The Bullock Report proposals on participation are now being quietly buried by the Government along with other 'Social Contract legislation'.
But their demise does not mean that the questions raised by the debate on participation are any less impor tant for the workers' movement The Bullock proposals are designed to harness the independent action of workers and to co-opt their desire themselves are to solve the crisis at the expense of the workers Bullock is an attempt to turn schemes like Ryder's in British Leyland and the strategy. Its 1976 General Council Report calls for estab lishing: 'the essentially joint interest of labour and capital in the enterprise Report are based on this supposed 'joint interest' It is no accident that one of the principal architects of the Bullock proposal for so-called 'industrial democracy is the same Jack Jones who is the backbone of the Social Contract The Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers is the principal union opposed to the proposals. It argues, in line with the Communist Party, ment or colective bargaining proposals. The advantage of this position is that it bases sell on the exisano strength rejects the ideas of "joint interest'.
NEED FOR CONTROL But this in no way corresponds to the need tor ine working class to start to assume control of the economy. Collective bargaining, however radical, still leaves the right of management to ramework of such bargaining is within the traditional role of trade unions as defensive organisations.
In order to carry through the fight for workers control, the working class must not only be organised indepen dently of the ruling class, reformist bureaucracy OT demands which clearly express the necessity of workers control. The election of the 'Open the Books' Committee at Cowley in response to the Ryder collaboration propo sals indicates the sort of independent organisation that can be fought for.
threats or lay-ours or redundancies snould be met witr the demand for work-sharing with no loss of pay. Speedup proposars snould be countered by plans tor increasing staffing levels to carry out the work and employ the jobless.
Management's defence of their expressed in such ideas as the 'confidentiality of infor mation, should be challenged. no-one but the emplovers, the bankers and the state whe scheme behind the backs of the workers. An end to com mercial secrecy must be fought for to expose the bosses manoeuvres, organise the fights against specific plans and prepare the way for nationalisation of industry under workers control.
Control is forged through struggle. Some people in organisations like the Institute for Workers' Control spend hours designing plans for so-called workers' control over particular industries. But any rigid scheme is mistaken. In the heat of the struggle, the workers themselves will produce far more creative schemes and will themselves decide the most effective measures for imposing control.
TUC PROPOSALS Red Weekly has arguing that the TUC proposals were only a more militan participation scheme.
Workers Socialist League, argued the same line in its 16 February issue.
quoted from the TUC proposal itself that at least one half of the members of the board be elected by the workers from their own ranks, and that no decision could be taken unless it had a majority of the worker representatives Chris argued that if the workers on the board were immediately recallable and accountable, the TUC proposals on worker representatives and on disclosure of information could create a situation in which collective bargaining 'would take piace over overal company poncy ne mererore called for the implementation of these proposals.
Comrade Baltour has not suddeniv capitulated to the bureaucrats. But he is mistaken. The TUC proposals are wrong because iney for control demands at the base of the working class. They would have the effect of defusing the mass struggle rather than assisting its development.
Socialists therefore, implementation of the TUC proposals. Had the proposals caught the attention and imagination of broad layers of workers, then it would have been perfectly principled and legitimate to be a part of the movement demanding their implementation. To stand aside from such a movement under the banner of so-called 'principle' would be childish BUT по SUCI endorsement of Bullock's proposals ensure that thev wage no tiaht around their origina alternatives.
Social Contract into lono-term The TUC itself has endorsed such a All of the proposals in the Bullock for the further developInstead or participation of the trade unions. manage unchallenged.
but independently from the trade around to manage, Business secrets protect received letters mom two readers Socialist Press, the paper of the neither our correspondents nor Socialist Press Balfour, writing in Red Weekly (3 February)
are alvorced wrom any struggle should not campaign for the The TUC'S will In such a situation. the task of socialists is to