SCRAP THE PAY CAP: don't let divided Tories divide workers

The Tories are suffering internal Mayhem, with public divisions between Cabinet members spilling out over how to respond to the public fury at pay cuts under their brutal regime of austerity since 2010. 

But like the centuries-old class they represent, they're past masters at dividing their working class opponents, in their ruthless desire to cling onto power, to retain the ability - that goes with being in government - to hand out perks and privileges to their own class of people.    

The trade union movement, socialists, and all those wishing to put an end to the planned poverty and inequality that is austerity, need to be especially vigilant in this period of Tory crises. We must not let weasel words divide one section of public sector workers from others. Nor allow the Tories to make workers pay with job losses, further service cuts, or tax rises, for any cosmetic concessions on the hated public sector pay cap.

After the pounding the Tories suffered in their self-inflicted snap general election - and especially the tide of support for the anti-austerity message of Jeremy Corbyn - Theresa May's Cabinet are wrestling with how best to silence the roar for decent pay and an end to cuts to public services. 

Listening to Public Fury?? 

They are especially desperate to give the (false) impression of listening to 'public opinion' in the wake of the furious backlash at the vote by Tory and DUP MPs to block pay rises for the likes of nurses, police officers and firefighters - when that was proposed by Corbyn as an amendment to the Queen's Speech. 

A public fury fueled by the Tories' sudden discovery of a spare £1bn to buy power, courtesy of the DUP. 

And mounting anger at the fact the same Tories literally cheered as they voted down pay rises, mere days after the population's hearts went out not only to the victims of Grenfell Tower, but also to the firefighters who raced into the inferno to try and save lives, at risk to their own. The Tory cabal trotted out praise for the emergency services one week, pay cuts the next. 

No wonder the 'Not One More Day' demo in London on Saturday 1st July attracted up to 100,000 people, angry at Tory cuts and demanding their removal. 

Cabinet of Chaos 

Several Tory Cabinet Ministers have called for 'a review' of the 1% cap on public sector pay, in operation since 2010, and an easing of their cuts in funding of some services. They are cynically desperate to give the appearance of having listened to public criticism. Each of them is also eager to save their own skin, and jockey for potential leadership challenges to the hapless May. 

Tory Education Secretary Justine Greening has pleaded with May to abandon plans for further cuts to per pupil spending in state schools. The IFS think tank estimates it would take an injection of £1.2bn a year just to halt planned additional cuts, let alone the vast sums needed if they had any intention of reversing cuts already imposed. Until now, Greening was happy enough to administer the knife to state schools whilst pouring resources into selective Grammar Schools for the well-off... until her 10,180 majority was slashed to 1,554 in Putney last month! 

Arch opportunist Boris Johnson has suggested 'a rethink' on the 1% pay cap. Don't forget he was one of the chief pioneers of curbing, or totally banning, the right to strike for public sector workers, as far back as when he was Mayor of London. 

Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt - object of unfriendly rhyming slang from many an angry NHS worker! - has publicly suggested new deals for nurses, and teachers. 

Damian Green, de facto deputy Prime Minister, has raised the need for 'a national debate' on the continuation of student tuition fees. 

Weasel Words

Michael Gove, who is actually Environment Secretary, found it more opportune to advocate a possible end to the 1% not for staff in his own department, but for... NHS workers.

There's the clue, the warning, of what these new-found 'critics' of pay cuts and austerity in public services are up to. 

They are feeling the hot breath of revolt from workers and students who are sick of Tory attacks - such as the threat of the first ever strike action by the Royal College of Nurses, and the literal queues of students at unlikely places like Canterbury University, eager to vote for Corbyn's pledge to abolish tuition fees this autumn. 

But in looking for a line of partial retreat from the policy of austerity that they've repeated like a devout religious chant for the past decade, the Tories are seeking to divide and conquer workers' opposition.

Pay Review Bodies

The weasel words of Michael Gove are a case study of this poisonous plan. He has trotted out media statements about how his government should 'respect' the looming reports of (eight) Pay Review Bodies for public sector workers. To the uninformed, that sounds like good news for the 5.3 million UK workers employed in the public sector. But let's pause and look at some detail behind the headlines.

The two years' pay freeze and 1% pay cap imposed since 2010 has been a devastating pay cut to these 5.3 million workers, as the cost of daily living rises, alongside substantial increases in workers' pension contributions. According to studies for the civil service union, PCS, the government's own workforce will have been hammered by a 20% real terms pay cut by 2020. 

The fact that large swathes of civil service staff themselves rely on the in-work, top-up benefits they administer, and nurses are amongst those who've had to turn to food banks, is a damning indictment of government policy. 

Divide and Conquer 

But far from offering a guaranteed end to the below-inflation pay cap for all 5.3 million workers - let alone pay rises to compensate for a decade of cuts to their real incomes - Tories like Gove are angling for a divisive concession to just some of them. 

For starters, his talk of 'respecting the Pay Review Bodies' only covers substantially less than 50% of the 5.3 million in the public sector. For instance, the vast majority of civil service staff are totally excluded from these Pay Review bodies. 

The Tories' tactical trick to me seems obvious: promise to concede a few crumbs to the likes of nurses, maybe police, possibly even firefighters - because of the place they hold in the affections of the public - but to hell with the vast armies of low-paid civil service and council workers; show them ruthless resistance on pay. 

"Weary after Seven Years of Hardship"

Chancellor Philip Hammond this week told a CBI dinner of bloated business executives that he "understands why people are weary after seven years of hardship, repairing the damage of the Great Recession", but rejected any concession to 'taking the foot off the pedal', insisting "the government must hold its nerve." 

Theresa May responded to rumour and counter-rumour of the Tories ending the pay cap by stating they will "consider the Pay Review Bodies' reports on a case by case basis." Another signal of divide-and-conquer tactics - even within the parameters of the less-than-half of public sector workers who ARE covered by such Bodies.

Hammond on Mock the Week?

The Tories' shenanigans are in part driven by their desperate attempts at political  survival, in the face of growing opposition to their austerity and pork-barrel politics - and the surge towards Corbyn's anti-cuts message. But they are also reflecting the panic in big business circles at the parlous state of the capitalist UK economy. 

Tory Chancellor Hammond must have thought the CBI dinner on 3rd July was an audition for a place on the Mock the Week panel, when he declared:

"After seven long and tough years, the high-wage, high growth economy for which we strive is tantalizingly close to being within our grasp." (!!??)

Back in the Real World

That's the man allegedly in charge of a British economy with an invisible 0.2% growth in GDP last Quarter - the worst in the G7 biggest economies; with a Scottish economy teetering on the edge of a technical recession; with dire warnings from the Bank of England at credit card debt rising by 10.3% in the 12 months to April. 

An economy where wage-slashing and political insecurity has led to the GfK consumer confidence index today reporting a five points plunge to minus 10 in June - meaning sectors like retail and hospitality are bracing themselves for tough times ahead. 

The same economy where the recent Scottish Widows Adequate Savings index sounded alarm bells at 1 in 4 Scots saving nothing for retirement this year (up from 19% last year), including an astonishing 70% of workers aged 22-29. This despite the new Auto Enrolment Pension scheme. 

All in large part because the sustained and conscious drive to slash wages as a share of national wealth has led to the longest and deepest cuts to wages since the Napoleonic Wars, two centuries ago! 

