News from the NUT Executive

Teachers are facing further attacks from politicians – and after the comments by Tristram Hunt on both ‘teacher licensing’ and ‘classroom discipline’ this week, sadly not just from Government politicians – making it even clearer that a strategy of ‘waiting for Labour’ is no solution to the problems facing teachers and education.

Teachers are facing yet more attacks on our conditions, when our existing intolerable workload is already driving many teachers out of the profession – a rate of ‘wastage’ that even Michael Wilshaw has had to admit is a ‘national scandal’ this week.

Michael Wilshaw’s answer to the crisis facing education – that teachers should ‘stop moaning’ is no solution. Yes, we should complain but complaining will not change matters – only a serious campaign of action will do so.

Teachers are waiting to hear what plans their unions have in place for such a serious campaign. In particular, NUT members are waiting for news from the emergency meeting of the NUT National Executive that met yesterday. That meeting was called in the light of the commitment, made following the postponement of the strike action in November - a postponement that I opposed - that, instead, “in the event that insufficient progress is made in talks with the Secretary of State, a joint day of national strike action be called and taken no later than 13 February 2014”.

Given that Michael Gove has so far refused to agree to meet separately with the NUT, NASUWT and UCAC to try and resolve our disputes, then clearly no such progress has been made. However, Executive members have been asked to maintain confidentiality about the decisions made at yesterday’s meeting and so I am unable to report on them. All I can say factually is that discussions will be continuing at the next National Executive meeting on January 30th and that, clearly, if action is to be taken before February 13th, then there is little time left to make such a strike announcement. 

However, it’s no secret, as I had already made clear on this blog, the position that I would argue for: (http://electmartin1.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/nut-nec-meeting-on-thursday-what.html) – naming a date for a one-day national strike before February 13 as was promised, seeking to co-ordinate with other trade unions in dispute - like the RMT*, FBU, PCS and Higher Education unions as well as the NASUWT, and, critically, making clear to both teachers and the Secretary of State that our next strike is not just a one-off protest action but part of an ongoing campaign with further industrial action and campaigning activities to follow in the spring and summer terms. 

Last night's Hands Off London Transport meeting

I believe that there is an urgent need to implement an action strategy along these lines. Teachers will need to look out for further official communications from their unions about what has been agreed.

* The RMT in London have called two 48-hour strikes starting on the 4 and 11 February to oppose plans to close all London Underground ticket offices and cut 950 staff. The TSSA are also balloting over a timetable that should allow them to take action at the same time. These unions are correctly adopting a strategy of both industrial and campaigning activities – including a public meeting that I attended in London last night (and why this blogpost had to be delayed until this morning).

As I have said in a feature article explaining the dispute in this week’s Socialist paper (http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/17957/15-01-2014/rmt-v-johnson-union-prepares-to-defend-london-underground) "Londoners need to stand shoulder to shoulder with the RMT. These cuts are an attack on a vital transport service for all who live and work in London and an attack on an important section of our trade union movement. Let's join together with a coordinated campaign of strike action to defeat cuts and defend jobs, conditions and services"

NUT NEC meeting on Thursday - what strategy should we adopt?

With the attacks on pay and pensions already largely in place, and attacks on conditions soon to be added, the NUT urgently needs to agree a workable strategy to put to beleaguered teachers.

With no news of any 'significant progress' in our dispute with Gove, (and that's no real surprise), an emergency NUT Executive meeting has been called on January 16 to decide what strategy the NUT should now adopt for action. But what should that strategy be?

The strategy has to be one that is seen by members as having a prospect of successfully forcing back Gove's attacks. We should also be pursuing co-ordination of action with other trade unions in dispute - which needs to be addressed seriously by discussion of common action dates between unions.

These are the proposals that I have been discussing with NUT reps in Lewisham and that I hope we can consider at Thursday's NEC:
a) Naming a date for a one-day national strike before Feb 13 - as was promised. However, the validity of anything that looks like just another protest strike will clearly be questioned by teachers. This has to be seen as part of an ongoing/escalating campaign.
b) So this strike isn't seen as a one-off, then there should be a commitment to a further strike (even if the exact date might be left to be subject to co-ordination with other unions) in March (before Easter, Annual Conference and the exam-season).
c) To emphasise that this is an escalation, then we should consider the March strike being a two-day strike. The preparation for this should include collections for hardship funds for the hardest-hit colleagues.
d) Alongside national strike action, which best hits the headlines, what about using the first strike day's rallies to launch a national non-strike action strategy that (a) again demonstrates a clear escalation of action and (b) is also seen as action that is directly relieving the intolerable everyday pressures on colleagues. All workload actions can have their strengths and weaknesses but, rather than continuing to leave action to individual school choice of the various instructions, can we propose - and consult with reps - on action, based on the current ballot / instructions, that can involve the majority of schools in a focused national campaign?
e) This would need to be combined with a sharper publicity campaign exposing Gove's agenda and appealing for public support. We need sharp national materials that teachers could use to leaflet on school gates and every Association could use for a public meeting / street stalls.
f) What about then building for a national Saturday demonstration to defend education in the summer term - followed by further strike action after the exam period? 

Tell your NEC members what you think!

Hunt joins Gove in the teacher-blame game - NUT must oppose 'licensing' plans

Tomorrow's Times will carry the headline "Labour will tell teachers to improve or face sack"

In an announcement that will be a further blow to teacher morale, Tristram Hunt has made clear that he will revive the idea floated under the last Labour Government of regular 're-licensing' of teachers, or as the Times puts it "teachers will have to be licensed and will face the sack if they fail tough new checks on their abilities under plans drawn up by Labour".

Shamefully, Tristram Hunt and New Labour are lining-up behind Gove's agenda of blaming teachers for the problems of education - and wider society. It is these same politicians that should accept responsibility for the root causes - for cuts, for underfunding and for poverty. 

