THE Iron and Steel Trades Confederation claims measures in New Deal for Steel will halt the closures Some of the proposals, if taken in islation, might be a good idea.
But they do not add up to a plan that can solve the problem of job loss in steel.
Let's look at them one by one.
The pamphlet should cut the price per cent. But would this stimulate steel sales and provide more work?
It might, if there market demand. But today we are in the midst of an international recession and while tips to BSC management to solve the market problem out with prices, it certainly doesn't guarantee jobs.
Furthermore, it's entirely wrong to suggest that the economic slump hasn't drastically affected the market for steel. Deprived Despite the rise in steel production levels, it is clear that still more steel is needed. Yet political choices been made by the bosses of industry and their governments on a world scale which fewer hospitals, and schools.
That's why the market demand for steel is lower than world produc tive capacity. And that's why the Tories have imposed cash limits on If these decisions are beyond our control, why should steelworkers get involved in BSC's pricing policies? It is the responsibility of workers to save jobs, not to work out how BSC can tinker with the market value of steel. That should be left to the BSC accountants.
The ISTC pamphlet puts the blame for high-priced steel government's cash limits. It calls for an end to these limits on funding from central government, state subsidy. Good idea. Why should private Industry de given ample investment aid and the nationalised sector be deprived of it?
Investment New Deal for Steel points out that BSC, a basic, nationalised industry, is paying out over £200m each year the banks. It says that half of BSC's debts should be written off. Why only half? Still, this is a step in the right direction.
The pamphlet proposes that new investment be made in the profitable finishing end of the industry; in a new aggressive marketing policy; and in developing a more flexible with increased use of electric arc furnaces which make special steels. Fine providing that such investment takes no one's job.
But. if the Steel Corporation would benefit from investing in the profitable finishing end of the industry, why does the union's pamphlet remain silent about the fact that the most profitable sectors of all remain in private hands? nationalise the private steel firms?
The more serious problems in the was a high may held have.
houses, on the cut through and for greater ments' complains that sidies for domestic coal.
of coking coal. industry steelworkers to be re-employed.
workers an 'attendance bonus'.
because, i danger of working in steel, measures in the pamphlet.
proposals come when the pamphlet. before they come in, to work, This ut Bill Sirs' policies don't offer them a way foreward. (See page 5 for stor tries to explain how the prices can be 'operational improveIt suggests that BSC is using too much coking coal in its product. It government is refusing to make coking coal sub.
But it also argues the need for BSC to cut its use Does this mean that the jobs of miners are to be put at risk in order to save BSC money? Miners are steelworkers' best allies. Last week the workers NUM executive threatened that any further contraction of the coal or steel industry would be 'strongly opposed'.
'operational improvement' to allow BSC to make a price cut is the proposal for a cut in over- levels time. Good. This could allow many But the pamphlet also argues that the best way to reduce overtime is to 'absenteeism' by giving EEC, Now if there is a high level of absenteeism in the steel industry it is leaving aside the dirt and , workers are demoralised by the lack of job security. This will not be cured by the BEC!
It is a testimony to the tragedy of the industry that workers should have to be bribed with special bonuses HE BLACK ONSETT workers march through London to lobby MPs last week. Their town will die if closure plans go throug idea of bonuses is similar to Ford management's plan, which has volved a wage cut for many Ford workers. Any slight infraction of the agreement by workers leads to a substanțial reduction in wage packets.
But the real problem about overtime is this: if it is so widespread in many plants, why not share the work with the thousands of steelworkers on the dole queues, on the basis of the principle of no loss in pay? Is it in the interests of unity that some creed should be facing the dole while others are working themselves into the ground?
• The ISTC pamphlet criticises the corporation for its export policy. But British production are fixed by the infamous Davignon plan. The pamphlet leaves aside the thorny political problem of the Common Market by arguing that even within the levels imposed by the Britain should not be cutting back in steel.
Why should British workers submit to the bosses' Common Market at all? A. real fighting lead from the ISTC would be a suggestion for a campaign to get Britain out of the Even if the measures in New Deal for Steel did not involve a single job! are being asked to loss from the day it was implemented onwards (and about thousands already out of work?) they in- cannot and will redundancy in steel. The will not stop thousands of jobs being DAYL And even if all these doubts were cleared up, and the pamphlet faced up a bit more bravely to issues it confronts, the New Deal for Steel would not be the programme that steelworkers really need The reason for this is that the problems of the steel industry are more lundamental than Bill Sirs assumes. The steel industry hasn't just caught cold, it has pneumonia. It suffers not finally from a passing chill but a debilitating disease.
This is not the fault of steelworkers. The steelworkers are being asked to pay for the decades of inadequate investment in dustry, for the fact that the nationalisation of the steel industry was left so late, for the fact that private ownership rested content with the captive markets of the British Empire instead of investing in new plant - in the final analysis for the fact that Britain was the first to develop steel making, which meant that her who came later, could avoid her mistakes.
It is the present generation who previous generations did. And this at ther. a time when. &- serious for steel.
choices means a its ingredients.
dustry.
as they are not stop further Rotten some of the The • sociely up by Callaghan, the COLCCI for everyone.
But their jobs.
will be long competitors, pay for throughout the capitalist world is hitting workers everywhere That's why it is no use tinkering the steel industry. For that's what Bill Sirs proposals are: tinkering. A serious problem demands a there is a recessIon. But everyone knows that more and more, steel is needed, both in Britain and abroad. Schools need Do we have enough schools?
Hospitals need steel. have enough hospitals? Countries in the Third World need steel too for trac tors and combine harvesters. Do they have enough of those?
Of course not. The need for steel is greater than ever before. What an we live in! Many countries — like Nicaragua and Cuba and African countries are crying The Soviet Union and China can't meet the need for steel.
only • ar unplanned economy that such a basic commodi. ty as steel suffers from a crisis of over-production, and where political about exports mean that necus i orner countres aren t ruiled despite the demand.
The answer is that industry must be harnessed to human needs. This plan for reconverting the whole of the British economy. There is no way that steel can avoid the effects of the world recession merely by bico will lie level Ol sicer prices raising the working capital of BSC diversifying the product, or altering And then there is the problem of the antiquity of much of the steel in There can be no doubt that a fully economy, would be not be efficient for society or pleasant for the workers to keep a number of the antiquated steel plants But under a planned economy it would be possible to bring new industry into being to replace the old, to retrain workers no longer needed work in another, without the misery of the dole queue modernisation of British steel could be carried through without the fear of unemployment.
All this can only be brought about by a fundamental re-structuring. of genuine workers' government, not one that is headed would map out a plan of the economy in the interests of people's needs, not profits. would aim to transform our economy into a flourishing system with jobs until that time arrives, steelworkers must fight to hold on to There are no magic formulas or easy solutions. The struggle and hard. Inevitably there will be defeats and setbacks. Inevitably the employers will succeed in pushing some workers on to the dole But steelworkers must stubbornly refuse to accept redundancy. They must do this by a struggle to bring workers everywhere the message' that we must get rid of this! "rotten system and build a new and
workers flesh