AS shop stewards actually involved in the public sector pay fight in Camden secured almost the full £60/35 hour week claim, we teel we must come out publicly in opposition to what amount to deliberately lying accounts of the settlement published both Socialist Worker Socialist Challenge.
Both papers claim that there was no political opposition to acceptance Camden council's offer in the week of 19 February. Socialist Worker states outright that: 'Certainly in Camden no-one on the left argued for Camden NUPE to stay out. The argument should have been put, but there is much strength (sic) in argument that not signing a settlement in Camden so near the claim will strengthen the opposition in NUPE to the sell-out' (17 March).
Socialist Challenge March) takes a more roundabout way of distorting the truth. In an article written by Sikorski and Varnes (unusually) endorsed by no less than the Political Bureau of the IMG, Socialist Challenge publicly disowns the actions of IMG member and Camden NUPE Branch Secretary John Suddaby. But it goes on report the steps leading to the acceptance Oner follows:
*Prematurely assuming that the strike would crumble, they (the strike committee) voted to recommend acceptance to the mass meeting. In addition, neither at the strike committee nor at the mass meeting did the branch leadership argue the case for Camden to continue to play their leading role staying out for the full claim.
The Socialist Challenge article dodges any mention of the opposition there was within the negotiating committee and within the strike committee to accepting the offer. Instead it minimises the opportunism of IMG MICHIBCE Suddaby by Deadline: 3pm Saturday before pablication. Payment in advance.
MANCHEs ch Socialsi Uniy Bubil „conng with Pat Arrowsmith arendanaalaoner on treiand, 1o Aor noulusworn nan COUnCH RACIAL Oppression: How to fight it.
Communist Pamphlet tight it s of a class controls. pamphlet Revolutionary Communist Tendenc Send 30D DC+S 10p p p&p to BM RC Cheques etc payableto HorAssociation} DESIGNER required to work for Socialist Challenge Fl Litho.
Apply in writing
to Fl Litho, 328/9 Upper St, London N1 Socialist Challenge - 12 April 1979 Page 10 which and the (1 settlement as a resounding victory. and palming off responsibility onto 'the strike committee, branch leadership', and later even 'the Camden leadership'. These terms are designed to give the impression that not only Suddaby but (since no opposition is mentioned) all the leading stewards involved as in making the key backed down.
This is simply not true. Indeed in an interview with Socialist Press (28 February), Cressy Road dustmen's steward John Seymour described he opposition that existed t he offer among strikers, whil pointing out Suddaby's role in by in case the council withdrew their offer.
Seymour argued then and continued to argue Camden to press ahead — to win the full claim for all secuons or worKers, strengthen the national struggle. It was Suddaby who from 19 February onwards pressed John Suddaby, secretary of Camden NUPE general branch, during the all-out strike. Many saw the the case for acceptance *the it was SWP members who actually proposed holding the mass meeting.
Thursday 22 February on the other hand saw no less than six strike committee members - including WSL members -decisions VOLC acceptance. stewards dustmen, home helps (whom Suddaby wanted exempted from the strike call), lighting, sewers, cemetery workers.
It is a total fraud for the SWP and IMG to ignore this political opposition, led by the WSL within committee -they do so only to cover up the opportunist actions of their OW CHOCO. and to CREASLEY NUPE)
- and recommending These six were sections of workers, be baths and local level.
big error -recognised, the strike especially when working class.
(Camden John Suddaby but UCATT. NURE.
TAKI NALGO opportunism'.
Our reply "nearly abstract IN relation to the national struggle of the council manual most of the left crucised une Camden decision to recommend a deal on the In This critical approach was a - as the IMG has now the failed appreciate me basic principie: on which revolutionaries lead the trade union struggles of the VICEOR The attitude of comrades determination Seymour and Creasley amounts to abstract leftism. They take national claim. up the IMG not for criticising In - incredibly The Ford Strike way then.
'covering his
Now it is true that one cannot look at the settlement solely from the point of view of the Camden workers. But nor can one negate the fact that they got the full claim references to the "national struggle' The question is: how did the Camden victory relate to the combativity and self-organisation of the public sector workers as a whole? Did it set this back?
other did the workers' front or the bosses/government front?
The answer is clear: NUPE workers nationally, and many others, saw it as a resounding boosted the of workers elsewhere to struggle for the fact the Camden ders leadership was able to go onto for 'All-out for the full claim' on the basis of the Camden victory.
The alternative of staying out until the full claim was won nationally was completely abstract. It would have been irresponsible reject the settlement given its size and the strengthened the struggle.
To have done so would only have weakened the credibility of the class struggle wing of the Camden branch leadership, and rightly discredited revolutionaries in the eyes of the mass DI WOrKerS Comrades Seymour and Creasley recognised these realities at the final mass meeting to the extent that they did not speak against the line of critical acceptance put by John Suddaby.
Nor have they raised these criticisms at UHE shop SLEWETUS and two meeungs since It is not merely fainthearted but completely opportunist to write to Socialist Challenge in this way while refusing to take up the fight in front of the Camden member ship and mutants Comrade Seymour is nevertheless a serious if inexperienced revolutionary militant, even though he made a number of leftist error attempt to get a decision on all-out strike action before thi branch leadership had been able to carry out the vital measures needed to prepare such a mobilisation - which of the right-wing.
But the falsification of facts by the editors of Socialist Press claiming that Suddaby opposed all-out action, and was working to break the strike throughout the struggle - is a different matter.
This lying method - - derived from the Healvites of the WRE - should be repudiated by the WSL comrades It tney wish te be taken seriously as contenfor working class leadership.
----- pull-quotes -----
WHAT'S LEFT ineper ward. Display E2 per column