Worst Wage Cuts since Napoleonic Wars 

Austerity for the working class may have meant boom times for the profits of the multinationals, but it's not even achieved its own stated goals of cutting the government's budget deficit.

Sections of big business, and now of the Tories, are belatedly awakening to the fact their own robbery of wages is undermining the spending power of the working class, thereby choking their prospects for profiteering. Plus they dread a revolt by millions of workers against the long, excruciating pain of the public sector pay cap.

United Strike Action 

The Tories are divided; we must build united action, rather than allow the cornered rats lash out and divide workers, sector by sector. 

The time is ripe for coordinated industrial action to 'scrap the cap' for the entire public sector - not just the minority covered by Pay Review Bodies, and certainly not just for selected sections such as nurses, or firefighters, or the police, as hinted at by the Tories. 

The Scottish teachers' union, EIS, is amongst those proposing coordinated action on pay at the September TUC conference. Already, at the recent 'Not One More Day' demo, PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka called for united public sector strike action. 

A serious, urgent plan to prepare and build such action should be implemented by union leaders, with explanatory materials and meetings across the public sector. And lessons need to be applied from November 2011, when a huge one-day public sector strike was squandered by leaders of several unions capitulating to shoddy promises, letting the Tory-LibDem Coalition off the hook, letting them divide and defeat the millions who'd shown willing to fight back. 

Don't Trade Pay for Job Cuts 

In fighting to scrap the cap on pay, workers must also guard against a 'rob Peter to pay Paul' tactic from the Tories; concessions on pay at the price of further job losses, further public service cuts, and/or tax rises for low to middle-income workers. 

Given the weak state of the economy, and the IFS estimate that it would take £6billion per annum by 2019/20 to bring public sector pay up to that of the private sector, the enfeebled Tory government won't just roll over without pulling every dirty trick in their book. 

They'll deny the existence of 'the money tree'. They'll try to resist across-the-board pay rises for all 5.3 million public sector workers, deploying their tried and tested divide-and-rule tactics. They'll demand even more work from even fewer workers in the event of having to retreat on pay. They'll tell us all that the pot of funds is finite, a matter of 'balance between pay, jobs and public services'. 

SNP Government 

In the case of Scotland, we already have the warning signs of this approach. After meekly obeying and implementing the Westminster public sector pay freeze for the seven long years since 2010, the SNP government have now stepped into the turmoil surrounding the Tories and announced they will lift the 1% cap. That is welcome news, compared to the 'will they, won't they' chaos emanating from the Westminster Tories. But Nicola Sturgeon's explanation is worthy of close attention by public sector workers, their unions, and all those opposing austerity. 

To quote Nicola:

"Over the coming months, ahead of our next budget, there will be a number of discussions with different unions,  public sector workers and employers about how we find the right balance between ensuring people earn a fair wage and protecting employment and public services. That won’t always be an easy conversation – unlike at Westminster we really don’t have a magic money tree, but no matter what the UK government does the SNP will deliver a new pay deal for Scotland’s public sector workers."

The danger nestling in this statement is that after growing anger among workers in Scotland's NHS, local authorities and FE colleges, the Scottish government will try to trade concessions on pay for setbacks on jobs and/or services.

Break Out of Austerity Straightjacket 

The pressing priority is to build a unified, coordinated plan of demonstrations and strike days to put the enfeebled Tories on the run, to scrap the cap for all public sector workers' pay, and demand pay rises to compensate for a decade of savage cuts. But that movement needs to add the demands 'no more job losses, no more service cuts', and refuse to be trapped in the straight-jacket of austerity; of the pretense that the funds available for the public sector are fixed, invariable, finite. 

The IFS's estimate of £6billion to catch up with private sector pay in itself is a modest sum compared with Treasury plans to spend £802billion this year - making it all the more viable as a fighting aim for the unions. 

The fact £1billion was discovered 'down the back of a sofa' at the Treasury to buy the allegiance of the DUP should embolden us to demand funding for pay, jobs and services - including a serious campaign to mobilize workers and communities in Scotland to demand the pro-rata equivalent of £2.9billion. 

And that's as nothing compared with the fortune that could be harvested through taxation of the obscenely rich. 

As just one illustration of the oceans of wealth sloshing around - whilst millions stave off starvation through resort to food banks, or reliance on credit cards rockets, or workers are unable to put anything aside for their retirement - the richest 1,000 humans in a UK population of 60 million have combined wealth of £658billion.

Even a modest 10% wealth tax on these 1,000 alone would reap in £66billion - eleven times the sum reckoned to raise public sector pay to that of the private sector; well over two years' worth of the entire Scottish block grant from Westminster. 

That's not to mention the £120billion a year, every year, that big corporations and hyper-rich individuals avoid, evade or simply don't pay in taxes. Or the £200billion being squandered on Trident weapons of mass annihilation. 

Win Back the Stolen Billions 

There's absolutely no excuse for poverty pay - neither in the public nor private sectors. There's equally no excuse for Westminster or Holyrood suggesting we have to choose between pay and jobs, pay and public services, robbing Peter to pay Paul. 

The consistent, persistent demand of those of us in the Scottish Socialist Party for a mass campaign to win back some of the £billions stolen from Scotland by successive Westminster governments could not be more timely. The Tories are in crisis. Growing swathes of the population have been shocked and appalled at the system of austerity, privatisation, deregulation, cuts to safety standards, cost-cutting for profit - the whole capitalist ethos of profit before people - that created the atrocity of Grenfell Tower. The £1billion bung to the DUP can be used to prise open the door to demands for funding for jobs and services, as well as pay rises to reverse the 20% pay cuts for millions. 

The Tories are divided; don't let them divide the working class as they cling onto power and rule for the rich. 
Do your bit in your union, community or party to demand unified, decisive action - including mass demos and public sector strikes - to win the funds to not only scrap the cap on pay, but reverse the cuts to jobs and public services. 

RECOLLECTIONS OF GLACIER METAL FACTORY SIT-IN VICTORY

 

On Hogmanay 1996, the Glasgow Glacier Metal engineering workers were ringing the bells in elation at their victory, whilst Glacier bosses were wringing their hands in despair.

The ‘Polmadie 103’ had scored a landmark victory for class struggle trade unionism, defeating the factory’s multinational owners, Turner & Newall, after a seven week factory sit-in. 

It was the first workplace occupation in ten years, and was provoked by dictatorial bosses trying to impose a 15-point change of contract, which aimed to double company profits, cut wages by £123 a week and slash sick pay, the canteen subsidy and other benefits won over 25 years by these members of the AEEU, now part of UNITE the union.

The boss’s method of imposing this was designed to undermine the union. He picked on the youngest tradesman in the workforce, and ordered him to risk health and safety by doing two jobs at once. The lad went to his union stewards, who had prepared for this confrontation and, advising the entire workforce to ‘down tools’, went upstairs to negotiate.

As they waited outside his office, the manager sneaked down to the factory floor to declare: “Gentlemen, you are all sacked!" Four of those sacked were on holiday, while another was convalescing after operations for brain 

Advantages of Factory Occupation  

Critically, instead of walking out the door on strike, which years before had landed them in a prolonged lockout, the workers stayed in the factory, declaring themselves available for work.