If Tristram Hunt took the time to talk to teachers, he might realise that the real problem that needs addressing is not the myth of 'under-performance' but the fact that huge numbers of excellent teachers are leaving the profession because of the impossible demands we face.

Instead, Hunt is joining in with a blame-game designed to keep up the pressure on teachers so that they will put up with impossible hours for fear of being 'failed'. Under Gove, the threat is that we won't be awarded a pay-rise under his performance-pay legislation. Under Hunt, the threat will be that we won't even keep our jobs!

Quite rightly, when Ed Balls floated this idea in 2009, it was firmly rejected by the NUT. Disappointingly, tonight the immediate response from the NUT was far too ambivalent, suggesting that the Union's attitude will depend on the 'detail' of the proposals.

By now, we should know enough about New Labour's politics to know that the details will not be ones that will make the plan acceptable. Yes, it will be presented in a more polished manner than Gove, using the excuse that the plans will help teachers maintain their 'professional development'.  But New Labour will maintain a very similar programme of  spending cuts as the present Government. Schools and teachers will not be provided with time and resources for genuine training and development, let alone the time to plan, prepare and develop initiatives. It will mean more observations, more imposed targets, more Ofsted-inspired gradings of lessons.

This 'licensing' plan will be another way to impose both excessive workload and whatever particular teaching models are favoured by Government onto a beleaguered teaching profession. Just like Gove's PRP, it will be a scheme wide open to unfair, discriminatory and arbitrary decisions by hard-nosed school management.

Hun't proposal is also reflected in policies adopted in the USA and in other countries infected by the GERM, the Global Education Reform Movement, where teachers are graded and bullied with the threat of losing their jobs if they aren't deemed to make the grade.

If unions adopt a policy of trying to appease New Labour into being slightly less harsh on teachers than the Tories, then such a  policy will fail teachers  - and fail education. Instead, we have to firmly reject both Gove and Hunt's plans and urgently put in place the national action that teachers have been promised will take place before February 13 - and follow that up with an ongoing campaign of strike and non-strike action. 

Our action campaign needs to be combined with a nationwide campaign to explain to parents what's really at stake - and to build a movement which can defend education from the attacks of all the main parties.

An electoral footnote:
The New Year YouGov poll showed that 25% of teachers already didn't know which party they could bring themselves to vote for. That figure can only have increased after Hunt's announcement tonight.

Lewisham speaks out against cuts and racism

The protest outside 'Question Time' last night

Last night, BBC's 'Question Time' came to the London Borough of Lewisham. It was a night when the people of Lewisham did themselves proud - in stark contrast to most of the Question Time panel.

A noisy crowd gathered outside Goldsmiths College before filming started to make our voices heard - above all about the threats to the NHS. The successful campaign to defend Lewisham Hospital has shown that, with a bold campaign, victories can be achieved. Lewisham teachers have also achieved a recent success over pay and appraisal policies through the threat of strike action. These kinds of local successes need to be celebrated - and publicised. Above all, they need to be built upon to build a national campaign of action to oppose cuts and defend services - in the NHS, education and across public services.

The successful RMT ballot in support of strike action to oppose the cuts to jobs and ticket office closures on the Tube opens another campaign that needs our full support. These cuts are an attack on a vital transport service for all of us who live and work in London and an attack on an important section of our trade union movement. Two 48-hour strikes have been called for the beginning of February.  Let's hope that we can join together with a coordinated campaign of strike action to defeat cuts and defend jobs, conditions and services.

These cuts - like the fire station closures which saw the shutting of Downham station in Lewisham yesterday - are part of an agenda of yet more 'austerity'. The attempts to justify swingeing spending cuts by the politicians on the BBCQT panel were immediately answered by one Lewisham campaigner in the audience, Helen, who rightly pointed to the billions that could be found if the Government were to seriously tackle tax evasion and avoidance. 

Nadine Dorries and the UKIP representative then tried to hide behind the racist fog of blaming problems on 'immigration'. Again the good people of Lewisham were having none of it. In one clip, already on youtube on http://youtu.be/9DFWxd6FFWs, one resident lambasted Dorries in particular for using immigration as a 'smokescreen' to hide the real agenda of privatisation.

The weakness of the professional politicians on the panel was in stark contrast to the anger and determination that came across from the public of Lewisham in the audience. It's up to the trade union movement to harness that anger and lead a campaign of strike action that can stop the cuts - and also to start to use its resources to provide an alternative.

The RMT are, to their credit, as well as backing strike action, also backing the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition in standing candidates against all the pro-cuts big business parties in this year's council elections. I will certainly be supporting TUSC candidates standing for election in Lewisham in 2014. 

The Calais Mutiny by A Killick (Private No. 08907 RAOC) - a primary source to educate Michael Gove

The pamphlet says 1918 - but perhaps should read 1919?

I would like like to begin by giving you a brief personal history of my childhood in order to illustrate the social background of the years leading up to World War 1.

As a child I was greatly influenced by my grandmother who used to regale me with stories of the privations endured by the workers in the hungry 'forties. She was a child at the time, attending the old village school. Many was the time when she had to go to school without breakfast. Occasionally the good-hearted schoolmaster would manage to rustle up something for them. I started to augment the family income at the tender age of 7 or 8 before and after attending school. Two decades had passed since my gran's schooldays. The old Board and National schools which my parents had attended had been superseded by the council schools. Education was now compulsory and had taken a step forward. Within his lights our schoolmaster was a quite efficient educationist. He was, however, a real dyed-in-the-wool imperialist and was very proud of the Empire on which the sun never sets. He managed to indoctrinate many of the children, including myself, with his imperialist ideology. He had many maps and all were painted a deep red where the British flag flew. I can still remember thinking and feeling what a desirable solution of all our ills it would be, could we but paint the whole world red. However, I suffered no permanent harm as one of my jobs was running errands for a shoemaker who was a socialist. I used to listen to him arguing the point and eventually decided that socialism was the only answer to our problems.

