21.09.1995

Underground climbdown

THE RAIL Maritime and Transport union’s initial decision to take industrial action to secure a better pay deal on London Underground met with a tremendous response. RMT activists ran a very effective campaign, not only ensuring that their own members remained solid in backing the strike, but also in recruiting 300 former Aslef members and an amazing 600 non-union members.

This was proof, if any was needed, that a combative union does appeal to workers.

Aslef on the other hand kowtowed to London Underground management and caused many members to hand in their union cards in disillusionment.

Now however the RMT’s position has changed. London Underground Ltd has obtained a high court injunction preventing those recruited since the ballot from taking any action.

This is despite the fact that the RMT recruited on the basis of ‘Join now, strike now’. This was an historic opportunity to defy the anti-trade union laws and win. The blatant injustice of the decision has found a resonance with other trade unionists.

Instead of this the RMT has opted to reballot all its members on the underground.

This could have disastrous consequences. Having been recruited with a promise that they could fight, workers could justifiably resent the RMT’s decision to delay the struggle. It is even possible that they may become disillusioned with trade unions altogether.

The role of the RMT’s legal advisors has been absolutely treacherous. Having first claimed that the RMT was legally entitled to bring out its new members on strike, they quickly reneged when faced with a contrary opinion from the London Underground company lawyers. This is another example of the men in wigs dictating to the union.

This is an intolerable situation, as the membership elects leaders to take the necessary decisions, not highly paid and ineffective barristers.

Meanwhile BR management have issued an ultimatum to the executive committee of RMT (drawn from rank and file members for a three-year period, paid by the trade union and then returning to work) stating that if EC members do not return to work by January 1 1996 they will lose their jobs.

With the break-up of the rail industry still crawling along and with increasing attacks on workers and the union, the RMT has a choice: it can see itself slowly disintegrate as a national union whilst securing bureaucratic positions in the short term, or it can enter a fight which it has a real chance of winning - ie, the fight against privatisation.

Of course this again brings up the question of combating the anti-trade union laws. It remains to be seen if the RMT has the foresight and the courage to take on this fight, or whether, as now seems more likely, it will let the union slip slowly into oblivion.

RMT member, London