Secondly, the operation of modern capitalism means that there must be a strong element of "planning" because of sharpened international competition and the huge risk involved in new investment. This means that every element of cost must be planned in advance. Free" wage bargaining introduces an element of uncertainty and unpredictability. This is one of the reasons for the capitalists' hatred of the so-called wage drift (the gap between nationally-negotiated wage rates and actual wage rates determined by local and workshop bargaining).
Thirdly, after a long period of comparatively full employment certain sections of the working class have become extremely well-organised and have imposed upon the employers an element of control-workers in some large motor industry factories, dockers, sections of the printing industry, etc. One of the recent aims of the employers, especially under the Labour Government, has been to change the relationship of forces in these fields.
Fourthly, also arising from comparative full employment and the strength of working-class organisation, there has been a shift of importance from nation-wide bargaining to local bargaining. This has lessened the use of payments by results schemes to the emplovers and enabled certain sections of workers to obtain quite high rates of pay. The corollary of this is moves for parity from other sections of workers in the same industry-giving rise to the famous leap-frogging effect. It also strengthens union organisation at factory and local level as opposed to the power of national organisation and the trade union bureaucracy. As the Donovan Report wistfully noted (page 32), "For a brief period between the wars the conjunction of industry-wide bargaining and heavy unemployment gave trade union leaders an unusual ascendancy in their own organisations" -Things have certainly changed Productivity Deals It is in this context that productivity bargains have to be set. The achievement of a tull svstem of productivity bargaining would be the capitalists' ideal solution. All measures of rationalisation would have to be accepted by the workers before wage increases were granted. Moreover productivity bargains would ensure the complete planning of wage costs. It must be noted that a complete system of productivity deals is utopian from a capitalist point of view, even in the absence of workers' resistance. Uneven rates or development in industry, the need to "lure" workers from one sector to another, etc. would introduce instability into the system-modern capitalism is quite unable to overcome the inherent anarchy of the capitalist mode of production.
In their efforts to get workers to accept productivity deals, employers very often offer what appear to be very high wage increases. Of course the catch soon becomes apparent: massive redundancies and a terrible speed-up. The most important long-term effect is the loss of control over conditions. The establishment of productivity bargaining, measured day working, etc. on a complete scale would be a big defeat for the working class and should be vigorously fought by all socialists. (3)
Building a Revolutionary Nucleus in the Unions In this situation the central task of socialists is to link the extreme militancy of big sections of the working class to the revolutionary struggle against capitalism. If anything emerges from the present stage of British capitalism, it is the strength of the working class and the weakness of the bourgeoisie and its agencies. The mainly "economist" nature of the present strike wave means that after it is over the class relationship of forces will, at best, remain unchanged. Moreover, whilst the struggle is limited to wage demands there is the danger that a whole series of productivity agreements will be the main outcome Whilst completely supporting the wage struggles, revolutionaries should, seek to insert into them transitional demands and should advocate the complete rejection of all strings. (4) Similarly all redundancies should be opposed and work-sharing counterposed. Shop stewards should take advantage of the present militancy to assert their control over hiring and tiring, shift working, overtime, promotion procedures, etc. There should be total opposition to any state control over unions.
The job of putting these demands into the current struggles is extremely difficult in view of the small size of the vanguard groups, their isolation and the absence of worker militants to put them forward from inside the movement. The winning of workers for revolutionary organisations thus becomes an imperative necessity. However, it is extremely important that these worker militants are won for a total revolutionary position. The concept of winning militants on the basis of industrial struggle alone and then dealing with the political questions is extremely misguided.
The Communist Party has, over the years, won tens of thousands of militant workers on the basis of "servicing" their struggles and needs via industrial fractions and its press. This led to the accruing of a large inactive membership, the majority of whom could not be further politicised because they did not attend meetings. This also led to the phenomena of a large, virtually syndicalist wing in te b.r which was never integrated into the Party. No revolutionary organisation can afford to have within its ranks unintegrated forces. At time of sharp political crisis when "unpopular" stands have to be taken (e.g. supporting the Arabs in the 6-day war) such elements will be the source of considerable instability and exert an opportunist pressure on the organisation. The C.P. discovered this at the time of the invasion of Czechoslovakia.
It is precisely by fighting in all industrial struggles Tor transitional demands tat con sciousness will be heightened and the basis of winning militants for revolutionary ideas will be laid. Fortunately we are aided by other factors: 1. that young workers have been affected by the youth radicalisation and many of them are attracted by revolutionary ideas. 2. the Communist Party has now lost its virtual топорогу or te allegiance or pontical worker militants; and 3. that other sectors have come on the scene which are more politicised than the average militant-Irish workers, black workers, etc.
