NIRC finalizes law on 'blacking'
Page 26
Page 28
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
TGWU, which can come back under review procedure, says sacking shop stewards is no solution
• On Wednesday the National Industrial Relations Court heard lengthy arguments from counsel on the responsibility of the TGWU for the actions of its shop stewards at Hull docks. Two senior officials of the union gave evidence and there were some revelations of the looseness of shop stewards' election procedure despite the fact that elections are supervised by the Docks Labour Board.
Court president, Sir John Donaldson, deferred judgment until Thursday (May 18). He told the court that the case would be treated as the final hearing on the container blacking dispute, but said the union might wish to come back to the court under the review procedure. He understood that the Heaton case had been referred to the Appeal Court and this was a relevant factor in making this hearing the final one.
This followed a hearing on Monday this week when Sir John, after being told that the Hull docks "blacking" of Panalpina lorries was continuing, extended until Wednesday the blacking ban against the TGWU and its steward, Mr Walter Cunningham.
The NIRC's consideration of the Hull dispute came after last Friday's ruling by the court in which the TGWU was given a further 21 days in which to end the blacking of Heatons Transport and Craddock Brothers lorries at Liverpool docks (see page 44 for the terms of the judgment). The court also ruled that the union was responsible if its officials, representatives or shop stewards did their work in breach of the law.
The TGWU has appealed against the court's decisions and the appeal court is likely to hear the case on May 30.
In London on Tuesday the union's general secretary, Mr Jack Jones, met the Secretary of State for Employment, Mr Maurice Macmillan, to discuss the critical situation in the docks and the effects of containerization. Labour MPs from London dockside constituencies had told Mr Macmillan on the previous day that London dockers would strike unless 2000 redundancy notices were withdrawn by a stevedoring company before June 2 — the date on which the TGWU has warned that a national docks strike may be called.
While Mr Jones and Mr Macmillan were talking on Tuesday, a joint committee of transport and dock sections of the union was meeting in London to try to thrash out a policy on containerization to prevent a major split. Representatives of transport workers and dockers from all over the country, including the major ports, were at the meeting. Afterwards the TGWU national commercial secretary, Mr Ken Jackson, said the joint committee would now try to formulate a policy acceptable to both drivers and dockers. No decision was taken on the present container issue, in which transport members have complained that dockers' blacking of lorries is threatening their livelihood.
The Hull 'blacking' At the resumed hearing by the NIRC in the Panalpina container lorry blacking complaint Mr Richard Yorke, counsel for Panalpina, said container lorry blacking at Hull had persisted at least since the middle of 1971. Mr Yorke produced copies of minutes a the Hull Joint Port Working Committee for various dates in 1971 and 1972 which suggested — in the reported words of Mr Brian Barker, a TGWU docks officer — that the issues of containerization and definitions of dock work would be dealt with by the TGWU as a national issue. It appeared that the union had set itself the task of obtaining container stuffing and unstuffing work with groupage consignments for its dock members. It appeared that the union was officially behind the blacking.
Mr Frank Brantley, traffic manager of Panalpina Service, gave evidence of telephoning the TGWU regional secretary and the local docks office of the union, to advise them he was sending two container loads in .Mr Cunningham was in a shed near the gates with Mr Brian Barker, the union docks officer, together with the Press; the vehicle sent in on Tuesday morning did not get beyond the tallyman's office.
"Mr Barker talked to the men and I waited nearby until he had finished. He had promised to instruct the men to lift the ban on Panalpina and MAT lorries. I asked him to come to the tallyman's office to present the delivery notes to the tallyman and he did so. The tallyman said 'You're blacked'. I reminded the tallyman that Mr Barker was a senior official of the union but to no avail."
The blue union Continuing, Mr Bramley said he asked Mr Barker why he could not discipline the recalcitrant dockers. "If! try the men would leave and join the blue union, NASD. I
suggest the matter be referred to a higher level."
On Tuesday afternoon, when another Panalpina vehicle was sent in, Mr Barker was on his way to London and through a Mr Andrews, of the TGWU, was supposed to try to clear the vehicle. In fact the lorry did not get through the gates.
Cross-examined by Mr Ralph Gibson, for TGWU, as to whether he (Mr Bramley) had any idea of what would be involved in disciplining the docker shop stewards, Mr Bramley made no audible reply.
When Mr David Shenton, regional secretary of the TGWU, gave evidence, he revealed details of union structure and organization in Hull docks. The shop stewards, he said, were supposed to follow union policies but sometimes they worked in opposition, acting for themselves and for a proportion of the membership. The mass of union membership would not endorse such actions, he believed. But if the shop stewards were sacked similar people would be elected. It would solve nothing to take punitive action. The only result would be another breakaway movement.
Mr Shenton confirmed that no action of a disciplinary kind had yet been taken by the union or was contemplated. Mr Gibson interposed: "Subject to what happens outside the Union......
In detailed evidence as to the actual situation at Hull docks, Mr Shenton said there was an unofficial committee of TGWU and NASD shop stewards. The blacking policy at Hull was initiated by this body and not by the TGWU.
