HC Deb 20 July 1949 vol 467 cc1374-6
Mr. Dobbie

(by Private Notice) asked the Minister of Labour why he has amended his original terms of reference to the Railway Conciliation Board in view of the fact that the trade unions representing the majority of railway workers and the Railway Executive have accepted his original proposals.

The Minister of Labour (Mr. Isaacs)

The terms of reference originally proposed were drawn up in consultation with all parties represented, but it was fully understood at the time that each party was perfectly free to reach such decision regarding participation as seemed right and proper in the circumstances. In their letter to me explaining why they were unable to accept the full terms of reference, the Confederation of the Engineering and Shipbuilding Trade Unions pointed out that the machinery of the Railway Shopmen's National Council has not been utilised. I do not find myself able to contest this view and in the circumstances it is necessary to amend the terms of reference so as to confine the proceedings of the Conciliation Board to questions relating to the conciliation and salaried grades. It is in respect of these workers that constitutional machinery has been exhausted and by appointing the Conciliation Board, I have made available to the parties an ad hoc piece of machinery which I hope will help to solve the complicated and difficult problems that confront that section of the industry.

Mr. Dobbie

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his action in altering these terms of reference, as well as his answer today, will cause disillusionment and disappointment in every grade of the railway service in the country, and may well precipitate a dispute with the railway industry?

Mr. Isaacs

All the other parties have accepted this obligation to carry out the recommendations of the Board. If those with whom my hon. Friend is associated decide at this juncture that they cannot take part in this movement, which will give them an opportunity of settling the wages and conditions of some 80 per cent. of their members—and the way is still open for the other organisations to step in—one can hardly blame the Ministry of Labour if two of the unions cannot agree to the terms of reference.

Mr. Cecil Poole

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that there are about 130,000 railway shopmen, of whom 73 per cent. are inside the organisation of the National Union of Railwaymen, and how can he deny to 95,000 railway shopmen the benefit of this conciliation machinery? Does he not realise that he is laying up for himself an awful lot of trouble?

Mr. Isaacs

It is necessary now and then for a Minister to defend himself. What the Minister has done is to assist the National Union of Railwaymen to find means of settlement outside their own conciliation machinery. In the other case, the union are standing by their machinery. They say they want to proceed through their own organisation and their own machinery. They say that they are quite willing to take part in these discussions but that they will not accept as binding the awards of the Conciliation Board. The three unions, the National Union of Railwaymen, the A.S.L.E. and F. and the Railway Clerks Association are prepared to do so. I ask my friends in the National Union of Railwaymen whether they want the proceedings to go on with people sitting there and taking part who are not bound to accept the conditions to which the others are bound. If they sit down and look at the matter as reasonable people they can get on with this part of the job. Meanwhile, we can see what we can do to bring in the others and cover the whole lot. After all, the railway shopmen are covered by other agreements.

Mr. Harrison

Will my right hon. Friend say whether he is satisfied that the Railway Shopmen's National Council can function now that he has set up a new tribunal to go into the whole question of wages and conditions on the railways in all departments? How is it possible that the Railway Shopmen's National Council can function under such conditions?

Mr. Isaacs

It is evident that the unions concerned think it can function because they insist upon it functioning.

Mr. Mikardo

Is not the position taken up by the Confederation the only possible one for them in view of their large membership in other industries? Is my right hon. Friend aware that the compromise he has reached will be supported by the overwhelming majority of organised workers throughout the country?

Mr. Isaacs

I do not want at this stage to express an opinion, but I would like to say that I do not think the Confederation in its attitude at the moment is unreasonable.

Mr. C. Poole

May I ask the Minister whether it will be pertinent, in view of his statement, for the conditions of service of railway shopmen to be considered by the Conciliation Board, provided the other parties go forward with the presentation of their claims to that Board?

Mr. Isaacs

I think it would be best if I were to quote from the official statement in which it is said: The Minister, whilst regretting that the Confederation will not be able to participate, has expressed his readiness to restore the terms of reference should the Confederation on reconsideration feel that they would be able to participate on the basis of the full original terms.