|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Britain
Britain: Union lefts neuter opposition to privatisation of
London Underground
By Tony Robson
2 June 2001
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email
The two trade unions claiming to be leading the fight against
privatisation of the London Underground rail network are attempting
to wind up opposition, at the very point when the Labour government
is handing over control of the infrastructure to private companies.
After a one-day stoppage in February, the leadership of the
train drivers' union ASLEF called off all further scheduled action
against Labour's proposed Public-Private Partnership (PPP). The
executive of the RMT, the main rail union, called off the last
24-hour strike just before it was due to start on May 2, recommending
its members accept a similar offer to that agreed by ASLEF, which
the unions claim amounts to a guarantee of job security.
Both unions are attempting to portray management's proposal
as a major climb-down, because it promises that any employee faced
with redundancy would receive an alternative job offer. But such
a placement could be at any location on the network and at any
grade. The union-management agreement describes this as
a mechanism to deal with surplus staff if voluntary processes
do not work.
No undertaking is given to maintain existing staffing levels,
while the proposed agreement commits the unions to collaborate
with new working arrangements in return for avoiding compulsory
redundancies. What this would entail can be seen in the
latest pay negotiations. In return for a pay increase set at the
rate of inflation, management is demanding a reduction in paid
overtime, an increase in part-time workers and total labour flexibility.
While station staff and drivers would remain within the public
sector, they would not be insulated from the greater levels of
exploitation facing the 6,000 workers being transferred to the
private corporations that will take over the infrastructure of
the Tube under the Labour government's plans. It exposes the unions'
claim that the detrimental effects of PPP can be prevented without
opposing its implementation.
In the course of the last decade, the RMT and ASLEF have presided
over a reduction of staffing levels on London Underground from
21,630 to 15,560, while passenger journeys have increased from
751 million to 927 million. The union bureaucracy has reconciled
itself to the implementation of PPP. Its sole aim is to ensure
the preservation of its own interests within the new privatised
network, hence the recommendation to accept the management offer.
While the proposed agreement does not satisfy any of the major
demands of Tube workers, it does enshrine the position of the
unions in the negotiating procedures with management, and promises
that any reduction in staffing levels and other changes would
be implemented through collaboration. With their own privileged
position secured, further strike action would be embarrassing
for the bureaucracy of the rail unions and also threatens to disrupt
their relations with management.
Recommendation of the current offer by the rail unions came
after sustained pressure exerted by the TUC General Secretary
John Monks during the talks at ACAS (Advisory, Conciliation and
Arbitration Service). The Labour government no doubt urged Monks
to see the strikes were aborted in the run-up to the general election
on June 7 and ensure the smooth implementation of PPP. But Monks
has relied on the so-called left within the RMT leadership, and
at regional and local union level, to push this policy through.
RMT Assistant General Secretary Bob Crow called for the suspension
of the strike and acceptance of management's offer. Crow is a
leading member of the Socialist Labour Party (SLP), founded in
1996 by the National Union of Mineworkers' President Arthur Scargill.
After stating on May 1 that the strike would proceed, the next
afternoon, Crow announced it was being suspended.
He argued for acceptance of the management proposals at a meeting
of RMT officials and local representatives on May 8, but this
was rejected overwhelmingly. Crow had promised that the so-called
offer of job security would be put in place the day before
the privatisation deal would come into effect and concluded,
I can put my hand on my heart and say this is the best we
could have offered the membership. Crow claimed he would
abide by the decision of the majority, and the RMT then announced
two further 24-hour stoppages, with one on June 6, the eve of
polling day. But the union immediately sought discussions with
management, in an effort to get the planned strikes called off.
The various radical groups organised within the electoral umbrella
of the Socialist Alliance, which advances itself as an alternative
to the Labour Party, have worked to keep opposition to the RMT
leadership at the level of ineffective protest. The Socialist
Workers Party's newspaper left it to an unnamed union member to
make some mild criticisms of Crow, saying he should not have gone
along with calling off the strike, but who had played
a good role up to now.
Whatever tactical differences its constituent parts may have,
the Socialist Alliance is united by its insistence on preserving
the authority of the trade unions over the working class. Those
such as Crow owe their position within the RMT to rank-and-file
disaffection with the right wing. But they work at all times to
protect the right wing from any effective political challenge.
They reject the fight for the political independence of the working
class and seek to channel all opposition into a campaign limited
to putting pressure on the trade union leaders and the Labour
government.