Revolutionary Consciousness and Trade Union Consciousness Of course, trade union consciousness by itself will never automatically lead to revolutionary consciousness. Indeed this is one of the most important contributions made by Lenin in his theory of the Party(5). However, this does imply the acceptance of the propagandist argument that this revolutionary consciousness will be inserted into the workers movement by proba ganda from the outside. On the contrary, whilst propaganda for ideas of revolutionary socialism is vital at all times, the way of winning masses of people (and especially industrial workers) for revolutionary ideas is by revolutionary praxis. The popularising of transitional demands and the creation of nuclei capable of winning masses of people to fight for those transitional demands and taking these masses of people through an experience is the way to develop revolutionary consciousness on a mass scale.
Getting a Local Base At a time when revolutionary forces are weak in the trade union field and in many areas contined to one or two areas and then very otter white-collar unions), membership of Trades Councils will give activists contact with a variety of unions and industries. Although at the present stage Trades Councils tend to be conservative, and what left there is tends to the C.P., in time of sharp crisis they can easily become focal points for coordinated militant activities. Revolutionaries should, anyway, try to convert them into instruments for generalising class struggles on a local level. They should be in the forefront of campaigns to break down non-unionism and should become organising centres tor local solidarity. Altnougn tnere are many weaknesses in the Liverpool Trades Council, it has played an important role in this respect over the last few years.
Before one can do serious trade union work or help a living struggle one has to build up a certain minimum of resources. Whereas the strengun or ideas can by temserves be very effective in university and intellectual circles, in industry it is the size of one's organisation and the scope of one's press which together with correct ideas is decisive. To effectively assist a living struggle a small group will require a relationship of forces in which it is not swamped. This means that in the first stages the greatest successes will be obtained in those fields where the scale of the struggle is small and the strength of opponents (especially the trade union bureaucrats) is weak. Atter successe. have been registered, revolutionaries will gather sutticient experience and torces to move into even more important sectors.
United Action Committees In the absence of a revolutionary party but the presence of burning and immediate tasks which a revolutionary party snould tackle, tne tactic of the united action committee is paramount. This is usually called the united front tactic, but this is a little misleading. More correctly, the united front refers to the unity of mass of bringing together on a single issue (or a very minimum programme) all those forces which accept a principled position on the issue. In this wav some of the consequences of the tragmen tation of the left are overcome and the workers and anti-imperialist struggles are assured greater solidarity than if every group did its mite on its own. Making this distinction between united action committees and the united front in no wav exonerates the refusal of such sectarian organisations as the SLL and CPB (ML) for refusing to take part in them; on the contrary. this concept makes it more imperative and brands refusal to take part in principled campaigns utterly reprehensible.
It is essential that revolutionaries spare no effort in forming united action committees to assist present trade union struggles. The call for solidarity in all major struggles should be made. These calls for solidarity should be generalised in the formation of permanent trade union solidarity committees. It is clear that at the present stage it is impossible to do much more than aid each struggle as it comes up and make general propaganda for the idea of perma nent solidarity committees. However, sooner or later a crucial struggle will come up, one in which, for instance, the Tories will attempt toin the words of The Economist-"stand firm" against wage increases. The miners could easily be the victim of the Tories' endeavour to end the present wave of wage increases: they are in a comparatively weak position as compared with the dockers, for instance. In such an event the committee of solidarity could become a living reality.
The Institute of Workers Control The Institute of Workers Control has done extremely good work in popularising the ideas of industrial democracy (for a study of this see the September issue of International). However, it has never clearly defined itself or decided whether it is to be a purely educational organisation or an action-orientated body. (And a real workers control campaign needs to be linked with living struggles). On many occasions it fuzzes over ideas (in popularising the ideas of Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon, when the latter's demon or austriar democracy equals workers participation and increased producti vity combined with high wages). Seeing "left" trade union leaders as a bridge to the rank and file, many elements in the IC are extremely reluctant to criticise these trade union leaders. At the same time, association with the workers control movement gives such people as Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon a left coloration. Failure to criticise them in these circumstances can assist them in keeping this left coloration even at a time when they damp down rank-and-file struggles.