The average wage of the workers in this part of the country was not more than £1 a week, with no social services of any kind. This was before 9d for 4d, and the first old age pension - 5/-. The only provision against sickness was made by the workers themselves through their Friendly Societies or Slate Clubs. The fear of unemployment was a dominating feature of every workers’ life and the spectre of the workhouse was very real. Annual holidays were very rare - just the occasional day out. To give you some idea of the cost of living - bread was 3½d a quarter loaf; meat from 6d to 1/- a pound, rabbits 1/- to 1/3; cheapest farm eggs ld; milk 2d a pint; butter from 1/- a pound, margarine 6d, cheese 7d; village and town rents 5/- to 7/6 a week; the cheapest suits 25/-. You can imagine how little was available for luxuries: so much for the good old days. Our family was slightly better off than some as Father was gardener to a local doctor and free medical attention was included as a part of his wages. He started with a wage of 15/- a week when there were two children in our family and he was given an increment of 1/- per week for each child produced. My mother was never sure whether it was 16 or 17, but only 8 lived, so the wage was increased to the magnificent figure of 21/- per week.

Soon after leaving school I joined a debating society called the Young Men’s Fraternal, run as an adjunct by the local Congregationalist Church. There all the burning topics of the day were discussed and no holds barred. On one occasion I was invited by the local Boy Scouts to uphold the banner of socialism in debate with a much more elderly anti-socialist sponsored by a well-known local imperialist ex-army officer.

At the end of the debate a vote was taken and I was overwhelmingly adjudged the winner. (My father tentatively asked me if I would tone my activities down a bit as he was frightened of losing his job). I remember another occasion about this time when a speaker for the Anti-Socialist Union was leading forth at a pitch at the Five Ways, Tunbridge Wells, about the terrible things that would happen should the people be so ill-advised as to return a socialist government. He said the capitalists would take all of their capital out of the country. I had to intervene and inquired if they were going to take out all the land, factories and railways, etc. 'Sonny', he said, 'you had better go back to school’. – Mister’, I said 'I should guess you’ve never been to school'. Roars of laughter. I think this episode secured my entry into the SDP, Tunbridge Wells branch. I was about 16 years of age and there was no youth movement then. These were the days of the Clarion Vans and Fellowship and Robert Blatchford, who probably made more socialists in Britain than any other single person. His best-known book, 'Merry England', was a best-seller, topping the then astronomical figure of a million copies. Of course, Blatchford was really a national socialist and so for that matter were a great many more, 'which accounts for the support they gave in that War which was so soon to break out to the allied governments against the central powers. I am not suggesting that they were fascists, for although these call themselves National Socialists, their theories have no connection whatever with socialism or for that matter with genuine nationalism. This period around 1910 also saw the birth of the 'Weekly Herald', under the editorship of that grand old man George Lansbury; which was also soon to become the first socialist daily newspaper - around 1913. The 'Herald' had as its cartoonist the Australian Will Dyson who created the famous Fat Man, and was to my mind the greatest cartoonist the socialist movement has ever known.

The War which broke on the world in August 1914 more or less took the socialist movement by surprise, and not unexpectedly many in that movement supported the then liberal Government in the prosecution of the war. I was never under any delusions as to the real nature of the war, but apart from verbal opposition had no idea what to do about it. I probably had not sufficient courage to become a conscientious objector and I could not see that such action would get anywhere. With conscription in the offing, I joined Kitchener's army in July 1915 as a specially enlisted tradesman, a shoemaker, and became a number, 08907, 59th Co. AOC. After a few weeks of hectic training, I was despatched to France in the August of that year.

In a few days we found ourselves domiciled in the Valdelievre camp and workshop at Calais, the main supply base for the expeditionary (British) forces in France. The personnel was comprised of approximately 1,000 officers and men, mainly belonging to the AOC (later to be elevated to royal status, the RAOC); also a few of the AS corps and a sprinkling of specially attached individual. Apart from a small hard-core of professional soldiers, this personnel was comprised of specially enlisted tradesmen of all sorts: gunsmiths, tinsmiths, carpenters, saddlers and shoemakers etc. I was one of the 59th Co. RAOC, 'The Shoemakers', who all the way through the war nursed a special grievance. Most of them were misled into believing that they would receive a special corps pay of 5/- or 6/- per day, as had previously applied to such specially enlisted tradesmen. Instead, they found that the actual pay they received was the same as the ordinary enlisted soldier, i.e. 1/- per day. Later, after much grumbling, this was augmented by an extra 6d per day, corps pay ex gratia. Always this rankled while working alongside and with men receiving 5/- and 6/- a day ; also later colonials arrived, drawing 7/6 a day.

However, having accepted the king's shilling, there was nothing much that could be done about it. A number of these men were prominent in the constant struggles that were always developing.

At one time there was a big trial of strength over output. As more and more machinery was introduced into the base factory, this was used as a lever to increase output even beyond the level justified by the increased mechanisation. This was resisted by most of the men, who refused to do the quota demanded. This resulted in the defaulters being forced to return in the evening to make it up. In this connection the only army rule we had to watch out for was the one which makes malingering a chargeable crime. Therefore, so long as one was always working, one could not be so charged. Incidentally, no-one was ever thus indicted. However, we could not refuse an order to work in the evening. At first about half the men in the shop (shoemakers) were involved, but after a few days resistance was broken. Finally only two of us were left; a dour Highlander and myself. In any case I was not physically capable of maintaining the new pace, so made a virtue of necessity; indeed, soon after this I was sent to hospital after a breakdown, where I was listed as suffering from fever of unknown origin. On the last night on which we were forced to return to work I had a heart-to-heart talk with the sergeant who had to accompany us. There were no witnesses apart from my mate, and among a great many other things, I told him that we could stick it out longer than they could and - 'You see this work here?' (which was the completion of the official quota.) he said, 'yes', and I retorted - 'Well, that comes off my quota tomorrow, and I mean my quota, not yours'. My comrade confirmed that my remarks went; for him, too. Hell, we kept to our threat, and that 'was the end of the matter so far as we were concerned - we were left alone. Indeed, we did ourselves a bit of good, for after that, if there were any soft jobs going, we would be detailed.