This totally wrong-footed management, and gave the highly-skilled workers several strategic advantages. They seized control of a factory with £1million worth of undelivered precision engineering products, paralysing £200,000-a-day production and thereby putting pressure on the owners from customer companies. I'll never forget the irate phone call to the factory during the sit-in, when a company boss bellowed: "What's going on with my orders? I've got a f***ing nuclear power station to run!"

They psychologically brought the battle into the bosses’ domain, preventing them bussing in scabs past legally-hamstrung pickets with police assistance, as Timex had done in Dundee 1993. And above all, they were fighting for their jobs, justice and full trade union rights inside a well-heated factory, with snow-storms outside, making it one huge campaigning nerve centre.

Building Workers' Solidarity  

If the factory occupation had remained a ‘folded arms’ affair, waiting for concessions from the employers, it would have collapsed, or at best allowed some dirty deal to be hatched above their heads between the management and top AEEU officials, who had secret contact with the company as early as five days into the occupation. But this inspiring workers’ struggle was a model of strategy and tactics. Firm discipline was established by the union stewards and Occupation Committee, with a booze ban and daily mass meetings. Meals were cooked and the factory kept clean.

Role of Socialists in the Sit-in 

Some of us who later founded the SSP played a major role in this historic event.

I first called to offer practical solidarity the morning after they started the occupation. We had been in the thick of building support for the 500 locked-out Liverpool dockers for the previous 15 months, and used our vast array of workplace contacts to arrange solidarity visits with Glacier workers all over Scotland – and parts of the UK, particularly those with big engineering industries. This served several purposes, including financial survival for the workers’ families and a breach in the media vow of silence.

On the issue of whether management could evict them, we explained the law, with the help of a couple of friendly lawyers, but emphasised that the ultimate means of defence of the sit-in from potential moves - involving police, or cowboy security firms - was to build mass support in the workplaces and surrounding community, creating a potential army of defence.

Solidarity Mass Pickets  

The employers hoped to isolate the sit-in with the help of media silence, aiming to starve the workers’ families into submission as Christmas loomed large. Workplace solidarity tours helped scupper that. It also countered the danger of boredom and demoralisation setting in amongst a workforce not previously known for involvement in the wider movement. 

When management told the arbitration service ACAS that they had no workforce, we smelt a rat, suspecting imminent eviction, and in discussions with the Occupation Committee suggested an early morning solidarity mass picket, built through a leaflet around workplaces and the mailing list of the Clydeside Dockers' Support Group (which I was the organiser of). That vastly boosted morale, became a weekly feature, and peaked at a turnout of 400.

Taking to the Streets 

We then suggested a pre-Xmas demo, which attracted well over 1,000 on Sunday 15 December. One report claimed 3,000. The build-up was as important as this stirring event itself. The Occupation Committee had coopted me as an adviser, and put me in charge of a small Demo Committee. We involved the absolute majority of the men, and a few of their partners, in street meetings, issuing hard-hitting leaflets that won support, by-passed the media blackout, and swamped workplaces and shopping centres across the west of Scotland.

An ACAS boss complained after a leaflet was left unwittingly on his windscreen, because it described Turner & Newall as ‘notorious merchants of death’, citing their appalling record on asbestosis. AEEU officials went ape-shit down the phone to the union convener, who firmly rejected their instructions and printed 29,000 of the ‘offending’ leaflet. This propaganda offensive helped bring T&N bosses to heel, as they already faced dire problems with £billions of outstanding asbestosis claims and feared their notoriety being broadcast.

Supporting Locked-out Liverpool Dockers  

The workers were literally dancing with elation after the success of the demo. They then turned their attention to daily street collections in the run up to Xmas – for financial survival, but also to keep the campaign alive and in people’s minds.

The first big collection, on 18 December, raised £488 … for the Liverpool dockers. The Occupation Committee rounded it up to £600, in an act of selfless solidarity born of their own experiences in battle. On Xmas Eve, a team hit Glasgow’s Argyle Street from 10am to 5pm and collected £2,800.

Negotiations began that day, involving both full-time union officials and the factory union convener and deputy convener. T&N’s head of Employee Relations grizzled that as they negotiated, Glacier workers were on the streets with megaphones and leaflets attacking T&N. That was part of the point – to pile pressure on the company and remind right-wing AEEU officials what was at stake.

An Xmas day breakfast was laid on in the occupied factory for families and supporters – another ingenious act of defiance and comradeship by people whose talents erupted in the heat of battle. 

Outright Victory! 

By Hogmanay, the 103 workers were celebrating a landmark victory. All were reinstated, with full union recognition, and very little conceded to the bosses on their conditions of work. In a final fling at undermining union rights, the company tried to get a staggered return to work – which the AEEU full-time officials agreed to. The workers’ direct union representatives went ballistic, refused, said it was a ploy to potentially victimise leaders of the occupation, and won a proud, united return to work.

A multinational giant was brought to its knees by the tactics, skills, and impact on production by this factory occupation. Socialists played an important, constructive part, applying collective experience to living struggles, laying foundations for a united, working class socialist party - in the form of the SSP, established two years after the Polmadie 103's victory. 

Capitalists Complain! 

Such was the impact of this victorious struggle in the southside of Glasgow, that a dissident voice in the hierarchy of Turner & Newall management reproduced the article I wrote on its tenth anniversary, with a covering note bemoaning their losses.

"Even if they worked only 5 days per week, at “£200,000-a-day” this 7-week strike cost them £7 million, plus legal and administrative costs of fighting the strike. And they lost not only the strike but their former stronger position against the union.

Here’s an exquisite example of why [former Glacier Metal Company CEO] Wilfred Brown’s ideas about Works Councils make management stronger, not weaker. Had Turner & Newall had the guts to restore this strong institution — instead of the cowardice of underhanded union-busting — they would have been in a stronger position overall in their discussion with the union."

Interestingly, he advocated a return to earlier methods of Works Councils - the much-vaunted concept of 'social partnership' - rather than full-frontal union-busting methods... to achieve precisely the same cost-cutting, profit-boosting attacks on workers' terms and conditions!

As workplace closures and massive redundancies erupt 20 years on, workers and their union leaderships should study, adapt and apply the lessons from this outstanding model of how to defy the dictatorship of capital.

UNIONS MUST BREAK FROM LABOUR TORIES: stop funding arsonists to torch your home!

On 1st July 2014 I wrote a blog - "Ructions after Referendum" - which included the statement: "The exposé of Labour as open collaborators with the avowed Tory enemy of workers has added immensely to the process of workers unshackling themselves from their old Labour loyalties...After September 18th we are likely to see eruptions, schisms and a haemorraging of members from Labour in Scotland."

Within weeks of the Referendum result - a No majority won primarily through the agency of Labour lies, scaremongering and false vows! - absolute ructions have erupted in Labour, with an intense squeeze on them from the hundreds of thousands of trade unionists who fund their party. 

Workers without a mass party 
The Labour party was founded 120 years ago by pioneering socialists and trade unionists who had seen through the false promises and capitalist ideology of the Liberals, who up until then had enjoyed the loyalty of big swathes of the working class. They sought to build an independent mass party of the working class, a political wing of the trade union movement. 

