05.09.1996

In tune with the members

The RMT transport union is currently in dispute with 20 train-operating companies. It has called further one-day strikes and an overtime ban at seven, while members at 13 others are being balloted for action. Alan Pottage is on the 12-strong national executive committee of the RMT, where he sits alongside six other members of the Socialist Labour Party. Peter Manson asked him about the role of the SLP in the disputes

What is the mood of the membership?

The members are very solid, militant and angry. Over 1,000 new members have joined since the ballots. Scottish track workers have also just voted to strike in defence of Joe Morrison, a union rep at Mossend in Glasgow, who has been sacked for his union activities.

What about these stories that it is only the ‘intransigent attitude’ of the ‘hard-left’ SLP leaders that is preventing a settlement in these disputes?

Well, it’s laughable. It’s like saying that the signalworkers’ dispute was stage-managed by Tony Blair, because the RMT had a Labour majority at that time. We are just working people elected to serve on the NEC, but the press like to make out that we are somehow detached from the membership. Yet in ballot after ballot the members have voted for action. The smallest majority we have had is three to one. In fact the entire executive is united around this strategy - SLP or not.

It’s just a joke. Like the attempt to make a connection between the RMT and CWU disputes: ‘hard-left militants’ - whether SLP, SWP or Communist Party - are supposed to be holding up settlements.

We are working to an RMT agenda, not an SLP agenda.

In a way it’s a back-handed compliment, isn’t it?

Yes, we have won the support of the membership and we remain influenced by them. In our union the rank and file make the decisions. Elected EC members are seconded for three years, and then they have to return to their work. Of course management prefer to deal with full-timers, appointed for life. They start to build up a relationship. That’s why the bosses are starting to interfere with the union’s constitution - trying to prevent people being released to the EC.

Of course there are people in any union who would also prefer to be in a job for life, but our rules say that the lay members of the EC are elected for three years and then have to wait for at least another three years before they can be elected again.

We in the Communist Party say that union officials should be subject to recall by the members. So long as they remain in touch they should be able to carry on representing those who elect them. Perhaps there should be a balance between experienced leaders and fresh blood?

There is a danger that people can get burnt out after three years, but there is another school of thought that says that there should be continuity. What we need is a fighting spirit among the members, and a national leadership in tune with them. We are people with socialist principles - although I am not saying that it is only the SLP who have socialist principles. The SLP influence is irrelevant, as far as the conduct of the dispute is concerned.

Shouldn’t a socialist party aim to coordinate action, not only within a single union, but across union lines, wherever it has influence?

That is definitely something that needs to be thought about.