I found myself in charge of German prisoners of war, with whom I fraternized to the best of my ability; although I must confess that I never really overcame the language barrier, nevertheless we managed to convey to one another that our views on the war were identical. I was also at one time in charge of Chinese indentured labour in the docks and I could never wish to work with a finer set of men.

Incidentally, this episode in the struggle enhanced my personal status among the men, and I was always listened to. During the whole of the war, its meaning and purpose was continually under debate, and those of us who were under no illusions on this score kept plugging away. On one occasion, I remember a certain private who fancied himself as a great patriot asked - 'If you thought like that, why did you join up?' My reply was - 'For the same reason as you, mate - to dodge the trenches'. There was no rejoiner.

During the election campaigning in which we indulged prior to the Khaki Election I decorated my little section of the hut with in the centre a portrait of Karl Marx, surrounded by other socialist personalities, including the Labour candidate for my own constituency. One day, after returning to the hut for tea, I noticed that my display had been removed. When tea was over I spoke to all the men in the hut. I told them that they all knew what my politics were, and whilst not everyone agreed with me, I was sure that they all upheld my right to express myself; however, someone had seen fit to remove the decorations I had placed at the head of my bed. I didn't know who had done this, but I was going out now, and when I returned would expect to find them replaced. It worked. Nothing more was said, but the photos were back in their positions when I got back.

On several occasions we had official war apologists visit us and give us the orthodox dope. These meetings were always well attended, and we used to have a lovely time getting these people tied up in knots. I remember one such lecture given by a certain Professor Kerr who nobbled me after the meeting and took me aside. 'Of course you're right, he said, 'but we just have a job to do'.

I am bringing out these things in some detail because I want to illustrate that by and large we were not just another lot of disgruntled and dissatisfied men, but that there was a large element of political consciousness.

We used to receive most of the journals that were circulating at this period, sent out to use by friends and relatives at home. These were passed from hand to hand. The most popular of these was the 'Weekly Herald' - it had been forced to revert to its weekly status owing to the exigencies of the war. A meeting was held and it was decided that I try and get a local newsagent, who was also a wholesaler, interested. We succeeded beyond our wildest hopes: the newsagent turned out to be a militant socialist and was most co-operative - but more of that anon.

Food was another matter about which there was constant complaint. We realised that we were much better off in this regard than the men in the trenches, but contended that with the food and resources available we should be doing much better. There was a lot of graft and also spoilage of food. Consequently a messing committee, composed of elected men from all over the camp, was formed under the chairmanship of the camp CO, a certain Captain Rees, a quite forward thinking and fair man. I remember at one mess committee meeting the subject of the conscientious objectors arose, and this officer sprang to their defence - they were, he said, men of principle and guts. In fact we felt quite sorry that the major struggles should commence whilst he was still in command. This messing committee had considerable powers, including daily inspection of the cookhouse, and stores leakages stopped and there was a very noticeable improvement in the amount and cooking of the food.

Another matter which caused a considerable amount of dissatisfaction was Sunday morning work. This increased when the war was obviously entering its final stages and we argued that it was no longer necessary. We succeeded, and Sunday morning was abolished. There was, however, an interesting sequel to this and that was a little matter of church parade, which was held on Sunday mornings. Whilst we were working the faithful were allowed to opt for Sunday morning service and were excused work. Now naturally for quite a few the service was more attractive than work, so the attendance was quite fair. However, when Sunday morning work was abolished, the number of the faithful was reduced to vanishing point. So now in order to get a sufficient number to form a congregation, compulsory church parade was instituted. This took the form of an NCO coming the rounds and at random picking out volunteers - you, you and you. We put up with this, as not many were involved at anyone time. However, our reaction took on a curious expression, and without any agitation on our part. The service always ended with 'The King', but no-one would sing it, so all we had was a rendering by the band. I was at one such service which stands out in my memory. The band had struck up the anthem and there was the usual silence on the part of the congregation. On this occasion, however, the visiting padre stopped the band half-way through and spake thus: “Men , I think there is a little misunderstanding. We are expected to join in and sing this. Now, let’s start again, shall we?” Still not one joined in. The man of God was in a flaming temper. When the band had finished he slammed his Bible shut with a resounding bang and said - 'Thank God we've got a navy'. He evidently had not heard of Invergorden.

It was Soon after this that the great strike which became known as the Calais Mutiny took place; but before dealing with this I will return to the development with regard to the sales of the 'Weekly Herald'. Instead of a few dozen copies we rapidly achieved a mass circulation. In a few weeks in the Valdelievre camp alone we had a sale of 500 copies a week, I and another comrade used to collect them from the French newsagent, and I can assure you it was quite a weighty job.

In addition to our supplies the news agent displayed the weekly posters and sold further hundreds of copies to the troops in other units in the vicinity. The eagerness with which the paper was snapped up was almost unbelievable and our French comrade was just as bucked about it as we were. If I might digress again here, it was this same comrade who became the sole distributor of the 'Daily Herald' as it again reappeared soon after the war had finished.