But that was then! History has turned full circle. Workers entered the 21st century with no mass party to represent and voice their aims, interests and aspirations. Labour's attachment to the UK state, displayed during the Referendum, is an expression of its deeper ideological devotion to capitalism. Since at least the 1990s Labour has transformed into an openly capitalist party, the New Tories.

Labour's shameful record
That was harshly exposed under the spotlight of Labour being in government from 1997-2010. Thirteen years in which Labour retained the most vicious anti-trade union laws in the whole of Europe; announced the slashing of 100,000 civil service jobs; scrapped the 10p tax rate for the lowest paid; implemented rampant privatisation; raided workers' pensions; allowed the worst levels of inequality since 1886, according to Oxfam; and dragged us into the blood-soaked killing fields of Afghanistan and Iraq. 
Not to mention Gordon Brown's boasts of having ended the capitalist cycle of 'boom and bust' being smashed to smithereens by the bankers' crisis of 2008; a crisis which Labour obliged workers to bail out and pay for through subsequent years of austerity.

Make the Break campaign 
Back in January 1999 the SSP launched the 'Make the Break' campaign, appealing to trade unions to end their funding of Labour's New Tories, instead demanding a democratic choice of pro-trade union parties that workers could help fund through their union fees - on top of what individual workers could do by joining the SSP to pursue the goals long since abandoned by Labour. 
Some unions did in subsequent years, but now the time is rotten ripe to 'Make the Break' and help build a mass, working class socialist party. Immeasurably more so than in 1999, especially after the mass politicization of working class people that the Referendum debate produced.

Millions for a party supporting millionaires!
Yet many trade union leaderships persist with Labour affiliation and funding of their own worst enemies. It might be only a few pence a month that each union member gives to Labour (usually without knowing it!) if they're in one of the affiliated unions. But over a period it adds up to £millions of members' hard-earned money going to an outfit that couldn't give a toss about low pay, inequality, workplace victimization or the shackles on workplace rights imposed by successive Tory and Labour governments.
Given their track record, it's obscene to note the level of trade union funding since 2001: Unite has given Labour £41.4million since then; Unison £19.6m; GMB £15.7m; Usdaw £12.29m; CWU £7.6m. And in 2013, the trade unions accounted for 77 per cent of the total funding enjoyed by Labour.
It's time to end this madness. It's equivalent to holding a whip-round at work to buy the fuel to hand over to an arsonist to torch your own home!

Don't resign - organise! 
Thousands of workers in Labour-affiliated unions are in revolt, rightly furious at the treacherous role of Labour in blocking Scottish democracy, the right to rule our own country. And at bottom this is a rebellion against the continued anti-working class policies of capitalist austerity on offer from Labour.
Hundreds in each of several unions have furiously - but foolishly - resigned from their union in disgust at being told to vote No by a leadership that failed to hold democratic debates or votes amongst members first. That includes Usdaw, GMB, CWU. 

Foolishly, because in most cases that leaves them with no alternative union that is recognized by their employer, leaving workers defenceless in the face of exploitation or victimization.
Hundreds have taken the much more constructive and wiser route of staying in the union but withdrawing payment of the political levy to Labour, by filling in exemption forms. And vowing to fight for democracy in their own union. To illustrate the scale of this growing force determined to punish Labour, almost half my own Usdaw branch members have completed these forms in the past few weeks - with more to come! And that includes many who voted No, but feel abandoned and betrayed by Labour.

Life's political
But it's important to avoid the pitfall of believing that "the unions should stay away from politics". That is impossible. Workers' conditions, incomes and rights are determined by political decisions.
Anti-union laws have helped reduce wages to their lowest share of national wealth in 60 years. The pathetic level of the minimum wage - which has become the norm rather than the minimum - needs to be challenged politically. Not with Labour's recent insulting promise of £8 by 2020 - which would barely even match inflation - but with the demand of the SSP for a £10 minimum here and now.
Political decisions on public services, privatisation, fracking, Corporation Tax levels and a multitude of other issues deeply affect our daily lives. Workers need an organised socialist voice and vehicle.

Democratise the unions 

And as hundreds of thousands demonstrated by their participation during the Referendum, we should never leave those decisions to an elite, the 'political class' of career politicians, most of whom have never done a day's work outside the machinery of their own party and parliament.
We need to demand union members' meetings and decision-making Scottish conferences, where as well as pursuing the fight for measures to tackle poverty, inequality and the dictatorship of capital, we can democratically decide which political parties members' fees can contribute to. A multiple choice of pro-trade union parties. That would assist workers in choosing to help construct a mass socialist party that stands up, unashamedly, for the working class against the profits, power and privileges of bankers, billionaires and bosses of big companies.

Murphy's Blairite claptrap

When contender for Scottish Labour leader, Jim Murphy, launched his mission statement with talk of "representing both the prosperous and the poor", he is repeating the nauseous, dishonest claptrap of Blairite New Labour. In reality they represent 'the prosperous', at the expense of 'the poor'.
At their recent Scottish Labour Gala Dinner, these worthies forked out £200 each in the city where people rely on foodbanks for handouts to avoid literal starvation.
They have countered the Tory Coalition's additional £25billion in cuts over two years with their own cuts over three years - of £27billion!

Murphy epitomizes all that is rotten about modern Labour: a capitalist party that tries to disguise its devotion to capitalism with empty sound-bites that try to hide and deny the class realities of society to their working class electorate, whilst cooing messages of reassurance to the City of London spivs and profiteering capitalist class. 

Murphy's former spin doctor, John McTernan, has claimed that the really significant vote in the Referendum wasn't the 53% Yes vote amongst working class Glaswegians, but the 61% No vote in Edinburgh's middle class. He concludes that Labour in Scotland should tack to the right and win over the "aspirational middle classes" as well as its traditional heartland working class. 

Facing both ways

Classic Blairism. But the material basis for this con-trick has melted away with the 2008 banking crisis, which burst the financial bubble that for a short spell in history had deluded not only "the aspirational middle classes" but also sections of workers that things were getting better under New Labour. Based on plastic wealth, credit, that inevitably turned into debt and demolished any temporary feel-good factor in the working class. 

Since then, the class divide has deepened, making it all the more untenable to keep up the pretense of simultaneously 'representing the prosperous and the poor' for any length of time. Something Labour is discovering as their support in working class Scotland plummets at an unprecedented rate. 

SSP upholds principles of the socialist pioneers
Workers and their unions don't have to imprison themselves with a choice of two factions of Thatcherism. They should stop funding their Labour enemy, demand democratic choices and membership control of their unions' political funds - and join the SSP in pursuit of the democratic socialist aims of the labour movement pioneers, often enshrined in their own union rule books.

'THIS IS THE MODERN WORLD'...

SCOTLAND HELD TO RANSOM BY A CAPITALIST DICTATOR

"Relief" is the most widespread feeling after the eleventh-hour reversal of the closure of the Grangemouth petrochemical plant on Friday 25 October.

Relief for the 800 workers directly facing unemployment without even an enhanced redundancy package 48 hours earlier, when INEOS bosses declared its closure and handover to the liquidators.

Relief for the 550 workers at the neighbouring oil refinery, which had remained on cold shutdown, with the real threat of it not surviving the liquidation of the petrochemical operation, given their interdependence. 