A list of shop stewards presented to the court appeared to suggest that a number of NASD stewards were listed jointly with TGWU stewards on TGWU notepaper. It was confirmed that the NASD men were not members of the TGWU.
MF Shenton insisted that major labour relations matters were not dealt with by the unofficial committee of shop stewards. Major issues vere the province of the Joint Port Working Committee —a committee of representatives of Hull branches of the union and port employees. Mr Shenton said the election of shop stewards at the dockside, where even non-union men might vote in a crowd of dockers, had given rise to many difficulties; formerly the practice was for shop stewards to be elected at branch meetings, but now annual elections were supervised by the dock labour board, with the agreement of both unions.
Mr Shenton told of his (and Mr Barker's) experiences when trying to persuade the dockers at various meetings to lift the blacking. He (Mr Shenton) was not behind Mr Cunningham in his actions. The union planned a series of. fresh meetings and publicity to try to get the blacking lifted. At one meeting he had addressed at which some 2000 dockers were present — during a one day's stoppage — he had had a good reception and thought the men would accept official union policy but he learned that after he had left the meeting other speakers persuaded the men to reverse the decision to lift the ban.
Asked whether it was widely known among union membership that no disciplinary action by the union was contemplated, Mr Shenton agreed that this was so. "The shop stewards know it would exacerbate the situation. It may be that at the end of the road the union will be compelled to take action but we are using peaceful methods of persuasion now."
Mr Yorke said he had yet to see any words from Mr Jack Jones, the general secretary of the TGWU, doing more than "advise" dockers to lift the blacking. Mr Shenton said this was not so. He knew that Mr O'Leary, the docks secretary, had certainly used stronger words in publicity to the men.
Asked by the president who was chairman of the 2000-strong meeting he had addressed, Mr Shenton said he went straight onto the platform and did not know who was in the chair. Mr Yorke suggested that with emotive questions the negative should always be put first; otherwise the verdict would not be truly representative.
Mr Brian Parker, regional docks and waterways officer for six years, and a former docker, gave evidence of the manner in which shop stewards were elected. It was a peculiar system with positive and negative voting. If 200 men voted and only 50 votes were cast for a candidate the man was not elected. A clear majority must support him.
Mr Barker said on only one occasion had he asked to meet the shop stewards because the TGWU did not recognize the NASD in Hull. The stewards gave him a polite hearing but they were not to be moved from their attitude over blacking.
Lengthy arguments were made as to the analogy between a company or corporation, which was responsible for the acts of its servants, and of a trade union like the TGWU where, Mr Gibson insisted, contrary arguments prevailed. Counsel insisted that the action of the shop stewards at Hull was not performed with the backing of the TGWU. He suggested that the decision not to discipline the men was shared with the employers who had taken no action following the unofficial day's stoppage recently. He felt the doctrine of vicarious responsibility was being asked to carry an impossible burden, though this was perhaps the intention of the Act.
The president said Mr Cunningham's importance should not be exaggerated though the court might have to look to him in relation to the Hull problem at some time. The two union officials, he felt, were sincere but they complied with the law with a great lack of enthusiasm.
Unions are accountable When the NIRC delivered its judgment on May 12 in the case involving Heatons' and Craddocks' lorries being blacked by Liverpool dockers, it adjourned for 21 days any action on further contempt charges against the Transport and General Workers' Union. If at the end of that time the union is obeying the court's orders, no further action will be taken against it. But, said the president, "if it is not, we shall be forced again to assert our authority and in an unmistakable manner".
In the face of arguments from the union's lawyers, the court reaffirmed its earlier decisions that the union was in contempt. The union had appeared in court to defend itself for the first time, a move welcomed by the president who said this represented a "new chapter" in industrial relations.
But he warned the union: "Change the law by all means. But do not break it. That course leads to disaster for us all."
Sir John said the law was plain. "The union is accountable if its officers, officials, representatives or shop stewards do their union work in breach of the law. It is for the union to see that they do not break the law. If they persist in doing so they are unworthy of the union's trust and of continuing in office."
Friday's order of the industrial court contained a requirement that the union paid the costs; Mr Richard Yorke QC, for the haulage firms, had made an application for costs. The union has the right to contest these at a later stage.
Going to appeal On Tuesday the TGWU asked the Appeal Court if the hearing of its appeal against the NIRC decision could be speeded up. Mr Peter Pain QC, for the union, told the three judges that the union was anxious to get a decision in the Appeal Court before the 21 days adjournment expired on June 2.
Mr Pain said the appeal boiled down to a point of law — the responsibility of a union for its shop stewards in a situation where the stewards were going flatly against union policy but the union did not strip them of their authority. Did the shop stewards remain the agents of the union so as to put the union in contempt under the order of the NIRC?
He estimated that the appeal would take two to three days and said he felt sure that the industrial court would hardly hold his clients in contempt if the matter was still being debated in the Appeal Court.
Granting the appeal application, Lord Denning, Master of the Rolls, said he hoped the court could take the case on the first day of the next law term (May 30) and that the 21 days would be sufficiently flexible until a decision was given.
Miss Carole Alton, counsel for Heatons Transport and Craddock Brothers, told the court that the blacking was still continuing.