It happened thus ….l had recently been demobilised, and called at the 'Herald' office to see what was being done to ensure the circulation of the paper among the troops in France. I saw George Lansbury, who introduced me to his circulation manager. I got into a flaming rage when he told me that nothing had been done. They Here so busy with the Scottish edition and other excuses. I told him that they should be ashamed of themselves, after all the work that had been put in to build up the sale of the 'Weekly Herald', and also pointed out the vital importance of our voice being heard in the armed forces. The upshot was that he asked me if I would undertake the job to which I readily agreed. I immediately opened a correspondence with the French comrade, who was with us responsible for building up the sales of the 'Weekly Herald’, and he became the sole agency in France for dealing with the new 'Daily Herald'. A very good job he made of it, and I have no doubt that the paper played a great part in securing the acknowledged very large Labour vote in the Khaki Election just after the war.

In fact the influence of the paper was such that the brass hats got the wind up. The great Winston Churchill, at that time the Minister in charge of the War Office - we called it by its proper name in those days - ordered the burning of the paper on the Rhine.

Now, as to the strike. The army was by now suffering from extreme war weariness , Their theme song was 'I want to go home'. It was now that the brass hats made their fatal mistake. It was a Sunday afternoon, and one of the Valdelievre boys was making a visit to a neighbouring camp to do a spot of propaganda, but he was in no sense a key man. However, he was seized by the military police and lodged in the old Bastille Prison in Calais.

The news was despatched immediately to our camp, which had come to be recognised as the leader of the impending revolt. An emergency meeting was called; the officers' quarters were surrounded, and I have never before or since seen such panic as showed on their faces. They realised that now they were really up against it. They tried to temporise, but we had now got the bit in our teeth and would have none of it. A strike was decided on to commence the next morning and to cover the whole Calais area and all units.

The strike was complete. Very few turned out on the Monday morning, and it took little to persuade them to pack up. Our committee now took on the title 'The Calais Area Soldiers and Sailors Association'.

In the matter of organisation we were greatly influenced by the Soviet method. It was strictly democratic: each hut or group of tents to the same number, elected a delegate to the camp committee, and these committees then likewise elected delegates to the central area committee. It was so easy really; we were just using the organisation that was already there, obligingly provided for us. We issued the daily orders instead of the camp officers, and in the Valdelievre camp occupied the headquarters offices. It all seemed the natural thing to do.

To show the mass feeling - on the Monday morning, to make sure that everybody got the message, pickets were organised to cover the whole area, and I was one of a small party detailed to deal with the docks area. We soon found that very little picketing was required, so in order to get maximum coverage with minimum effort we split into single units. In the sector I covered I found in one office three high-ranking NCO's sitting at their desks. As I entered they swung round on their swivel chairs with sticky grins on their faces. They obviously knew, but I asked them what they were doing there and didn't they know that there was to be no work until our arrested comrade was released. They made no reply, so I just ordered them out and they went like lambs.

There was only one case that offered any resistance: our picket was arrested. But in about five minutes the tables were turned: this camp had revolted, and released him.

A few days after this we had a mass demonstration of thousands of men, complete with a number of regimental bands, marching through the streets of Calais. The people of Calais got the wind up and shuttered their shops. They need not have worried; we were mostly orderly and well behaved, and so far as I know there were no untoward incidents whatever.

The reaction to all this by the Army Command was to send the 5th Army Corps under General Bing to suppress the revolt. However, the first thing the men of the 5th army did on arriving was to ask us for information as to how we did it and for advice on organization. They followed our advice and joined the revolt.

Having failed to break the strike, the top brass now decided to negotiate. We were placed in a very awkward and invidious position. A really revolutionary situation was developing for which we were not really prepared. We felt, however, that we could not go much further unless we had evidence of support from the workers at home. It was a strange coincidence that parallel with our strike a general strike was taking place on the Clyde. As you are doubtless aware, the Clyde at the time was the focal point of real socialist activity in Britain, and it was with great hopes that we waited for this strike to spread to the rest of the country. This, however, did not happen, and unfortunately there was no communication between the two centres of revolt. The only communication we had was with the 'Weekly Herald', and they were too scared to give any publicity to what was happening across the Channel. Also, possibly some of us were a bit scared of our own success; so we decided to negotiate.

A Long Table Conference was arranged, at which were present 13 representatives of each side, including all the units and regiments involved, and this included the WAAC. Our side was led by the president of our Association, a Scots VC.

On the other side the 13 representatives included some of the most important top brass of the British Army. As the conference was just getting under way, it was discovered by a sea lawyer (he was actually a member of the Royal Navy assigned to our base for special duties – and known as the Bolshie), reading the army manual not the King’s Rules and Regulations – that any soldier who had been arrested and then released under duress was liable at any time to rearrest and trial. A message was immediately dispatched to our president in the conference chamber, because the release of our comrade had already been assured, and was obviously not enough. Our delegation immediately decided that a court martial must be held immediately, with of course an implied acquittal. These were met with all sorts of objections: a court martial could not be held on the spur of the moment, like that. Said our president – ‘Well, aren’t there enough of you here?' Adding, 'In any case, our delegation is not prepared to discuss any other of the outstanding matters in dispute until the court martial is held'. We won that round; our comrade was tried and acquitted and the conference then got down to business.

The principal item was the speeding up of demobilisation - 'But how are we going to occupy defeated Germany if you all want to go home?' - Our delegation's reply was that we neither knew nor cared, but it wasn't going to be us. So demobilisation went forward with a bang, and membership of the committee was a certain rapid passport to home.

Then as time went on, Authority was gradually re-established. So far as I know there was no victimisation, and the Calais Area Soldiers and Sailors Association obviously faded out in the course of time. The whole thing was carried through without any violence; but unfortunately there was a tragic sequence insofar as our victimized comrade was concerned. As a result of his incarceration he contracted pneumonia and did. I am sure that Authority in this case did all they could to save him, as it would do them no good to have his death laid at their door; but to no avail. A collection among the men for his widow and two children realised several hundreds of pounds, half of which was ear-marked for the education of his children.

From a pamphlet published by World Books in January 1976.