At least some partial relief, mixed with continued uncertainty about their job prospects, for 2,000 contract workers at Scotland's biggest industrial site - some of whom were already laid off by the INEOS bosses' lockout. 

And relief across the working class of Scotland that such a pivotal employer and economic 'powerhouse' - to use the phrase of UNITE's Scottish secretary Pat Rafferty - is not closing down after all, with all the devastation, poverty and social destitution such an act of shameless economic vandalism threatened.

RELIEF - BUT SERIOUS SETBACKS

But whilst having some kind of job is better than having no job at all, and much-reduced wages and conditions is preferable to having no wages, the outcome of the Grangemouth showdown should not be dressed up as anything other than a serious setback, a defeat for trade unionists - and not only those in the eye of the storm at Grangemouth alone. Not a defeat on the scale, for instance, of the heroic miners' strike of 1984-5, but a serious setback nevertheless.

In order to reverse the closure announcement on Wednesday, by Thursday night the UNITE union leadership offered complete acceptance of the savage cuts to conditions which INEOS had demanded - with a rocket-launcher held to the heads of the workers - over the previous week. 

This includes a three year pay freeze; an end to Final Salary Pensions (euphemistically called 'a move to modern pensions'); savage cuts to shift allowances and bonuses amounting to losses of £10-15,000 per worker; drastically reduced redundancy terms; removal of trade union facilities, including an end to full-time union conveners; unspecified 'head count reductions' (job losses to you and me); and a three-year no strike agreement.

ANTI-TRADE UNION FRENZY

In the 24 hours since this package of vast concessions by the workers - plus the concession of £9m in grants from the Scottish government and £125m in loan guarantees from the UK government to a tax-dodging multinational - big chunks of the media and commentariat have launched a festival of lies and vitriol against trade unions. 

They bury the facts and the real sequence of events to tell a fairytale of UNITE the union bringing the workforce and the entire economy to the edge of the abyss. These hired liars of the capitalist media either have short memories, or are blinded by their prejudices against any set of workers who dare to resist the slaughter of their livelihoods by multi-billionaires like Jim Ratcliffe, whose personal yacht alone is worth £130m. 

It doesn't occur to any of these overpaid hacks to ask why £134m of taxpayers' money should be handed over to a gangster capitalist who could get almost exactly that same sum if he sold his super-yacht!

IMPOSSIBLE CHOICES

The phrase "caught between the devil and the deep blue sea" doesn't even begin to hint at the heartbreaking choices imposed on Grangemouth workers, their families and communities in recent days. 

Choices imposed by the one-man dictatorship of tax-dodging Jim Ratcliffe, majority shareholder of INEOS, owner of Scotland's biggest industrial complex and the only oil refinery in oil-rich Scotland.

A choice between the death of entire communities through closure of the petrochemical plant - and in all probability the rapid knock-on closure of the oil refinery - with the loss of thousands of jobs, or slow agonizing crucifixion through the package of concessions the workers were bullied and blackmailed into giving.

Ratcliffe played the cavalier industrial thug, and ultimately got away with it. As explained in an earlier blog, he planned consciously with his cohorts back in March to provoke and defeat a strike - which he marked into the calendar for November! - as a means of decapitating the workers' union, decimating the workers' wages and conditions, and to blackmail £150million out of governments to shore up INEOS investment plans.

FRACKING MAYHEM

This investment plan is largely focussed on the import of shale gas ethane from the USA, where the destructive fracking industry is laying waste to whole communities and the environment. Fracking is something which the Westminster Coalition is likewise devoted to, with recent announcements of tax breaks for fracking fortune-hunting corporations, and the crude, outrageous suggestion by Tory Lord Howell (George Osborne's father-in-law) about the scope for fracking in "desolate areas like the North East of England"! 

And all that in the wake of the recent G8 summit held in my native County Fermanagh, where plans to frack in pursuit of profit threatens to not only wreck the natural beauty of Fermanagh's Lakelands, but infest the local environment with a range of poisonous byproducts - decimating local jobs in tourism and agriculture in the process. 

So the accusation by Grangemouth's local MP Michael Connarty of collusion between the Westminster government and Ratcliffe's INEOS is not wide of the mark.

INDUSTRIAL VANDALISM

In the past week, Grangemouth workers went through a stomach-churning series of twists and turns. They were provoked into voting to defend union convener Stevie Deans from victimization, with an initial 48 our strike, due to have happened on 20-21 October.

On discovering proof this was a long-planned provocation, the union canceled the strike. Ratcliffe took this as a signal of weakness, which invited his increased aggression, issuing 'sign or be sacked' forms to every worker at their home address, deliberately bypassing the recognized union, UNITE.

COURAGE & DEVASTATION

To their eternal credit, over 680 of the 1,000 union members at the site returned the forms unsigned to their trade union; a powerful display of courage, union loyalty and solidarity, a mandate for resistance to the butchers' assault on terms and conditions. 

The ball was back in Ratcliffe's court. In a high risk countermove - given the phenomenal importance of the site to the economy and as a source of profit for INEOS - Ratcliffe shut down the petrochemical plant, liquidating it. The workers and entire community, indeed the whole of Scotland, were thrown into a state of shock and devastation.

Now what to do? Nobody with any experience as a trade union activist or shop steward would envy the horrendous situation facing the 60-strong shop stewards organisation at Grangemouth. They must have agonized over how best to fulfil their responsibility towards the men and women who elected them, whose entire lives were thrown into meltdown by Ratcliffe's brutal, unhesitating vandalism.

REPRESSIVE ANTI-UNION LAWS

In past days, the pivotal economic position of the site would have given trade unionists an almost invincible weapon in the form of solidarity action by workers at both ends of the production process - ranging from the pipeline into Grangemouth from the Forties oilfield, to the supplies of the overwhelming majority of fuel to Scotland, N Ireland and northern England, and the production of about 30% of Britain's needs of ethylene and similar materials.

But 30 years since Thatcher constructed the most repressive battery of anti-union laws in Europe, which 13 years of Labour governments retained in full, workers and their union leaderships were immediately confronted by a harsh choice: convince members to defy the anti-union laws and take decisive, appropriate forms of industrial action in defense of a vital enterprise and the communities dependent on it - or be hamstrung and paralyzed, beating a hasty retreat in the face of Ratcliffe's onslaught.

UCS OCCUPATION

In the situation where a venture capitalist with absolutely no pretense of social responsibility to society - or to the skilled workforce that helped produce INEOS's £2billion in profit last year alone - had declared closure, permanent closure, a strike was not an appropriate tactical option. 

A more timely option would have been occupation of the site, to halt asset-stripping, and to use workers' control of the vast assets to mount a mass campaign for public ownership to save the jobs, conditions and enormous contribution to the national economy. 

It is an unfortunate irony that just a few days before UNITE general secretary Len McLuskey led the union delegation to offer wholesale acceptance of INEOS's brutal package, he had addressed the annual Jimmy Reid Foundation event with eloquent tribute to the inspiration to workers far and wide when Upper Clyde Shipbuilders was occupied by the workers to halt closures in 1971 - successfully. The spirit and lessons of UCS could have been an invaluable guide to the national UNITE leadership in the Grangemouth struggle for survival.

