Two days early, Mayday comes to Croydon

The first mayday demonstration in Croydon for ten years took place today. The Campaign for a New Workers' Party were by far the largest political group. Trade Unionists did not perceive us as outsiders or interlopers. The demonstration was for "Public Services NOT private profit." New Labour were conspicuous for their absence. It is not a slogan they endorse. The demonstration had banners from public sector trade unions. It is an irony that the leaders of UNISON support New Labour but Croydon Labour won't lift a finger to support UNISON.

Thirty years ago I took part in a Mayday march in Croydon. The Croydon Labour Party were the backbone of that march.

NUT conference report

Ken Smith writes:

DELEGATES TO the National Union of Teachers (NUT) annual conference faced up to how to fight the biggest proposed upheaval to the education system for over 60 years.


New Labour's Education and Inspections Bill aims to overturn the idea of comprehensive education and allow the 'free market' and big business to let rip in the education system. It plans to take schools out of local authority control and hand the most lucrative parts over to big business and religious organisations.

As well as preparing the way for a two-tier or three-tier education system, they are also opening up the way to corruption in education provision - see the 'cash for honours' scandal over sponsorship of academies.

Lewisham delegate and Socialist Party member Martin Powell-Davies, speaking to the main Left amendment in the debate on how to oppose the Bill, warned that the attacks it contains are part of "a divisive neo-liberal ideology that believes that market competition and privatisation improves services which they patently don't... they are part of a wider attack on public services."
Education Bill

Martin warned that the NUT leadership's proposals were not enough to win this struggle. He pointed out that with this government "strength of argument is not enough - they're happy to lose the argument but press ahead in any case."

Martin added: "There is no educational argument for the Education Bill but unless we fight back it will happen anyway". With the break-up of local authority schools and the "dog-eat-dog admissions system" there will be a huge threat to teachers' jobs, pay and conditions.

He concluded that although it may be necessary to fight school by school in some cases, the most effective action would be across schools, with a campaign for national strike action. Martin argued for the linking up with other public-sector workers who are also considering action against privatisation, to ensure an effective fight before the Bill becomes law.

Former NUT president Mary Compton showed how the Labour government's plans were part of an international campaign by big business and financial capital to make rich pickings out of education. She referred the conference to a World Bank document "Education - the last frontier for profit" which was part of a worldwide plan to end free education and which chillingly warned of how "the political power of teachers' unions can be countered."

National executive member Hazel Danson pointed out that although only 7% of education in Britain was currently in private hands, 17% of the Parliamentary Labour Party had received a private education. 25% of junior ministers, 40% of the Cabinet and 100% of those making decisions on the future of education had received a private education.

The conference agreed a resolution, strengthened up by the Left amendment, that prepared a campaign that could build for strike action. One immediate aim will be to build for a huge lobby of Parliament, possibly alongside other public-sector unions fighting privatisation.
Pensions

OTHER KEY debates at the conference were over pensions and the anti-union laws.

The successful united public-sector union pensions' struggle that forced the government to retreat from its plans to raise the retirement age for existing public-sector workers clearly gave NUT delegates confidence that the government plans for 'reforming' education could be driven back.

Speaking against an executive amendment, which wanted delegates to accept on trust what the union leadership was in the process of negotiating on the new teachers' pension scheme, Martin Powell-Davies warned that whilst a lot had been achieved there was still much to do to defend pensions.

He said there are still battles ahead and the unions needed to maintain their unity in action to force the government back.

He pointed out that all those who are guaranteed a fabulous pension - MPs, CBI leaders and newspaper editors in particular - believe it is 'unreasonable' for the rest of the population to retire at 60. Martin said that whilst forcing back the government's plans last year we "can't accept the government's work till you drop" proposals.

He argued successfully for a special NUT conference to have a say on any final offer from the government.

"United action forced them to retreat" he said but "we may need to take that lesson into other struggles" including future pension struggles.

The theme of workers fighting back was developed by Bristol delegate and Socialist Party member, Rachael Thomas, in the debate on the anti-union laws and the Trade Union Freedom Bill. Rachael pointed out that Britain has the most repressive anti-union laws of any of the advanced capitalist countries and workers' rights had been driven back over a century. She pointed out how some employers were using this to sack trade union reps but also showed how, like with the Gate Gourmet workers, when workers are compelled to struggle they can sweep the anti-union laws aside.