The case for joint coordinated industrial action

It certainly isn’t only teachers that are facing attacks from this Government, workers right across the public and private sectors are under threat as well. Joint coordinated action across a range of unions in dispute with the Government, as started to come together over pensions in 2011, would strengthen all our separate battles. In 2014, we have to build that joint action again.

The following abridged version of an article written in a personal capacity by John McInally, national vice-president of the PCS civil servants’ union explains why "PCS is now posing the question straight – we are in favour of joint coordinated industrial action to defeat the cuts – will you join us?"

" SINCE THE 1970s the capitalist class has conducted a relentless war to seize back all the gains won by workers internationally in the post-war period. Austerity is the latest manifestation of a neoliberal agenda that is little more than naked class war to ensure that working people pay for the capitalist crisis.

The ruling elite aims to establish an unchallengeable hegemony of the market and to buy off, neutralise, or crush any opposition. With the fall of the USSR, Stalinism, in which the planned economy – albeit in a distorted, bureaucratic form – demonstrated there was an alternative to the market, collapsed. This was greeted by corporate apologist ‘intellectuals’ such as Francis Fukuyama as the "end of history".

The inclination of so-called social democratic leaders in the Labour Party to cosy up to big business, rather than support the interests of the working class that the party was formed to represent, propelled them further to the right. Some in the labour movement, even those nominally on the left, appear to remain in a state of open-mouthed denial that ‘their’ party is now firmly in the hands of corporate interests. But big business isn’t giving it back. These events have triggered a crisis of political representation for working people. It is still unfolding and will do so for quite some time until a new party is formed, capable of representing the interests of working people against the pro-market political consensus.

During the Blair and Brown governments, right-wing union leaders and even some on the left almost entirely vacated the field of industrial struggle. This allowed New Labour to cut and privatise public services and lay down the structure that has subsequently been used by the Tories to drive their own privatisation agenda. More privatisation took place in the NHS, schools and civil service under New Labour than under the Thatcher and Major governments. Mass privatisation is a major strategic aim of the capitalist agenda. Unfortunately it has not faced a generalised response from the trade union movement yet.

There have, however, been some fierce and inspiring individual battles and in some cases, victories. PCS campaigned hard during that period, including taking industrial action which won concessions on pensions and a jobs protocol that allayed the impact of staff cuts by avoiding compulsory redundancies. PCS campaigned both politically and industrially, proving in the process that concessions were possible and that campaigning worked and action got results. The union repeatedly took action at departmental group and national level that stopped the worst excesses of Labour’s cuts programme.

PCS responded to the concern of members and activists that no mainstream political party represented their interests or values, ie, supported public servants and the vital services they deliver into the communities in which they live and work. PCS’s left leadership took the view then, as it does now, that to fight on the industrial front alone was tantamount to fighting with one hand tied behind your back because if any gains won through industrial struggle were not underwritten politically the employers would simply return again and again until they achieved their aim. This is the lesson of over 200 years of trade union struggle in Britain.

After the 2010 general election the coalition government launched its austerity programme in earnest. PCS rejected the lie that austerity was meant to clear the deficit and produced its Economic Alternative which argued there was an alternative to the cuts, based on job creation, climate jobs, investment and tax justice. This programme has been key to PCS members’ confidence to fight the austerity measures.

It drew accusations from opponents of ‘deficit denial’ and so on, demonstrating how far to the right the political establishment, including many trade union leaders, had moved. While these demands fall short of a complete alternative to capitalist crisis, Socialist Party members in PCS have been to the fore in fighting for them while also putting forward a more comprehensive socialist programme.

PCS policy is clear. No cuts. No privatisation. Anything less means the road to division and defeat. PCS argued that the way to prevent the coming attacks, particularly on pensions, was to build for joint, coordinated industrial action across the public sector.

In 2011 PCS argued that the attack on pensions was an attack on the whole public sector and should be met with the full strength of our movement. PCS also sought to actively build the emerging anti-cuts alliances, a policy and process that intended to put the trade union movement at the centre of the resistance and to build maximum unity in action between the struggles in the workplaces and communities.

Posing an alternative to the austerity programme riled the coalition government and indeed all the political establishment. This great lie – there was no alternative – was central to their strategy. Why else would people put up with cuts, the sell-off of the NHS, food banks, the bedroom tax etc, if there was indeed an alternative?

PCS’s bold insistence on an alternative was also deeply uncomfortable for the TUC under the leadership of Brendan Barber and other right-wing union leaders. Their strategy was to simply put their heads down and wait for the return of a Labour government. In essence they agreed with the cuts programme, having bought into the cynical analysis propounded by Ed Miliband that there was ‘not enough money around’ and cuts to the public sector were ‘inevitable’.

Austerity is an attack on our whole class and there must be a class-wide response. The role of the trade union movement, over six million strong and organised under the banner of the TUC, offered the best, most effective way of defeating the race to the bottom – but only if armed with the correct strategy and a committed leadership with the political will and determination to fight for our class in the way the coalition government was fighting for theirs.

PCS posed from the very beginning the question of joint coordinated industrial action across the public sector and in the private sector too if possible as the best and most effective way to achieve our collective demands and defend terms and conditions.

Right-wing union leaders have operated de facto no-strike agreements for some time now. Their rationale is that you can’t take action against a Labour government because it is ‘our government’ and you can’t take action against the coalition government because it is ‘too strong’ and anyway, if you did, it would only hurt the chances of Labour being elected.

Some of these leaders would say it is nonsense to talk of a no-strike agreement. While it is true that isolated struggles resulting from the pressure of members on reluctant leaderships have been tolerated, every attempt at generalised action has been blocked or thwarted. Future generations will be puzzled how it was possible for a tiny unrepresentative ruling clique to carry out the systematic destruction of the NHS without one single day of industrial action to prevent it.

