WHO ARE THE DISRUPTORS?

Grey River Argus, 13 August 1946, Page 8

WHO ARE THE DISRUPTORS?

(To the Editor). Sir.—After reading your leader ol Aug. 6th., I was tempted to reply to several of the points you raise. 1 have decided, however, to accept the opportunity you offer me of getting back to the original issue of who are the disruptors of industrial life in Australia. You say the Communists. But as yet you have produced no evidence to back your charge against this section of the working-cl’ass movement. I challenge you to- do so. I claim the disruptors are the big capitalist interests of Australia. I submit my evidence in support of this assertion by dealing briefly, with the industrial disputes occurring since the war ended. The first major strike was that of the N.S.W. steelworkers. It commenced at the Port Kembla plant of the Broken H Proprietary steel monopoly when a union job delegate was sacked without even the pretence of an excuse by the company. After requesting his reinstatement and being refused the men on the job ceased work —action which any self-respecting body of unionists in this country would take if a workmate was victimised in so blatant a manner. The company remained adamant in its refusal to reinstate the delegate. The Government was appealed to and refused to intervene: So the strike spread and other unions became involved. They rightly recognised that this was another attack upon trade unionism by a company which has always been notorious for its hostility towards the trade union movement. The Tory press howled "Communist plot!’-r--and you echoed the cry. Finally, the delegate was reinstated and the unions immediately called off the strike. The other major strike was that of the Queensland meat workers. In this case a number of men (including a union delegate) with from 15 to 20 years’ service were sacked from the plants of an international meat combine in defiance of the long established principle of seniority. The only excuse offered by the company was that it maintained the right to “hire and fire” as; it pleased. Every effort was made by the union to settle the dispute in its early stages —including an appeal to the Court and several to the Government. But the effort was fruitless. So the strike spread and involved other unions who again . correctly interpreted' the company’s action as another attack upon trade unionism. Again the Tory press howled “Communist plot!”—which cry you once more echoed. But the solidarity of the men was not to be shaken and the strike was called off only when all the men were reinstated in their jobs. No less han 30 other strikes have been caused by victimisation — most of them at plants owned by the big monopolies and combines. On each occasion that capitalist press howled “Communist plot!” It had an object in adopting this catch-cry It sought to strengthen the hands of the sectarian and right wing groups within the trade union movement who, by their treacherous behaviour, were working to split the unions into “leftists” and “moderates.” Other strikes were likewise purely defensive strikes—strikes to maintain conditions already won. Then the double-dumping dispute of the. wat-er-side workers. During war-time the wharfies had agreed to continue loading double wool bales on the promise of the employers that the double bales -would be abolished when war ended. With the war well over, the union asked for a date to be set when double dumping would cease, pointing out that the double bales were too heavy to handle with safety. This reasonable request was refused, the employers indicating they had no intention of honouring their promise. So the wharfies reinsert to load double bales until a satisfactory compromise was reached. To the Tory press this was another "Communist plot.” I have dealt with the reasons for the strikes of the Australian miners in a previous letter —the struggle for life itself by the South Coast miners employed in dust-laden mines for adequate safety measures to reduce the appalling death and serious accident rate, and for decent conditions of employment. From the lips of Mr. Eddie Ward himself, ex-Minister of Labour in the Curtin Government, I have heard statements concerning the raw deal the miners are getting frrm the wealthy coal-mining companies. Meanwhile, the capitalist press screeches for “drastic action,” to be taken against the “Communist-dom-inated” miners who had to cease work. Yet this same press has nothing to say about the 150-odd miners who have lost their lives in mines accidents in the past five years; or of the rise in the accident rate till it has reached the total of 50 per thoussand last year in the Wonthaggl coal-field; or of the hundreds of “dusted” miners coughing their lungs away in South Coast -mining townships; or the deplorable housing conditions. the miners have had to put up with. The miners have never needed a Communist Party to make ation —in Australia or elsewhere. 1 repeat my assertion’ that it is the big capitalist interests of Australia who are really responsible for the industrial disruption. They are out to wreck the trade union movement. If they succeed in this design they wilt have the Australian workers at their mercy to exploit to the limit. Now it is your turn to produce your evidence that it is the Communists, anc~ not the capitalists, who are responsible for the disruption.—l am etc., T. PRATT.