DEFIANCE 

It would be irresponsible sectarianism to criticise the Grangemoth shop stewards or UNITE members who faced such horrendous dilemmas, especially in the context of the anti-union laws designed to neuter collective action. They showed great courage in a horrendous situation.

But the trade union movement as a whole needs to ponder the questions raised. How are we ever going to resist butchery by billionaire multinationals if the unions simply obey these laws? 

When are major unions going to take action in defiance of the anti-union laws, after thorough explanation and preparation of the members, and then build and demand solidarity from the wider trade union movement and working class communities?

THIS IS THE MODERN (CAPITALIST) WORLD

As they announced their gracious decision to accept £134m off the taxpayer, and appalling reductions in the incomes and workplace rights of Grangemouth workers, INEOS bosses and their media sycophants made much noise about 'modern pension schemes', 'modern industrial relations', and 'accepting change in the modern world'. 

In the words of the mighty Paul Weller, "This is the modern world":

Capitalism in the modern world involves systematic lies about the 'financial distress' of the Grangemouth wing of INEOS's 51 manufacturing plants. Ratcliffe told us it makes a loss of £10m a month - although the annual figure pumped out by INEOS varied vastly with each new press release.

In fact the financial experts hired by UNITE proved that Grangemouth petrochemicals made them £7m profit last year, and £6m the year before. They found INEOS's own accounts forecast profits of £500m from Grangemouth by 2017.

BILLIONAIRE BULLY BLACKMAILS SCOTLAND

And just to underline the lies used to stampede workers into thinking the place was 'worthless' (their word) and in need of a bounty from the government and the workforce to survive, Ratcliffe has declared to the world that Grangemouth now has a bright future for "the next 20 to 25 years".

Capitalism 'in the modern world' means it is in the gift of one man - a Swiss-based tax exile - to close down the only oil refinery in oil-rich Scotland; the power to obliterate an industrial site that produces at least £1billion a year towards the Scottish economy.

This is the modern world - one man lies, blackmails and bullies not only thousands of workers whose jobs depend on the place he owns, but holds the elected government of Scotland to ransom, demanding public subsidies for his private profiteering.

NATIONALISATION BACK ON THE AGENDA

But there is something positive stirring in the minds of many ordinary people 'in this modern world', for the first time in years: the attraction to the idea of public ownership of vital national assets and public services.
The dictatorship of capital - in the form of one capitalist in this instance - has been revealed to millions in the past week, and reviled by most of them.

Added to Grangemouth, people are furious at the wider energy cartel, where the 'Big Six' suppliers of household energy carefully coordinate their crucifying 8-11% price increases just as the clocks go back for the winter months. The idea and demand for public ownership of energy is growing exponentially.

Likewise, the planned privatization of east coast railways, after its nationalisation led to over £200m being gifted to the government Treasury this year, infuriates people facing mounting fares and adds another strand to the attraction of public ownership.

ALTERNATIVE OWNERSHIP

When Ratcliffe and his cronies threatened the very existence of Grangemouth, the SNP government (in stark contrast to the Westmonster Coalition) quite rightly started to search for alternative ownership. How the hell could there be any justification in leaving the priceless assets, capital and workers' skills in the hands of JR and his capitalist vandals?

But why on earth did the SNP scour the globe - including China in particular - in search of a new owner? The answer was under their own nose: the Scottish government should have nationalized it, taking the assets off an outfit hellbent on rule or ruin. And they should have ushered in a new, democratic form of management, embracing the skills and expertise of workers' elected representatives, as well as the national government and appropriate scientists and experts.

Neither the SNP nor Labour openly or forcefully raised this blatantly obvious option - although individual MPs, MSPs and government ministers made some mild references to it.

And if the limited powers under devolution make that impossible (although Prestwick Airport's takeover by the Scottish government at least questions this), then surely combining support for nationalisation with the case for full-blown self-government under independence becomes all the more potent as an alternative?

UNITE AND NATIONALISATION

The most disappointing aspect of the fight for nationalisation not being seriously pursued is that UNITE's central leadership did not vigorously expound it or campaign for it.

True, in a press release Len McLuskey called on Scottish and UK governments to give the site a new beginning "free of the tyranny of one man's whims. If this means securing financial assistance - or even nationalisation - then this must be done".

But referring to it in the passing in a press release is not campaigning for it!

Failure by either the trade unions or major political parties to champion the case for nationalisation, or indeed to carry it out in government, has left Grangemouth under the control and dictatorial fancies of Ratcliffe, a capitalist thug who has proven he shouldn't be let near the ownership of a burger van, let alone Scotland's biggest industrial complex.

The whole issue of democratic public ownership is one of the central issues that the Grangemouth crisis has thrown up; the trade union movement should seize the time, and popularize what is an increasingly attractive idea within the working class.

SNP

Although they have, to their great credit, promised renationalisation of Royal Mail under independence, the SNP Is not a party ideologically committed to public ownership. They are more inclined to rattle the begging bowl under the noses of multinationals, enticing them to invest in Scotland with promises of low business taxation.

But surely INEOS has given us a brutal object lesson in the folly of reliance on multinational capitalists for our prosperity and security?!

LABOUR'S DESERTION OF SOCIALISM

Labour has long since abandoned commitment to public ownership. That's what Blair's infamous 'defining moment' was all about: obliteration of Labour's commitment to public ownership of 'the means of production, distribution and exchange', as adopted in Clause Four, part 4 of Labour's constitution at the 1918 national conference. One hell of a series of betrayals have since happened under Labour, and they now reject the very concepts of public ownership or universalism.

BREAK UNION PROP FOR LABOUR

So another profoundly important issue, thrown up in high relief by Grangemouth, is the outrageous absurdity of trade unions - including UNITE - devoting resources, members' money and members' activity to funding and shoring up the 'modern' Labour party.

JR and INEOS are the enemy of workers in this whole episode. They planned and stockpiled and provoked in a conscious effort to decimate the unions, in order to eradicate past gains in workers' terms and conditions.

But they were gifted the opening to apply their murky plans by Ed Miliband and the UK Labour leadership, when the latter witch-hunted Grangemouth UNITE convener Stevie Deans for doing what UNITE the union saw as their best political strategy: recruiting workers to Labour to make it the voice of workers. When Miliband & Co sent a report on Stevie Deans to the police - and treated Scottish Labour with imperial contempt by not even sending them a copy of their reports on the Falkirk Labour candidate selection row - that was the signal for INEOS to turn their guns on Stevie, to try and stitch him up and drag the whole workforce into a showdown that the union never planned for. The rest is recent history, with a detrimental outcome to UNITE's Grangemouth members, and indeed workers generally.

LABOUR'S BETRAYALS OF WORKERS

How many more examples of Labour in action does it take for the national union leaderships to abandon their utterly futile attempts to reclaim Labour for trade unionism, or even socialism? Even when Labour conference delegates voted unanimously to renationalise Royal Mail and the railways under a Labour government, by the time the union delegates who moved these proposals had returned to their seats in the Labour conference venue, Labour leaders and their spin doctors had reassured the media that there is not a snowball's chance in Hell of this happening.

END THE DICTATORSHIP OF CAPITAL

The unions need to ponder much of what Grangemouth has taught us, not least the need to break from a party that has persistently acted as an opponent of trade union rights, public ownership and socialism - Labour - and to instead assist those of us striving to build a genuine, organised socialist voice of working people.