PCS took industrial action on its own against the Tories’ attacks on the Civil Service Compensation Scheme and secured what could be won in such an isolated struggle but never accepted the imposed deal. PCS members understood that such setbacks would have been substantially worse had the union not fought back and taken action.

It was the pressure applied by PCS, not least the persistent work by general secretary Mark Serwotka and president Janice Godrich at the TUC general council, the pressure from members below, the strike by PCS, NUT and ATL on 30 June 2011, and the campaigning and lobbying by the National Shop Stewards Network (NSSN), that left Barber and the TUC bureaucracy diminishing room for manoeuvre.

They therefore called a public-sector-wide strike on pensions for 30 November that year. Over two million workers took action that day: strikers were applauded by the general public as they marched through the centres of towns and cities throughout the country. The huge potential strength of our movement was revealed for all to see. If that tremendous day had been followed up with further similar days of action and joint coordinated industrial action major concessions on pensions would certainly have been won. It is also possible that the entire cuts and privatisation programme would have been derailed and the government even driven from power.

As workers awaited the next stage in the campaign the TUC leadership and key right-wing union leaders divided our movement with a carefully planned and choreographed surrender to Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude around a shameful ‘Heads of Agreement’. This, in effect, handed over to the government all the concessions they demanded. At the TUC meeting intended to rubber stamp this sell-out Mark Serwotka spoke for PCS members and millions more across Britain when he rejected the agreement and said our union would fight on (see video link under photo).

Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXJQKwNgXOI

In January 2012 PCS Left Unity organised a conference that attracted over 600 activists from all unions dedicated to keeping the fight going. Industrial action with PCS, Unite, NUT and UCU did take place – but given its isolated nature did not achieve the type of leverage required to win concessions. To this day, however, PCS has not signed up to the pension changes.

The pension betrayal was significant for our movement. Many people understandably were demoralised. It sent out a message to the government and working people alike. It told the Tories they had a green light to ramp up their attacks and that is precisely what they did. It sought to tell workers there was no alternative but to accept cuts in conditions because the TUC would do nothing about it. It sent out the message to millions that the Tories may come for you with all the viciousness of their class but we will not organise to stop them. Most unforgivable was the message to youth – if you want to fight back don’t bother coming to us.

Despite the fact that joint coordinated industrial action was the best way to fight the cuts, the pensions dispute, which could have delivered much, saw a retreat into individual sector-based struggles, or to be more accurate in the case of most unions, inaction and resignation.

PCS organised a three-month programme of action from March to June this year based on fighting the on-going attacks on the civil service but also including the wider public sector issues of pay and pensions in our demands.

The government is happy to allow negotiations at departmental group level, all the better to put through its centrally driven programme by picking off weaker areas before seeking to isolate the stronger ones. That is why our aim of nationally-binding settlements is so important. The action had a considerable impact but not enough to bring the employer to national negotiations.

The union then carried out a major consultation, rare in our movement, which involved talking to branches representing over 80% of members. After analysing the results the national executive committee honed its strategy on defending jobs, pay, pensions, conditions and services.

PCS is still absolutely correct in its assessment that joint coordinated industrial action is the best way to win on common issues like pay and pensions. The union is urgently making contact with those unions currently taking action to investigate the possibility of coordinated action in the short term. And PCS will continue to build for coordinated action more widely to break the public sector pay freeze and pensions policy.

The question now needs to be put bluntly to trade union leaders – are you in favour of coordinated industrial action to break the pay freeze and pensions policy? If you are, good – let’s work out the details of the campaign. If not – then why not? This is the question every union member and activist must ask.

There is no contradiction in trying to resolve sectoral disputes and organising joint coordinated action on the issues affecting us all, such as pay. If concessions are won by one group then that can only provide impetus for the whole campaign. It is TUC policy to coordinate action on pay and general secretary Frances O’Grady has convened meetings of the ‘willing’. This is far from adequate but does represent a step forward. But the question must be posed to those not participating – why are you not prepared to discuss joint coordinated action in order to defend your members’ interests?

PCS will also pursue targeted, departmentally group-based and national action in order to build pressure on the Cabinet Office to come to the negotiating table, including setting up a levy to provide a strike fund to support members taking action over and above that taken by the membership generally. Targeted action will be aimed at specific identified areas to cause maximise disruption.

Departmental group disputes are not a supplement to but a core part of a strategy aimed at building pressure for a settlement. And most importantly, time and again, determined industrial action in the groups has brought concessions from the employer, defending conditions, stopping compulsory redundancies and, in the Home Office, winning more money for low-paid members.

PCS will pursue this strategy and will continue to raise in the most serious manner the critical need for joint coordinated action across the public sector and the private sector too where there are disputes that can be coordinated there – this is, and always was, the best and most effective way to defeat the attacks on us all. 

It is an incontestable fact that mobilising the enormous power of the trade union movement through joint coordinated action, including building for a 24-hour general strike, would fundamentally shift the balance of power in favour of our class and is the best and most effective way of defeating the government.

Those calling for civil disobedience without also calling for joint coordinated action and a general strike are effectively telling people, ‘Hey, there’s an easy way to get what we want but, you know what, let’s do it the really hard way’. This is especially so when the type of civil disobedience being called for is actually fairly modest and in itself has no real chance of applying the type of pressure required to make the government change course. So, let’s be clear – there is no more effective form of civil disobedience than workers taking strike action and especially joint coordinated industrial action.

A myth relentlessly repeated by employers and governments is that striking is never justified, that unions ‘rush’ into action and, of course, that it doesn’t work. They are particularly anxious to drive home this latter point. Industrial action is never taken lightly by any group of workers; it is never a first reaction but almost always the final resort when an employer refuses to negotiate.

There are many reasons strike action is hated by the bosses and government. Yes, it stops or mitigates attacks on conditions, wrings concessions and sometimes significant gains and more. But it also does something our class enemies are terrified of: it shows the real strength of working people and what their collective power is capable of achieving.

