Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. Newspaper of the Victoria University Students' Association. Vol 42 No. 14. July 2 1979

tional Council Takes Fright

[unclear: tional] Council Takes Fright

After about four days of unproductive talks with Railway management, the NUR members of the Auckland, South Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch branches enforced a freight-forwarding ban. This meant that no freight would be moved throughout the country by rail from these vital areas. From this point on, things developed quickly - and nastily. Railways employees, the vital importance of the work they do shown by the reaction to its withdrawal, were faced with threates of de-registration from the Government and widespread layoffs by the Railways Department. Under the Government Railway Staff Regulations 1953, all railway employees can be suspended from work without pay when there is no work to be done as a result of disputes with other areas of staff. At the time of writing, over one thousand railway staff have been dealt with in this manner, with the potential number of those laid off being many thousands. The National Council of the NUR, in the face of the development of a localised dispute into a national one involving many thousands of workers and millions of dollars, took fright and urged their membership to return to work while discussion continued. But it is clear that Railway employees are not in the mood to back down on this issue. At this stage, all of the branches of the NUR which imposed the freight-forward ban have rejected their National Council's proposal for it to be lifted. In fact, the Wellington branch passed sed a motion of no-confidence in the National Council for recommending this course of action. And I have just heard that members of other Railways union branches have taken action to show their concern at staff layoffs. Several areas will have no rail services at all for twenty-four hours.

This ability to lay off workers not directly involved in the original dispute is not confined to the Railways Department. In the Industrial Relations Amendment Act of 1976, the Government gave this power to the bosses of any industry. This particular piece of legislation is part of a whole string of anti-worker legislation passed around this time But what makes it stand out is the fact that it attacks the basic right of the worker to strike. In our political system, the only real power of those who sell their labour-power for wages is their ability to withdraw that labour. Even in the much-vaunted practice of "arbitration and conciliation", the power of the workers to withdraw their labour is what gives them any basis whatsoever from which to bargain. In both the Industrial Relations Amendment Act and the Government Railways Staff Regulations sections which deal with suspensions, the intention is to alienate and divide different sections of the workforce. Those not directly involved with the strike are faced, under these laws, with loss of employment themselves. The Government and bosses realise that those workers who have no specific grievance will resent hardship imposed on them, and will become a force to get the striking workers to back down - doing the bosses' job for them. This situation is obviously one of divide and rule, setting worker against worker in the interests of the employers (or the Government, in this case.)