This really 'is the modern world'. If we study the experience of Grangemouth we can help to end the dictatorship of capital, and build a genuinely modern world, where the working class reaps the benefits of our collective efforts, with the most advanced workplace democracy and public ownership of major industries, services and banking. A democratic socialist one.

GRANGEMOUTH SHOWDOWN: defend workers' rights from gangster capitalists

A very important Demo has been called this Sunday 20th October at 12noon at Gate 4, (Bo'ness Road) of the INEOS plant in Grangemouth.

It's been called by the UNITE union, in support of workers facing crucifixion and blackmail at the hands of asset-stripping gangster capitalists.
See below the latest news from the union itself.
Everyone possible should attend.

This is shaping up to be one of the most critical and significant battlegrounds in Scotland for a while. Without having time to elaborate all aspects, we have:

1. A tax-dodging Swiss-based venture capitalist in cahoots with the primitive capitalists of the Chinese Communist Party bureaucracy - as the joint owners of INEOS - out to crush the rights of Scottish workers.

2. They have issued an ultimatum that unless workers sign a new set of contract conditions, with attacks on shift payments, bonuses and pensions that add up to £10,000 a worker, by this MONDAY 21st, they will keep the plant shut down that supplies Scotland and Northern England virtually all its petrol and diesel.

3. They have shut down the plant despite UNITE the union agreeing not only to cancel this weekend's 48 hour strike, but also to pledge no strikes until at least New Years Eve, provided INEOS reopen production.

4. The asset strippers say the place is worthless and loss making, and needs huge investment from taxpayers, or else it will close down altogether. They are using this blackmail to extort millions out of the government. Expert economists hired by UNITE have exposed all manner of 'creative book-keeping' to paint a false picture of the site's fortunes.

5. This begs several questions, including why should we allow society (as well as its own workforce) to be blackmailed over the future of Scotland's biggest industrial site?
It raises the whole issue of public ownership of all energy production and supplies - something of course neither Labour nor the SNP have raised, but is longstanding SSP policy.

6. We need an independent Scotland that enshrines the most advanced protection of workers' rights in Europe, to prevent this kind of shoddy dictatorship by asset-stripping venture capitalists being possible.
We need an independent Scotland with the powers to nationalize these assets - and if as they claim it's worthless, that removes any issue of 'the cost of compensation'!

This is another ugly exposure of the heart of capitalism, fangs bared as they devour workers' rights and public funds for private profit. It underlines why working people need public ownership and socialism as well as Scottish independence.

--------------

From Unite the Union latest news:

Unite to Ineos: Lift your threats to the Grangemouth workers so plant can restart

18 October 2013

Union calls again on Ineos to return to Acas talks

Pat Rafferty, Unite's Scottish secretary, called again on Ineos to abandon its plans to impose detrimental new terms on its Grangemouth workforce and to instead reopen the plant and return to mediated negotiations to secure the site's future: “At Acas talks earlier this week, Unite committed to conducting no industrial action ballots or industrial action before 31 December 2013.

“This was on the basis that the company would not impose cuts on the workforce during the same period. Unite also proposed that these negotiations over the future of the site during this period would be held under the auspices of Acas.

“Today, if the company lifts the cuts agenda that it is imposing on its workers, then our offer still stands. If the company can provide that guarantee then there is no reason why the plant cannot return to production and both parties can return to negotiations immediately to secure the future of Grangemouth.

“But it is absolutely vital that Ineos removes its threats to the workforce immediately. We cannot work on a secure future for the site while the workforce is in fear for their jobs".

http://www.unitetheunion.org/news/unite-to-ineos-lift-your-threats-to-the-grangemouth-workers-so-plant-can-restart/

WORKERS CAN BE WON TO INDEPENDENCE

The working class make up the vast majority population in Scotland. Over 630,000 of us are in organized trade unions. Tens of thousands more would join to improve their wages, health & safety, job security and rights at work if they didn't feel under threat of reprisals from employers emboldened by the most repressive anti-union laws in Europe. 

That makes the battle to win the hearts and minds of workers for Scottish self-government absolutely central to the tasks facing the Yes campaign.

The anti-independence parties recognize this. That's why their self-named Operation Fear desperately tries to scare the wits out of working people at the alleged consequences of daring to vote for the Scottish people to have the powers to shape Scotland's future - rather than letting anti-working class Westminster regimes impose their ruinous policies on us.

Labour - chief Unionist prop

Very few self-respecting workers in Scotland vote Tory. Those duped into voting LibDem under the illusion they were a fresh challenge in 2010 are deserting these treacherous yellow Tories, as 'Saint' Vince Cable leads the Coalition's assault on workplace rights - in addition to their treachery over student tuition fees, nuclear weapons, the bedroom tax, war on Syria, etc.

So the only real weapon in the hands of the Unionists - especially when it comes to fooling workers into voting No - is the Labour party component of Better Together. Hence Alistair Darling's role as poster boy for the Tory-funded front. Hence Gordon Brown's lumbering attempts to put a hairline distance between the Tory/LibDem/Labour cabal and 'United with Labour' - with it's spurious arguments about retaining workers' solidarity and looking after those most in need by pooling and distributing resources in a 'United' Kingdom.

Vote Labour - get hammered!

Ultimately their argument boils down to this: vote No to Scottish self-government and wait for a Westminster Labour government in 2015, to resolve all your problems of job insecurity, low pay, public service cuts, fuel price rises, bedroom tax. They trade heavily on the longstanding link between Labour and the trade unions to peddle this message, constantly spreading the lie that the referendum is a vote for or against Alex Salmond and 'the nationalists'.

But this argument is absolute bunkum; it takes no account of the real living experience of the recent 13 years of Labour governments at Westminster and how they treated trade unionists and workers generally - far less the stated intentions and policies of Labour for 2015 onwards.

No change – all change

The pro-independence movement needs to waken up to a brutal truth and act accordingly, gloves off: all the talk (from the likes of Alex Salmond) that things will remain the same after independence is a recipe for disaster. Workers are bombarded daily with bloodcurdling scare stories about the dangers of independence (most of them simply absurd) by the Westminster government and Labour, which are printed and broadcast as if they're gospel truth by the mainstream media. So why should workers resist this monstrous lie machine if the Yes camp merely replies "don't panic, nothing will change" - when for workers that means no change to poverty pay, rocketing prices, mass unemployment, vicious anti-union laws?

Union debates 

It is to the credit of unions like the CWU, PCS, GMB, RMT (and the STUC as a whole) that they are holding debates and forums for members to discuss the issues - something which the likes of USDAW, ASLEF and COMMUNITY utterly failed to do before hitching their wagons to the No camp. 

This is an opportunity that must be seized by Yes Scotland, with all its resources - as is being attempted by Trade Unionists for Independence (TUFI), with it's minuscule resources - to hammer the false Labour prospectus in particular, and spell out the positive, radical changes to working people's lives that are available through independence - and only through that route.

Every union or workplace will have particular issues of concern, but several key issues are common to many.

Anti union laws – keep or scrap?