Revolutionaries should continue to support the workers' control movement but it is essential that they do nothing to assist "left" trade union bureaucrats keep their radical reputation. Indeed, a struggle within the workers' control movement for a transitional programme means combatting and freely criticising the ideas of Jones and Scanlon. Such criticism has to be both sensitive and non-sectarian, otherwise it will be incomprehensible to sections of the rank and file which look upon "left" trade bureaucrats as real militants. It is best, by far, if such criticism comes from trade union militants.
Conclusion In the present stage of the decline of capitalism, when far from being able to grant reforms it has to seer to take bac exisuno workers runts the era of classical trade unionism is over. Either the unions become instruments of political struggle and emancipation of the working class or it is their fate to be integrated into the state machine and be used more and more to police the working class-no third way exists. And nowhere is this more true than in Britain. Living proof exists of this general proposition in the experience of the struggle against the penal clauses in 1969. We had two political one-day strikes which had the perspective of growing bigger and bigger. A network of trade union defence committees sprung up and there was a huge demonstration in London on May 1st. But because this movement was restricted to defensive demands and the main one was conceded everything collapsed like a pack of cards. The present strike wave could suffer the same fate.
This makes the struggle against limiting the movement to "economist" demands (i.e. bread and butter issues) absolutely imperative. A polilical struggle combined win transitiond demands is essential if anything at all is to be gained.
This is not to say that the trade unions should be converted into political parties. The unions have a different function from that of a political party. They are in essence the elemen tary organisations of the working class in which workers receive their first lessons on organisation. Thev can be much more than that. how ever. They can become the great working class school in which all political struggles in the class are tought out. Thev can become the arena in which workers learn to distinguish between opportunism and revolutionary politics. The task remains, therefore, to build up nuclei of revolutionary workers in each industry and trade union, working through united action committees cardordan Footnotes Although this is not the main criticism to be made or me communist rarty sudde union Donc Ine cr despite some muted criticisms ot ine nus sians over the invasion of Czechoslovakia, still basically follows the political line of the Kremlin. This expresse of "peaceful coexistence" between the C.P. and "left" trace union oureducials But there is a reverse side to the coin: the "left" reputation of these leaders enhances their ability to deruse strudeles at decisive moments, is extremer coubtiul. tor instance whether beakin could nave called off the dockers in the way Jack Jones managed Tony Cliff, ideological leader of the Internatio -nal socialists crouo nas written an interesting and intormative book on this topic. As a tormer workshop activist | can appreciate that this study would be of *orientation, especially its almost com piece ignoring or the question ot workers control (4) A transitional demand is one which bridges the gap between the consciousness of people in struggle as they are now and revolutionary ideas. it is distindemand oy te tact unar i always involves tne eroome away or capitalist power and tne subsequent ennancing ot workers oower t is distinguisned from the maxi mum or full programme demand by virtue of the fact that it has to seem reasonable to those to whom it is sciousness. It is distinguished from the most radical retormist demano Dy virtue or the face Endt it is moos siDe Tor tae gourceoise to crant. As rotsK. explained:
"It is easier to overthrow capitalism than to realise this demand (for a sliding scale of wages and hours under capitalism. Not one of our demands will be realised under capitalism. That is why we are calling tem transitional demands • DISCUSSIOTS OR LIE Transitional Programme, Writings of Leon Trotsky, 1938-39 demand will remain a propaganda slogan unless it is inkee to action. i remains at that fever uness It 1s actualv mobilising workers in strucale A typical transitional demand is that of workers control over hiring and firing ised sectors in times of comparative prosperity. However , when management wisnes to sack workers because or slackenme or cemane or in ine interests or rationa sation. a very ap slogan will be that of no sacking, but work sharing. It will appear reasonable to the workers and yet cut int tional unless it is linked with a refusal to accept a cut i wages ven work is saca. truie capitatists tricE sav tney cannot attora nis, a demano tor tne osenine ot the books to verity this shoule be ene resoonsethen, as is very unlikely, this demand is granted and afford to pay full wages, the appropriate slogan will be for the workers to take ove and run the factory themselves The job of working out precise transitional d nanas is. or course, tar or tne revoronan involved in a particular struggle. Only they will be able to judge the exact mood of the masses. However, a revolutionary organisation should seek to insert the method and concept of transitional demands into every struggle it can influence. (5) However, one has to be on guard against the this topic a la C.P. and SLL (not to speak I of Lenin's ideas on extreme Maoist groups). Lenin explained that when he combatted the ideas or the economists, wno nac "bent the stick one way", he had to "bend it the other way" in order to straighten it.
In reality, the phenomenon of developing revolutionary consciousness and the effect on workers in -такпо part in studge is a very compick oroces:
The Red Mole 15th September 1970 Page 7