The Press MONDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1957. British Wage Policy

Press, Volume XCVI, Issue 28425, 4 November 1957, Page 10

The Press MONDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1957. British Wage Policy

The British Government’s attitude towards wage claims by 450,000 railwaymen is not, as the Government’s opponents

assert, a challenge to the trade unions. If the trade unions so

regard it, serious industrial unrest could well follow. This is a risk the Government has been compelled to accept if it is to give leadership to the nation and if its wage policy is to be consistent with its general financial policy. In normal circumstances the British Government would prefer to follow the democratic practice of interfering as little as possible in the process of wage bargaining— of “ keeping the

“ ring ” while negotiating tribunals do their work. A good deal was heard about this policy at the recent Conservative Party conference at Brighton, where the Minister of Labour (Mr Macleod) was at particular pains to steer discussions away from any thought of a politicallyinspired clash with organised labour. But circumstances invest the .British Government with special responsibilities towards wage demands. For one thing the Government has become a very large employer of labour; and it has followed that the Government and the boards of the nationalised industries have become the first line to be attacked in each new surge forward in wage demands. Far from being a shield, the Government and the official boards have proved, as “ The " Times ” has observed, “ a soft " underbelly ”. “ The Times ” was referring, in particular, to the Government’s responsibility early this year for inducing the British Transport Commission to offer railways employees a 5 per cent, increase. This action broke the then existing line, and once the line was broken the remainder of industry had helplessly to surrender.

It was recognised that when the next railway claim was made, it would be a crucial test of the Government’s intentions. The claim has been made, and the Government has met the test by declaring that this time it will give the Transport Commission neither directions nor financial help to meet the wage claims. If the claims are conceded, the commission must meet them from its own resources, and, since the railways

are losing money, wage claims could only be met by dipping! into capital set aside for maintenance and expansion. The Government’s attitude was summarised by the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he said that the Government would have no part in financing inflation. Any other attitude would have been incompatible with the whole of the Government’s economic policy. The Government is well aware that any general wage increase at the present time would be regarded abroad as a signal that the Government’s new financial policy had failed, and would be likely to stimulate a fresh wave of speculation against sterling. In addition to the railwaymen’s claim, claims have been lodged in the transport industry by London busmen. The miners in the nationalised coal industry are giving priority this year to a claim for a 40-hour week for surface workers. The engineering and shipbuilding industries, under the terms of the settlement reached after the strike earlier this year, may not press a wage claim for a full year from last May. But they also are pressing for a 40hour working week, and this is naturally interpreted by employers as a disguised wage claim. It is unfortunate that some union leaders seem intent upon using industrial power as a political weapon. No responsible person in Britain wan‘s a “ showdown ” with the unions in which strikes and lockouts follow one another, with disastrous effects on the economy. On the other hand, feeling has strengthened that a halt must be called to the process of acquiescing in wage demands on the cheerful assumption that no matter what the resultant bill may be the consumer or the overseas customer can be made to pay. In a highly competitive world the latter assumption certainly holds good no longer. “ The Times ” speaks for a growing volume of opinion when it urges the Government to make it clear beyond all doubt that, even at the risk of unpopularity, it is determined to take the lead, as an employer, in seeing that “ the national “ rake’s progress comes to ar “ end ”. Its attitude towards the railwaymen’s demand implies that the Government is seeing its duty in this light.