Socialism ‘counter to technology’

Press, 31 October 1979, Page 15

Socialism ‘counter to technology’

Socialism was the long-i term strategy workers should; aim for in their struggle; against the effects of new' technology, the Canterbury! Shop Employees’ Union has! been told at a meeting in! Christchurch. Mr J. Freeman-Moir, a i | lecturer in education at the University of Canterbury, (told the meeting that on the ' one hand electronic microI processor technology had the potential to eliminate dani gerous and repetitive work, | but on the other hand led to a reduction in the level of skills involved in jobs and to I a reduction in the number of i jobs themselves. I “Far fewer jobs are likely) (to be created than lost and) !the present Government is! unlikely to introduce major' job-creation schemes,” he said. There needed to be close, . inter-union communication! and co-operation. Unions, should be getting involved in school education programmes' . to make school-leavers aware I of the problems they might i face. The unions should also

be making specific demands H on their employers. Demands might include ■ ■ reduced working hours, the abolition of overtime, longer , holidays, part-time work and' ! job sharing, job retraining atj j the employers’ expense, j maintaining levels of pay for : fewer hours of work, the retention of job positions, redundancy payments until the worker finds a new job, worker participation in the design and organisation of jobs, and worker determination of what new systems were to be created. Mr Freeman-Moir urged the union to oppose new technology unless the em- | plovers gave satisfactory i guarantees. In the short I term there was no alternative 'but to oppose new tech-, nology. Economic power was I in private hands, which saw : the technology as a way of increasing productivity and profits. The long-term strategy for | the union must be social ! control over this economic :: power, said Mr FreemanMoir. 1