The package of vicious restrictions to the ability to freely join a union, function as a union on behalf of members, and ultimately take united action in defense of wages, jobs, pensions and conditions has been added to by the unelected Coalition. But whilst the recent Labour conference tried to sound a bit more eye-catchingly radical on issues like energy prices and the bedroom tax, they didn't even pretend that on repressive workplace laws.



And why would they? Labour retained Maggie Thatcher's vicious laws throughout 13 years in office. Tony Blair boasted Britain had the most repressive workplace legislation in Europe. Glasgow Labour council threatened striking UNISON members with jail in the '90s, using those very laws. Nowhere has Labour pledged that voting NO in 2014 and voting Labour in 2015 would lead to repeal of any of these repressive measures.

Yes to workers' rights

In contrast a Yes vote would provide workers with the opening to have them scrapped, and the most advanced charter of workers' rights in the whole of Europe fought for.
The riposte of some trade unionists is that Alex Salmond has never openly declared for total repeal. True; and if he did, or if Yes Scotland as a broad umbrella body did, it would be dynamite in demolishing the fake objections of union leaders tied to Labour.
However, this Referendum is not about supporting Alex Salmond. It's about winning the powers to banish the anti-union laws - which neither the Tories, LibDems nor Labour have any intention whatsoever of doing - and then wielding the might of the organized working class to elect a government of the left that is prepared to legislate decent workplace rights. It's a stark choice.

Poverty Pay - or Living Wage?

Precisely the same arguments apply to this, one of the central concerns of most working people. Better Together and United with Labour have a lot of explaining to do! If remaining in Britain is such a rosy prospect for workers, how do they explain away the fact that in the past 40 years of successive Tory and Labour governmnets, workers' wages as a share of national wealth have plummeted? Why UK workers today get £60billion a year less in wages than they did in 1980? Why if someone currently on £12,000 a year had their wages at the same share of GDP as in 1975, they'd be earning not £12,000, but over £23,000? That the last Labour government presided over a massive increase in inequality - the biggest gap since 1864? That their legacy means one in 11 people today are left with a mere £10 a month disposable income, after paying essential bills?

Carve out our future

Voting Yes in 2014 would permanently rid us of Tory rule, with their conscious strategy of driving down wages. And no self-respecting trade unionist has ever sat back and waited to be liberated by one or other brand of pro-big business, capitalist politician. Rather, we seek to carve out the future we want, through collective organisation - for instance by demanding the government of an independent Scotland implements a living national minimum wage for all over 16, with equal pay for women. That would be a genuine measure to assist a race to the top! - and imagine the way such an achievement would embolden workers in England, Wales, Ireland and beyond to follow suit.

Public Services – cut or expand?

As part of their survey of members on the Referendum, the PCS union has found the biggest single concern is the future of public services - exceeding even pay and pensions. Leaving aside the rather important fact that only 20 per cent of the Coalition's cuts have been implemented so far, meaning an eye-watering four times as much is yet to come, what are the prospects for public services and the workers who provide them if Labour manages to win in 2015?
It was United with Labour's Gordon Brown who declared 100,000 job losses in the civil service a clear 3 years before the Coalition took office. And in contrast to the populist speechifying at Labour's recent conference, Ed Balls and others made brutally plain their intention to be ‘ruthless’, with ‘iron discipline’ in making cuts to jobs, pay and services. That's the prospects even if - and it's far from guaranteed - Labour wins Westminster in 2015 and Scotland remains under its control.
By contrast, a Yes vote opens the door to a mighty push by workers and their unions for a massive expansion of public services, with the powers to tax the rich minority to help fund them, expanding jobs in the construction of cradle-to-grave care, expanded education, health and public transport, alongside a massive social sector house-building plan. Without the powers that go with independence, this is impossible under devolution.

Labour's Welfare spokesperson Rachel Reeves says Labour cuts will be deeper than Tories'

Privatization - or public ownership?

Royal Mail workers - and millions more of us reliant on the service - are reeling at the naked profiteering of the sell-off of a service that's been state owned for nearly 500 years. Over £1.1billion was stolen by the speculators and profiteers on the first day after privatization. Already the head of Royal Mail has admitted the prospect of dearer postage stamps. The experience of privatized energy - where the recent price rise by SSE was even higher in Scotland's coldest northern regions than in the rest of Scotland - is a warning of regionally varied prices for mail services, on top of the threat to the universal service, especially in rural areas.
But what do we face under continued Westminster rule, if workers are persuaded by the likes of the CWU union leadership to vote No?

Labour privateers

If some combination of Tories, LibDems and UKIP win in 2015, the answer is too obvious to elaborate. But whilst Labour took £1.8m from CWU members since 2010, and graciously rewarded them with the opportunity to win unanimous support for the CWU's Motion to renationalise the service at Labour's national conference, Ed Miliband and Co immediately spat in their face, trampling on Labour's conference decision, declaring they will absolutely not take Royal Mail - or the railways, or the exploitative Big Six energy companies - into public ownership.
In contrast, not only has the SSP consistently fought for the past 15 years for democratic public ownership of all these services - and banks, big business, transport - but Alex Salmond has now also pledged re-nationalization of Royal Mail in an independent Scotland.
So the choice workers face is stark: vote No for continued privatization, profiteering, service cuts, rip-off prices, or vote Yes to reverse privatization and extend public ownership.
Again, the SNP's failure to call for extensive public ownership, including North Sea oil, misses the point. The 2014 Referendum is not a vote for permanent SNP rule, but for the first ever chance to elect a government of our own choice, where the option of a government of the left that is committed to such massive restructuring of power and wealth is available.

Workers’ solidarity and internationalism

The last resort argument of Labour scoundrels for retention of Westminster rule is that "independence will break the unity and internationalism of the working class".
That's rich coming from people like Gordon Brown, Alistair Darling or Anas Sarwar!
Since when did workers' unity depend on Westminster? In fact, under successive Tory and Labour governments, 'divide and rule' has been a favourite tactic to defeat workers' attempts to defend their jobs, wages, conditions and communities. For example, the toxic combination of privatization and laws against solidarity ("secondary") action has been used to stop railway workers doing the very same jobs from uniting in action, because they're hired by separate profiteers.

Internationalism - not British nationalism

And since when has the solidarity and internationalism of Scottish workers halted at the shores of Britain? What about their solidarity actions with the workers of Chile under Pinochet or apartheid South Africa? What about the solidarity tours I've personally helped organise in Scotland for trade unionists from Denmark, Nigeria, Ireland...or Liverpool, Manchester, Bristol? Did anyone ever decline solidarity with any of these workers in struggle because they're English, or because their country is not part of the UK?! Nobody but a reactionary British nationalist would put such a viewpoint.

And why would this genuine internationalism suddenly cease once Scotland's working class majority had won the powers to elect a left government able and willing to transform workers' lives?
In fact, by voting Yes and simultaneously fighting to carve out a Scotland based on workers' interests, a socialist Scotland, Scottish workers and their trade unions can give a massive push forward to workers' struggles everywhere, starting with our nearest neighbours. And the fact that unions like UNITE and the NUJ straddle the borders of Britain and Ireland - north and south - buries the lie that self-government equals division and isolationism.

Workers need independence and socialism 

The case for independence - and socialism - is there to be won amongst workers, the very people who stand to lose most under continued rule by Westminster's competing capitalist factions, and most to gain from shaping Scotland into an egalitarian socialist democracy.