Industrial action, especially general strike action, also gives a glimpse of something more fundamental – it poses the questions of who runs things, in whose interests are they being run and why should it be that way? It asks why are relations between employers and workers the way they are, and why do they have to be that way?

In this period of austerity when we are under relentless attack, our movement must get back to fundamentals. The job of a union is not to negotiate cuts in pay and conditions but to fight to defend and improve what we have. It is not the role of unions to selfishly protect their own backyard but to show solidarity with all working people under attack. That is why the whole movement must oppose and organise to defeat the destruction of the welfare state and the NHS.

Strike action is our main weapon so we need to develop the strategy and tactics to ensure we use it effectively in our collective interest. That is why PCS is now posing the question straight – we are in favour of joint coordinated industrial action to defeat the cuts – will you join us? "

This article was first published in Socialism Today (Issue 174 Jan/Dec 2013/14) and can be read in full on http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/6611

2014 – High time to turn anger into action

I hope most teachers have been taking a rest rather than looking at blogs over the holidays. If you ARE reading this, I hope you had a chance to recharge your batteries – because we’ve plenty to do in 2014.

For a start, if Gove thinks he can get away with his proposed attacks on working conditions, teachers risk losing any chance to take a proper break from the stress and long hours imposed upon us. The Review Body is due to report shortly with its proposals and, in preparation, the Daily Mail was cheering on Gove over Christmas with a headline saying that “Schools could open until 6pm for up to 51 weeks a year as Gove pushes for flexitime” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2527902/Schools-open-6pm-51-weeks-year-Gove-pushes-flexitime.html.

(The Mail was also cheering on Gove’s jingoistic views on the First World War and his criticisms of supposed “myths which have grown up about the conflict”. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2532923/Michael-Gove-blasts-Blackadder-myths-First-World-War-spread-television-sit-coms-left-wing-academics.html We’ll regrettably have to read a lot more of this right-wing nonsense in this centenary year).

Most teachers are already struggling to cope with existing workload, let alone any increased burden. The harsh reality of teaching was evident in the results of the latest YouGov survey of teachers carried out for the NUT. The results released over the New Year show that

• 74% of teachers said their morale has declined since the last general election - just 3% said it had improved.

• 79% of teachers felt that the Government had had a negative impact on education – just 4% thought that the Government had made a positive difference to the education system. 

• In each case, a lack of cultural experiences like outings/holidays, child or adolescent mental health issues and a lack of specialist services for SEN and behaviour intervention were identified by over half of the surveyed teachers as having a negative impact on the children they teach.  

• 81% of teachers disagreed that performance related pay would improve outcomes for children’s education - only 6% answering ‘yes’, that it would. 

• 52% of teachers thought that Gove’s changes to pay and pensions would make it less likely that they would stay in teaching – and 57% when it came to the proposed changes to conditions. In each case, only 2% said they made it ‘more likely’. 

• Just 7% of teachers said they would be able to continue teaching to 68. 69% said they could not.

Tellingly, in addition to the last statistic above, a further 18% of teachers said they didn’t want to work on to 68 but that they also knew that they couldn’t afford to retire earlier. That response sums up the dilemma facing so many teachers. We can’t afford to work even longer hours, for even more days, weeks and years, without even knowing if we will be deemed worthy of an annual pay rise. However, what alternative will we have if these attacks are imposed on us? 

THERE’S ONLY ONE CONCLUSION THAT CAN BE DRAWN: WE HAVE TO TAKE ACTION TO STOP THESE ATTACKS.

The statistics in the survey are matched by a deep discontent in schools across England and Wales at what Gove and the Government are imposing on teachers and education. It’s high time we turned that anger into action.

The survey also showed two-thirds of teachers giving support to NUT/NASUWT taking strike action to defend pay, pensions and conditions. Now, as a new term begins, teachers need to be emboldened with news that their unions are ready to call a serious calendar of action to oppose these attacks. Teachers and Gove alike need to know that we’re not going to accept teachers’ lives being made a misery, nor children’s education being thrown backwards. If we are serious in doing that, then we need to be calling national strike action as a matter of urgency and follow it up quickly with further action, such as a two-day national strike. We should also co-ordinate that action with other unions fighting Government cuts and privatisation too.

The regional strikes in June and October were strongly supported – but the promised national action in November never took place. The excuse that it was worth delaying while we awaited the outcome of talks with Michael Gove was soon exposed by Gove himself as he made all too clear that no serious talks had ever been on offer.

Now there is no more room for excuses. Each time we hesitate, we give Gove confidence while shedding doubts amongst teachers that we can reverse his attacks. The NUT and NASUWT both announced that, barring significant progress in talks by the end of 2013 – which has, predictably, not occurred, then national strike action would be called by mid-February.

An emergency meeting of the NUT National Executive has been called on 16 January to consider strike plans. However, an article in the Independent on Boxing Day, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/teachers-threaten-more-strikes-as-talks-with-michael-gove-stumble-9026340.html still gave mixed messages about whether joint national action will be called. Chris Keates the NASUWT General Secretary is quoted as saying that “We are playing a long ball game over this”. Does this mean that she wants to get her strikers into action as quickly as possible! – or that she thinks we can string things out even longer – perhaps in the hope that a Labour Government will rescue us?

Regrettably, given New Labour’s backing for the agenda of cuts and privatisation, waiting for the next Government is a forlorn hope. Significantly, 25% of teachers in the YouGov poll were unable to say which party they would vote for at the next General Election, showing the doubts that are held about whether any of the main political parties can be relied upon to defend education.

Unless we act speedily and decisively, by the next General Election even more damage will have been inflicted on education and even more teachers will have been driven out by stress and overwork. If we want to stand up for teachers and education, then there is nothing else to rely on but our own strength – and the support of local communities who will also want to defend education. Let’s not delay, let’s start 2014 with determined national strike action.