10.04.1997

Liverpool dockers set Morris straight

The Liverpool dockers respond to Bill Morris’s article, ‘Setting the record straight’, published in the TGWU Record (February/March 1997)

In September 1995, 500 Liverpool dockers were dismissed by the port authority, the Mersey Docks & Harbour Company, for defending basic trade union principles. They refused to cross a picket line. Within 24 hours the dockers received their dismissal notices. More importantly, the reason for dismissal was given as “being in breach of their contract of employment”, not for being on unofficial strike.

From these simple facts a very complex tale evolves, incorporating events prior to and following the dockers’ dismissal. Sadly, our general secretary fails to comprehend these important facts and developments. Thus, the opportunity exists for him to construct arguments that at best confuse and at worse undermine the heroic struggles of men and women determined to attain their reinstatement amidst overwhelming difficulties.

Central to their campaign has been the dockers’ insistence on the removal of all scab/casual labour currently being used by Mersey Docks. This primary issue Bill Morris has refused to acknowledge. Indeed, the official position of the Transport and General Workers Union is two-pronged. Firstly, to alleviate the hardship of the dockers’ families and secondly, to seek a negotiated settlement.

Financial support to the Dockers’ Hardship Fund from the union has been £500,000. This money is much needed and welcome. This is the equivalent of £l5 per week to each docker’s family. The union has helped in developing our proposals for a labour supply company.

Unfortunately, the union and Mersey Docks have chosen KPMG Peat Marwick to develop this business plan. KPMG are the Mersey Docks registrars and were used to undervalue Medway dockers’ shares. KPMG are more closely associated with Mersey Docks. The union took KPMG to court over this matter. Thus the dockers have little confidence in their involvement. No doubt time will tell.

The paucity of our union’s strategy rests upon the so-called unofficial/illegal nature of the dockers’ dispute.

In ‘Setting the Record Straight’, Bill Morris distorts basic issues so that his preconceived conclusion is supported by his inaccurate introduction. As a result the general secretary spends little time upon real issues, preferring instead to launch invective against John Pilger.

1. The core of our union’s selective inactivity relies upon the premise that the Liverpool dockers are involved in an unofficial/ illegal dispute because they failed to conduct a ballot. Two weeks before their dismissal by Mersey Docks management, the Torside dockers held an official ballot over enforced redundancies and the introduction of casual labour by Torside. Following an 86% vote in favour of legal, official action, Torside withdrew their demands. Two weeks later they dismissed all their 80 young dockers.

Between 1989 and 1995 the Liverpool dockers, through their Docks and Waterways Regional Trade Group, requested on four occasions an official ballot relating to job losses, privatisation and centralisation. These requests were refused by the union for various reasons: ongoing negotiations, companies no longer trading, the illegality of holding ballots amongst different companies, albeit direct subsidiaries of Mersey Docks, etc. The complaints and concerns of the Liverpool dockers are adequately recorded in the minutes of the Region 6 Committee over a long period of time. Indeed, at least two meetings took place in London with Bill Morris.

Identifying these various concerns at the last meeting, which took place in 1994 with Bill Morris, the docks’ stewards spoke of the increasing chaos in the port that could result in the dockers’ dismissal if the union continued to fail to act. Three formal complaints were made about the local docks officer and a regional inquiry again failed to respond fully to the concerns of the dockers in 1993.

Indeed, the question begs to be asked, why did the union not organise a legal ballot in September 1995? Nevertheless, the Liverpool dockers have always maintained that their action is neither unofficial nor illegal. They were sacked for being in breach of contract. For 18 months they have had no employer. In law a strike takes place between an employer and employees.

If this was an illegal dispute no social benefits would be paid to the dockers. This must be the first illegal/unofficial strike in which the employer regularly praises the union while conducting equally regular meetings with them. Mersey Docks emphasises it is not a strike - the dockers have been dismissed.

Obviously, Bill Morris wants to “preserve the fabric of the union”. Why did he not repudiate immediately the actions of the dockers? Despite one or two aspects of sabre-rattling by Mersey Docks, no legal proceedings have been actioned over the last 19 months.

2. However, the article insists that Torside Ltd dockers had nothing to do with Mersey Docks. Obviously, this is repetition of Mersey Docks’ view. Why then were the young Torside dockers interviewed by Mersey Docks senior managers at Mersey Docks head-quarters in 1991? Why were the port shop stewards informed by the docks officers that Mersey Docks sought their approval to establish Torside? Torside dockers were trained and given certificates to drive plant and machinery by Mersey Docks. All facilities belonged to Mersey Docks. Why did two managers of Mersey Docks breach the contract of the Torside dockers, insisting that they work contrary to normal practice?

Importantly, Torside dockers were regularly employed by Mersey Docks working alongside Mersey Docks dockers.

3. The remainder of the article makes no reference to the John Pilger article. Suffice to say that one has to question the logic of refusing to give interviews to either John Pilger or Ken Loach. If John Pilger is an ultra-leftist journalist, where does that leave all other journalists that Bill Morris willingly gives interviews to?

The sacked Liverpool dockers welcome open debate, discussion and criticism. Last Christmas a reporter and cameraman from the TGWU Record spent a week with the Liverpool dockers. No article was published in the Record. The question again has to be asked why the Liverpool dockers’ dispute has never been covered in the Record over the last l8 months.

Whilst feelings run high in any dispute, especially one that lasts for 18 months involving men and women who have given their lives to that industry, the Liverpool dockers have attempted to avoid open confrontation with our union. This policy will continue, but only to a certain point of acceptability.

Meanwhile, we express our deepest gratitude to all who have maintained the principle of supporting all workers in struggle. This support must include the heroic struggle of the Magnet and Hillingdon workers.