Rachael pointed out that it was trade union leaders rather than the union members, who were most fearful of the anti-union laws. She pointed out that 100 years ago when workers had faced similar repressive laws they had realised that industrial struggle alone was not enough and that they needed to found a party to represent workers' interests. A new workers' party was needed once again to ensure there is an industrial and a political fight against the anti-union laws.

l Socialist Party delegates also spoke in debates on workload, workplace bullying and inclusion. Over 100 copies of the Socialist Party Teachers' Bulletin and 70 copies of the socialist were sold at the conference along with over £200 raised for the Socialist Party fighting fund.
Bullying

IN THE debate on workplace bullying, Socialist Party member Eileen Hunter, a Birmingham delegate, tried to intervene with a point of order - asking for reassurance that if delegates' speeches were used in disciplinary cases against them then they should have the full backing of the union.

This is what happened to Eileen, the NUT rep at her school, after last year's conference which led to her dismissal by ultra-Blairite headteacher Dexter Hutt. Eileen's daughter, Natara Hunter, a teacher at the same school was also victimised by the same head.

Shamefully, the conference chair, 'named' Eileen - a form of discipline - while she was trying to make her point of order. The chair then effectively pressurised Eileen into making an apology. This forced a backlash from delegates who felt that Eileen had suffered at the hands of workplace bullies and didn't deserve similar treatment from a national officer of the union.

During the debate on the issue, Natara Hunter, Socialist Party member and Birmingham delegate, said that "an injury to one is an injury to all has to be reaffirmed as a principle of the union".

Natara recounted how whilst she and Eileen had been sacked by a Blairite head teacher but they didn't want "sympathy but action against management bullying".

Around 40 delegates attended the Campaign for a New Workers' Party fringe meeting.

Eileen and Natara Hunter

“An injury to one is an injury to all”

This is the text of the leaflet distributed at NUT Conference. The support for Eileen and Natara Hunter and their brand of fighting trade unionism is growing.

After yesterday’s debate on management bullying, many Conference delegates will have been left wondering why a Union President, so keen to tell us that women should assert themselves, should then so harshly silence Eileen Hunter, a delegate from Birmingham, when she tried to seek a reassurance that the Union would defend anyone disciplined for what they had said from the Conference rostrum.

Delegates are also asking what is being done to defend two active union members, mother and daughter, who have been dismissed from their posts.

Both Eileen and Natara are pursuing employment tribunals against their dismissals but, under our harsh employment law, even if their cases are “won”, this is by no means a guarantee that they will win their jobs back. They have felt that they have had to fight at every stage even to get the Union to support them this far.

It is not appropriate to go into the specific details of the cases in this leaflet but there is one thing that Eileen and Natara are quite clear about. They believe that Eileen was dismissed because she refused to be cowed by a bullying school management and continued to speak up and organise as a fighting school rep. In turn, they believe that management also did not want her daughter to remain on the staff either.

In seven years Eileen had built the NUT membership from five to forty three, as well as encouraging the support staff to become unionised and fight off the threat of job cuts.

For acting as a rep, and speaking out at both school union group meetings and at last year’s NUT Conference, Eileen was charged with jeopardising the future of her school and undermining its management. If this is grounds to lose your job, then this a threat that could be made by a hostile management to many active reps and Conference delegates.

One of the main pieces of evidence against Eileen was reports made in the national press last Easter quoting from a speech she made at the Gateshead NUT conference, daring to criticise the disciplinary system and high number of exclusions which had been implemented in her school federation. But what price freedom of speech if your opinions are then used to help sack you?

Small wonder Eileen sought to ask her question yesterday. Small wonder why Eileen and Natara want to be sure that if union reps put their heads above the parapet against a bullying management that the Union will use all its resources to defend them against victimisation. If not, then which teacher will want to become a rep? How will the Union be built and maintained in the divided and harshly managed school system which this Government seeks to impose?

Conference rightly voted for the Union to confront management bullying with a collective response. But that policy must be put into practice. When our union reps are – as too often – at the receiving end, then they must be confident that the NUT will stand firmly behind them, not just with advice and legal support but also by offering and encouraging strike action.

Eileen and Natara can be contacted on

07876 361128

Bulletin for Conference

Socialist Party Teachers' bulletin for the 2006 conference is available online here to download as a Word or Open Office document.

There is also an HTML version available here

Campaign for a New Workers Party

The venue for the Campaign for a New Workers Party meeting at NUT Conference has had to be changed to:

The Dickens Suite,
Belgrave Hotel,
junction of Belgrave Road and the Seafront,
Torquay

Monday 17/4 from 7.30 pm