They are desperately attempting to maintain the fiction that
the RMT is still committed to a fight against privatisation. The
union had called today's demonstration over rail safety and opposition
to privatisation. However, RMT head office sent out very little
publicity for a protest it views as a political liability in the
midst of a general election campaign in which the union is fully
backing Labour.
It has fallen to the SLP and the radical groups in the Socialist
Alliance to do the legwork for the protest, but they make no call
for a struggle against the RMT leadership. Instead, RMT rep and
Socialist Alliance member Janine Booth urges Tube workers, don't
hold your breath waiting for RMT head office to produce publicitydo
your own! Stick some posters up, put it on the agenda of your
next union branch, put it in your next mailing, go and leaflet
your local station, consider organising transport to get people
there, bring yourself and your banners and placards.
The relationship between the SA and the labour bureaucracy
is exemplified by their role in the pressure group Campaign Against
Tube Privatisation (CATP). This was founded by the RMT's London
Transport Regional Council (LTRC), an intermediary body between
the local union branches and the national leadership, which is
dominated by individuals aligned to the SLP and the Socialist
Alliance. Earlier, it took the decision to stand its own slate
in by-elections against the official Labour candidates. But these
efforts were swiftly abandoned, once the then Labour National
Executive Committee member and MP Ken Livingstone declared he
would stand as an independent candidate for London Mayor on a
programme that included opposition to PPP, earning him expulsion
from the Labour Party.
The CATP stood eleven candidates for the newly created London
Assembly. However, its main platform in the mayoral elections
held in May 2000 became support for Livingstone. Pat Sikorski,
Secretary of the LTRC, drafted the call for a CATP vote. Sikorski
came to prominence in the early 1990s as a leading light of a
rank-and-file union protest movement, and used this to win a position
within the middle ranks of the bureaucracy. He was a leading light
in Scargill's SLP until 1998.
The CATP insisted that a successful struggle against privatisation
was dependent on Livingstone's leadership, rather than independent
action by the working class. The election statement read, When
the CATP Tube workers began their efforts they fought alone. Now
Ken Livingstone has burst onto the scene and there is hope on
the horizon. He has transformed the prospects for saving the Tube,
and London Transport, from disaster.
The CATP statement called for support for the bond scheme championed
by Livingstone as the alternative to PPP, however, this is merely
a variant of privatisation. The programme Livingstone and his
Transport Commissioner Robert Kiley have proposed for funding
London Underground is based upon a system known as securitisation,
which consists of selling bonds on the stock market secured against
the future revenues of the Tube. Without granting ownership of
London Underground's assets, it guarantees financiers purchasing
the bonds first claim on its future income. In addition, Kiley
has made it clear that his proposals would allow for a large part
of the infrastructure maintenance on the network to be outsourced
to the private sector.
Leading figures within the CATP had attempted to silence any
criticisms by claiming that the bond scheme was the only realistic
alternative to the government's plans. Kiley's record as the former
head of the New York Subway in attacking pay and conditions is
passed over in silence and his appointment defended, on the grounds
that he has helped win big business support for Livingstone's
option.
Kiley rejects separating the operation of Underground trains
from the maintenance of the track and infrastructure (the system
introduced throughout the national rail network with disastrous
consequences). He wants London Underground management to supervise
the day-to-day work of private contractors. The Blair government
has recognised that Kiley shares its central aim of opening up
the Tube to the private sector, and recently appointed him as
Chair of London Transport, responsible for negotiating the contracts
with successful bidders.
For his part, Livingstone's days opposing the Labour government
are already coming to an end. When he became Mayor, he promised
that he would hold every Labour MP to account over PPP during
the general election. Instead, after first seeking approval from
Labour central office, he has been out campaigning for a Labour
vote. His threatened legal challenge to PPP, which was to go to
the High Court on June 12, has been postponed. A spokeswoman
for the Mayor explained, This is in order to ease the path
of the negotiations taking place between Mr Kiley and the private
sectors bidders. It could also possibly ease Mr Livingstone's
path back into the Labour Party.
As the experience of the London Underground workers shows,
the role of the SLP and the radical groups making up the Socialist
Alliance is to subordinate the working class to one or other section
of the trade union and Labour bureaucracy. No successful struggle
is possible on this basis.
See Also:
Statement by the Socialist
Equality Party of Britain
The Socialist Alliance and Socialist Labour PartyNo alternative
to Blair's New Labour
[29 May 2001]
Britain's
general election
[WSWS Full Coverage]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |