[A-List] UK labour militancy & public order

["Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>]

As the accumulation of news articles under this thread demonstrates, the
scale of the state's armoury against the firefighters is quite formidable.
Quite sickening is the posturing of the "sensible left" types like Alf Young
of the Herald who feign sympathy with the strikers but vote with those who
would crush them. As these articles suggest, the weight of the ideological
apparatus bears heavily on the strikers, whose unexpected withdrawal from
planned strike action is being portrayed as a sensible retreat. In fact it
can be viewed as just that, except, far from capitulating, the FBU is giving
its members a chance to have a good christmas break whilst appearing to be
"reasonable" and flexible as against the government's inflexible response to
the pay claim. Unfortunately, without some kind of mass mobilisation of the
sort organised by the likes of the SSP and the rump Labour left, among
others, there is little hope of winning even the ideological war until well
after it is too late, as with the miners. Instead we have newspaper
commentators now brazenly accusing firefighters killing people by clinging
on to their "outdated" working practices, never mind the deaths they
"caused" by going on strike.

Ideally there ought to be a general strike across the state sector, because
pay and conditions have deteriorated so badly since 1979 that there are
sufficient grounds to justify it in conventional terms. However, as the SSP
has been pointing out, correctly, the main state sector union, Unison, has
been content to sell its members down the river in a long running dispute
involving hospital workers in north Glasgow. And until somebody somewhere
tells the truth about strikes -- that they are indeed political acts (and
what, for goodness sake, is the trade union movement supposed to be
about?) -- then chancers like Dave Prentis and toadies like Young and the
assortment of brown-noses below are given free rein to pontificate on the
grounds for legitimate strike action -- as if firefighters themselves didn't
know.

ps Donald McIntyre is yet another buddy, and sometime biographer, of Peter
Mandelson working at the Independent, on whose "international advisory
board" sits Peter Mandelson. Small world.

-----

Glimmer of hope as fire strike called off for talks
Both sides welcome Acas intervention

DEBORAH SUMMERS
The Herald, 3 December 2002

UNION leaders yesterday dramatically called off the next eight-day fire
strike amid fresh hopes of a breakthrough in the bitter pay dispute.

It followed the surprise intervention of Acas, the conciliation service,
which invited employers and the union to engage in "exploratory talks".

Ministers cautiously welcomed the move, but signalled their determination to
stick to the pay framework of 4%, with any extra money being paid for by
modernisation. The firefighters' claim is for a 40% rise.

Emerging from a four-and-a-half-hour meeting of the union's executive, Andy
Gilchrist, FBU general secretary, announced the planned walk-out at 9am
tomorrow would no longer go ahead.

Mr Gilchrist praised the "constructive intervention" of Rita Donaghy,
chairwoman of Acas, who contacted both sides in the dispute over the weekend
suggesting fresh talks.

He said: "These will be exploratory talks, but we have always said we are
prepared to talk."

John Monks, TUC general secretary, said: "This is the right move by the FBU
and shows sound strategic sense by its executive. It puts the pressure on to
the employers and government to come up with an offer that can start real
negotiations."

A spokeswoman for Acas said that no timetable had yet been agreed for the
talks.

Mr Gilchrist denied there had been pressure from rank-and-file firefighters
for the next strike to be called off.

He said: "The membership has behaved absolutely magnificently. They have
always said we want a negotiated settlement to the dispute. This gives us a
glimmer of hope of achieving that."

Asked whether some people would see the decision as a climbdown by the
union, he replied: "That would be a grave mistake. We remain united. The
other strike (between December 16 and Christmas Eve) is live - but let us
see how the talks get on this week."

The surprise development came against a backdrop of worsening relations
between the government and the union.

Ministers continued to attack Mr Gilchrist for telling a rally on Saturday
he would like to see New Labour replaced with "real Labour", leading to
accusations that he wanted to bring down the government.

Cobra, the cabinet's emergency committee, produced a report claiming the
armed forces worked "well and effectively" during the last strike.

The FBU accused the government of "deliberately misleading" people about the
army's response during the strike.

"We have seen the government's modernisation agenda in action," said Mr
Gilchrist. "They are using barely trained, poorly equipped young men and
women to run a greatly reduced service as best they can."

Nick Raynsford, fire service minister, said: "We welcome any move to resolve
the dispute providing they are within the parameters set out by the deputy
prime minister last week.

"The independent review in progress under the chairmanship of Sir George
Bain remains key to resolving the dispute and will provide the basis for a
future fire service."

-----

Fire strike: union denies climbdown
Hopes rise of an end to the dispute after firefighters suspend action
By Barrie Clement and Andrew Grice
The Independent, 03 December 2002

Internal links

Fire strike: union denies climbdown

Haunted by his party's history, Blair remains defiant

Government increases pressure to reform working practices after military
exceeds targets

Donald Macintyre: Mr Gilchrist has one last chance to save his union from
destruction

Leading article: Smoked out

Firefighters' leaders unexpectedly suspended an eight-day strike due to
begin tomorrow after allegations that they were waging a political war
against the Government.

Leaders of the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) and employers are due to meet at
the conciliation service Acas tomorrow for "exploratory" talks aimed at
ending the strikes.

Four times the FBU has called off industrial action to allow talks. While
union leaders asserted that a second eight-day strike before Christmas was
"live", last night's decision is expected to signal the end of the dispute.

Andy Gilchrist, general secretary of the FBU, denied that the decision to
call off tomorrow's stoppage was a sign of weakness, warning that such an
assumption would be "a grave mistake". He insisted that another eight-day
strike due to begin on 16 December would go ahead unless there was an
agreement, and that his 50,000 members remained united.

Mr Gilchrist came under intense political pressure at the weekend. He was
accused of conducting a political vendetta against New Labour. He told
members of the Campaign Group of Labour MPs on Saturday that he was prepared
to work for the replacement of New Labour with Real Labour.

The union's executive had been expected to call fresh walkouts after
increasingly strident comments from ministers declaring that any improvement
on a 4 per cent pay rise this year must be financed through modernisation.

Mr Gilchrist welcomed the intervention of Rita Donaghy, chairwoman of Acas
and a former president of the Trades Union Congress, saying that it provided
a "glimmer of hope" to end an increasingly bitter industrial conflict. He
said his executive had taken a "reasonable and mature" decision to suspend
the action, although he is understood to have faced substantial opposition
from left-wingers on the 19-strong executive. The announcement was further
evidence firefighters were not involved in a political crusade, he said.

The surprise decision to suspend the industrial action followed a weekend of
secret contacts involving the TUC, which has been trying to resolve the
dispute. While the discussions with Acas could clear the way for an
agreement, any negotiations are expected to be long and tortuous.

The local authority employers said last night that they were entering the
discussion at the behest of Acas and would be providing the organisation
with their views on modernisation and pay in the fire service.

A statement said: "This will be purely exploratory with a possible view to
Acas brokering discussions. It will not mean Acas mediating or arbitrating
in the dispute." The employers reiterated that any increase in pay above 4
per cent would require "significant" concessions on modernisation.

Both the Government and employers are keen to introduce greater flexibility
in the way firefighters are deployed. The FBU will be urged to agree to more
integration of full-time and part-time employees, lower night-time staffing
and integration of emergency control centres to involve fire, police and
ambulance services.

Ministers welcomed the union's decision to call off the strike but took a
hard line on providing any government cash to help to secure an agreement.
They said that any pay deal on top of the original 4 per cent offer must be
"fully funded" by modernised working practices, rather than simply "linked
to modernisation".

Tony Blair's official spokesman said: "If this is a sign they are prepared
to negotiate seriously on the whole issue of modernisation, then that is
good news."

Nick Raynsford, the minister responsible for the fire service, said: "We
welcome any move to resolve the dispute providing they are within the
parameters set out by the Deputy Prime Minister last week."

John Monks, TUC general secretary, said: "This is the right move by the FBU
and shows sound strategic sense by its executive. It puts the pressure on to
the employers and Government to come up with an offer that can start real
negotiations."

------

Government increases pressure to reform working practices after military
exceeds targets
By Andrew Grice Political Editor
The Independent, 03 December 2002

The Government stepped up its demands for an overhaul of the working
practices of firefighters yesterday when it published a report on how the
military had coped during last week's strike.

A dossier prepared by the Joint Assessment Cell of Cobra, the Government's
civil emergencies unit, says the emergency cover provided by 18,600 service
personnel who stood in for 40,000 striking firefighters "worked well" and
"exceeded" its original remit to concentrate on protecting life.

The report says75 per cent of the incidents reported to the Joint
Operational Control Centres were between noon and midnight. It saysthe
Ministry of Defence is considering a new rota system during any future
strikes with more people on duty during that shift.

This could have far-reaching implications for the shift system worked by
firefighters, which provides the same cover round the clock. They work two
days on, two nights on, and then have four days off, allowing many to have
second jobs.

Nick Raynsford, the minister responsible for the fire service, said: "The
very marked variation in the time of day when calls occur suggests there is
a case for more flexible shift patterns relating to risk, not simply
adopting the same cover irrespective of risk."

He also suggested the Government might want to set up joint operational
control centres for the emergency services - opposed by the Fire Brigades
Union (FBU) - because they had worked well during the strike. He said the
999 centres were "another obvious benefit of joint working" which avoided
the need for fire appliances to attend incidents unnecessarily. "It makes
financial sense too," he said.

The Cobra report makes no mention of whether firefighters should be banned
from striking, as the Tories demand. Mr Raynsford said the Government had no
current plans to make strikes illegal, but raised the prospect that the idea
could be included in a White Paper on the fire service's future next spring.
This was a harder line than Tony Blair adopted last week, when he suggested
a strike ban might be counterproductive.

"We will want to look at all options," said Mr Raynsford, adding that the
White Paper would examine how the fire service could be run "without the
risk of interruptions we have seen this autumn".

John McGhee, the FBU's national officer, said that most house fires in which
people died or were injured broke out between 10pm and 8am, so reducing
night cover would be "a ludicrous answer to public safety concerns". He said
reform of the fire service should be based on the experience of
firefighters, not the military's response to the strike.

-----

Mr Gilchrist has one last chance to save his union from destruction
It's becoming clearer by the day that if anyone is going to be defeated in
this strike, it isn't going to be New Labour
By Donald Macintyre
The Independent, 03 December 2002

Maybe it was just a Freudian slip. But it was a copybook error for the
leader of a union on a national strike even to hint that he wanted to change
the character, let alone the leader, of the government of the day - as his
subsequent protestations that he was taken out of context appear to show.

It's worth spelling out why. Two years ago, when direct action was launched
by fuel protesters in an attempt to change the government's fiscal policy, I
argued that this was not qualitatively different from the attempts by
business interests - including, as it happened, road hauliers - to undermine
the democratically elected Allende government in Chile in the 1970s. As with
the right, so with the left.

The much-cited Arthur Scargill in 1984-5 was, of course, in a class of his
own. Scargill was a Leninist in that he took the vanguardist view that if
the workers aren't ready for revolutionary struggle, don't consult them
before you embark on it; an absolutist in that he rejected every attempt to
make peace; and a syndicalist in that he sought to change the economic
policy of a government through industrial action.

I doubt that Mr Gilchrist, although of the left, is any of these things, and
not just because he had a large ballot majority for strike action of the
sort Mr Scargill might well not have done had he called a ballot, which
famously he didn't. By his decision last night to go to Acas, Mr Gilchrist
also looks like a man conscious of the need for an exit strategy, which
isn't something you could ever accuse the miners' leader of.

But the fact remains that either you believe unequivocally in parliamentary
democracy or you don't. It was special pleading for Nigel de Gruchy, this
year's TUC president, to claim that the FBU's political aspirations,
whatever they are, were simply a matter between it and the Labour Party, to
which it is affiliated. It wouldn't have hurt for Mr de Gruchy to make the
point that the TUC as an organisation, which has rejected syndicalism since
it worked for a settlement to the 1926 general strike, knows better than
most that industrial action can't, in a mature democracy, be used to subvert
the government of the day.

For "can't" - as well as "shouldn't" - is the operative word, especially in
this case. What's becoming clearer by the day is that if anyone is going to
be defeated in this strike, it isn't going to be New Labour. Even allowing
for a government in - at times excessive and unnecessary - propaganda
overdrive, it's pretty clear that yesterday's Cobra report has something
real to say about the working practices - from joint control rooms to
smaller shifts after midnight -that would work well in a civilian fire
service. And that in turn strengthens the Government's arguments for reform.

Secondly, the FBU's resort to the national strike weapon looks a little less
frightening than it did all those times in the last 25 years when it was
threatened but never used. True, it's been a quietish time of the year. True
too, the strikers have helped by leaving picket lines to fight fires. But so
far it looks as if the military - and the public - have been coping pretty
well.

There are conclusions from this for both sides. Given that the dispute is
demonstrably going the Government's way, the need to be even more draconian
at this stage is doubtful. Those urging Mr Blair to be even more Thatcherite
should consider a little history. It's worth remembering, amid all the talk
about banning strikes in essential services, that Norman Tebbit, when he was
Margaret Thatcher's Employment Secretary in 1982-4, looked seriously at the
idea before pronouncing it too much of a "legal thicket" to be worth trying.
As for the - to some - seductive idea of sacking all the firefighters and
hiring some more à la Ronald Reagan, Ian McGregor, the then Coal Board
chairman, contemplated doing just that to the pit deputies who walked out
during the miners' strike, only to have the political establishment, from
Mrs Thatcher down, throttle the idea at birth.

Which brings us to the language ministers use. Two phrases ring out from the
1984-5 miners' strike, both, oddly, originating with the First World War.
One was the electricians' leader Eric Hammond's description of the miners as
"lions led by donkeys". And the other was the ageing Harold Macmillan's
reminder that these were the "men who beat the Kaiser". You don't have to
think either appropriate in the present case to infer that a little care
should be taken. Demonise the cause, if you will. Demonise the second jobs
if you have to. Demonise the union leadership. But don't demonise the men -
and a few women - who will still be brave public servants when the dispute
is over.

A cod recruitment leaflet circulating in the Army says: "We're looking for
blokes who fancy spending around nine months a year away from home on crap
pay then provide strike cover for tossers who only work six months a year
for better money." Among soldiers that is wholly understandable - and also
illustrates that they won't be thrilled to do this for many more weeks. From
the rest of us, it is rather less helpful. Within the limits it has set out,
it is in the Government's interest to settle. And here the astute minister
Ian McCartney's more-in-sorrow-than-anger-as-a-friend-of-the-FBU is a big
step forward.

But the sharpest lessons are, of course, for the union. Actually, for all Mr
Gilchrist's faux pas at the weekend, the better parallel than with Mr
Scargill threatens to be with the leaders of the print unions in the
mid-1980s who, convinced by their own invincibility, just didn't get what
was coming at Wapping. They led their members badly because, instead of
negotiating sensible agreements in new times, they thought they could stop
social and technological change happening. As a result they were
comprehensively defeated.

In an important sense, and contaminated as it was by working practices
verging on the fraudulent, Wapping was the last of the real class struggles.
For the demographics have changed decisively since the last fire strike.
It's poignant that the firemen's pay formula no longer works for them
because it was linked to skilled male manual workers' earnings, and that
very group simply doesn't exist as it once did. For you can talk about New
Labour betraying the organised "working class" ; but even "Real Labour"
would have to ask whether a working class - in that sense - still exists.

Mr Gilchrist need not suffer the fate of the print union leaders. If he can
start showing at Acas that he is ready to take seriously the review by Sir
George Bain, start accepting that a better paid, higher qualified,
multi-skilled and, yes, leaner fire service can help the large majority of
his members who will still be working in two or three years' time, he will
be showing precisely the statesmanship that eluded those who led the print
unions in the 1980s. If he doesn't, he won't just be failing to supplant New
Labour. His union could end up - sadly - suffering just the kind of defeat
suffered in national newspapers.

-----

Haunted by his party's history, Blair remains defiant
It was a long time coming, but the Prime Minister is determined to win his
first major showdown with the unions
By Andrew Grice and Barrie Clement
The Independent, 03 December 2002

If anyone questioned Tony Blair's resolve to resist the firefighters'
strikes, his remarks to a Labour fund-raising dinner in Cardiff last
Thursday left his audience in no doubt. "What we are never going to do as a
government is to go back to the days that we left behind us, that scarred
us, that left us with 18 years of opposition," he said.

Mr Blair has never forgotten the images of a Britain paralysed by strikes
during the 1978-79 Winter of Discontent, which left many voters with a
long-lasting impression that Labour was unfit to govern. "Never again" is
his maxim.

The inevitable clash between the Blair government and the trade unions was a
long time coming. But when it came, Mr Blair was not prepared to pay the
price of defeat.

The dispute started badly for the Government. There were mixed messages from
ministers. John Prescott , the Deputy Prime Minister, worked tirelessly
behind the scenes to bring the FBU and the local authority employers to the
negotiating table. He hinted that extra government money might be available
to meet the transitional costs of a pay deal linked to modernisation of
working practices.

But Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, had other ideas. With public-sector
inflation more than twice that in the rest of the economy, he was not
prepared to see the billions he has pumped into public services soaked up by
higher pay.

The different signals from ministers encouraged the employers and the union
to try to squeeze more money out of the Government. Twelve days ago, they
cooked up a deal involving a 16 per cent rise over two years , which
depended on taxpayers' money to bridge the funding gap. But their
middle-of-the-night hopes soon ended when Mr Prescott, kept informed at his
country retreat at Dorneywood, would not endorse an agreement that included
unquantified costs for the Government.

So an eight-day strike went ahead, on top of a previous 48-hour stoppage.
The employers and the union blamed the Government for vetoing a deal. Worse
still, a slick public relations operation by the FBU blamed Mr Prescott for
not wanting to get out of bed. In fact, he was up most of the night, but the
damage was done.

The Government suffered its worst moments of the dispute. "We were slow off
the mark," one insider admitted. For once, the Number 10 spin doctors had
been outspun. Mr Blair's official spokesman hit back with a strongly worded
statement, attacking the overnight talks as a "ludicrous charade" and saying
the country could not "be held to ransom".

The temperature was rising fast. Over the weekend before last, there were
still mixed smoke signals from the Prescott and Brown camps. Tony Blair,
just returned from a Nato summit in Prague, knew he had to take personal
charge.

He called an unscheduled press conference at Downing Street on Monday last
week in which he warned the FBU it had embarked on a strike that it could
not win. "It would not be a defeat for the Government. It would be a defeat
for the country," he said. Number 10 insiders claim that the Prime
Minister's appearance steadied nerves inside the Government. "From that
moment, we were back on track," said one aide.

Although there were still some false starts - for example, when Mr Prescott
unintentionally suggested that 11,000 firefighters' jobs might be at risk -
ministers sensed they were in the driving seat.

The Downing Street spin doctors, who had perhaps underestimated the FBU at
the outset, concluded that while the union was clever at day-to-day tactics,
it lacked a strategy. The union, they said, had opened "a can of worms" by
allowing the dispute to shine a torchlight on the archaic working practices
in the fire service. Their rising optimism was boosted by opinion polls
suggesting that public support for the firefighters was waning.

As the eight-day strike drew to a close on Saturday, the fraying nerves were
in the union rather the Government. Dave Patton, an FBU national officer,
insisted the armed forces were "not coping well" in providing emergency
cover. Adam Ingram, the Armed Forces minister, hit back, saying Mr Patton
was "not fit to lace their [the servicemen's] boots".

The bitterness increased on Saturday when Andy Gilchrist, the FBU general
secretary, addressed the Campaign Group of Labour MPs in Manchester. "I am
quite prepared ... to work to replace New Labour with Real Labour," he
declared.

To his allies, it was more a statement of his views as a senior Labour Party
activist who hopes in the long term to bring about changes in the party's
direction, rather than evidence that he was a Scargill-like figure who
believed in industrial action as a political weapon.

But his remarks were immediately seized on by ministers. The Prime
Minister's private criticism of the FBU leadership as "Scargillite" seemed
vindicated.

Although ministers saw the outburst as a crucial turning point , the truth
might be more complicated. At the same time as firefighters' leaders were
damning New Labour and all its works, they were already engaged in
discussions to bring their dispute to an end.

Yesterday, FBU officials revealed they had been in talks with Rita Donaghy,
the chairwoman of the conciliation service Acas and former TUC president,
since last Friday.

Tough talk in public and moderation in private is a tried and tested weapon
in the trade union armoury. Mr Gilchrist had clearly decided that a long
strike would only reinforce the resolve of ministers, erode public support
and result in an eventual disintegration in the solidarity of his members.

His analysis, however, was not popular with a substantial minority of the
FBU executive, which met in Norbiton, south-west London, yesterday. Mr
Gilchrist was under pressure to press ahead with the next eight-day strike,
scheduled to start tomorrow. It took the FBU general secretary and his more
moderate colleagues some four hours to win agreement for suspension of
industrial action to allow talks with Acas to take place.

Talks are expected simply to involve an exchange of views between the union
and employers over modernisation. Among the points at issue will be the
staffing of fire stations during the night, the degree ofjoint working for
part-time and full-time firefighters, and the scope for introducing joint
control centres involving all three emergency services.

Fire employers were at pains to point out that the proposed session would
not involve active mediation by Acas officials, and certainly not
arbitration. The deal tentatively struck between the FBU and the employers
before the eight-day strike had involved arbitration - a point the
Government was not prepared to concede.

The planned Acas session will be "talks about talks'', but they are likely
eventually to result in some kind of agreement to call off industrial
action. While FBU officials argued that a further eight-day stoppage due
before Christmas remains "live'', Mr Gilchrist is not likely to be able to
march his soldiers up to the top of the hill again.