§ 3.40 p.m.
§ THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (LORD SHACKLETON)My Lords, with your Lordships' permission, I should like to repeat a Statement that is being made by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity in another place on the present situation in the Ford dispute. Noble Lords have probably also had an opportunity to study my right honourable friend's Statement in another place on Monday. To-day's Statement is as follows:
"Since I reported to the House on Monday, talks with representatives of the unions and of the Ford management have continued at my .Department.
"In these discussions the unions represented unanimously to the Company that the continuing possibility of legal action against the T. & G. W. U. and the A.E.F. was an obstacle to a return to normal industrial negotiation. In view of this, the company yesterday gave an assurance that they would not pursue further legal action and so instructed their legal advisers.
"In the subsequent talks the unions put forward yesterday—I understand by a majority decision—the following demands as prior conditions for a resumption of work;
"The unions also indicated that in the subsequent negotiations they would wish to query certain points in the provisions of the package deal setting out guide lines for the introduction of productivity improvements.
- (1) Implementation of the pay increases and related provisions of the package deal but with the dropping of the so-called penalty clauses;
- (2) Withdrawal of a provision in the package deal that the unions should give 21 days' notice of constitutional strike action;
- (3) An indication that the Company would improve the pity increases provided in the package deal following a return to work.
"For its part, the company has taken the line that it is prepared to re-negotiate the package deal but only within 483 the agreed negotiating machinery following resumption of work. It has pointed out that, since the package deal negotiated last month has been implemented from March 1 at the request of the majority of the trade union side of the National Joint Negotiating Committee, some 7,000 Ford employees who are still at work are already enjoying its benefits. The company therefore proposed that resumption of work should take place on the basis of the new deal on the clear understanding that the company would immediately negotiate with the unions the substitution of alternative provisions for any clauses not found acceptable. Alternatively, the company was prepared to revert to the previous agreement reached in 1967 as a basis for resumption of work and enter into immediate negotiations for the production of an entirely new package deal. This morning the trade unions rejected these proposals from the company, again I understand by a majority, and the talks have therefore broken down.
"The House will I am sure share my profound regret at this outcome and my deep concern at the continuing serious loss of production and exports. My Department will, of course, continue to keep in close touch with both sides and will be ready to help at any time when this seems possible."
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I am sure your Lordships are grateful to the noble Lord the Leader of the House for repeating this Statement. I certainly do not wish to say anything that would in any way exacerbate what I feel all of us believe to be a deplorable situation. It is deplorable in terms of lost production and in the forced idleness of many workers who, I am convinced, would be only too glad to return to work. It is deplorable in terms of lost exports at a critical period in our attempted climb back to economic recovery. It is deplorable also in the light of the possible threat of lost investment in this country in a very important sector of our economy. I must say that I deeply regret to have this confirmation, that what would appear to be a very reasonable offer on the part of the company has been rejected, albeit by a majority vote.
484 I should like to ask the noble Lord two questions. First, is there not a case, in the light of this deplorable situation, for the Government's introducing rather earlier than their present programme would appear to allow the trade union legislation which they have in mind? Secondly, do not these deplorable events reinforce the case for making contractual agreements voluntarily arrived at between management and the trade union side legally enforceable?
§ LORD BYERSMy Lords, this is indeed a depressing Statement on a very depressing situation. I would express the hope that Her Majesty's Government will not remain inactive in this situation, and that they could perhaps put their emphasis on persuading the unions that it is in their own long-term interests to honour the present agreement, to return to work, and immediately to start new negotiations, as the company has suggested, for a new deal. Can it be put to the unions that if there is no intention to honour this present agreement, but merely a desire to try to pick out the best parts of it, no management could ever agree to negotiate a new agreement, which might suffer the same fate? I put this forward as a possible suggestion. I hope that we shall not have any inactivity here. I realise the tremendous job that the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity has, but I am sure that if she could have one more go at the unions on these lines we might get some results.
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, I appreciate noble Lords' not pressing me hard at this moment. Clearly, in a matter as delicate as this the less I say, not being the Minister actually in charge of this situation, the better. I agree almost wholly with the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Byers, and I agree with the noble Earl, Lord Jellicoe, except in relation to his latter remarks. Next Tuesday we are to debate the Government's White Paper, In Place of Strife. In relation to the making of binding bargains, there was nothing in this particular instance, which is not an agreement entered into with an employers' association, to prevent the parties, if both sides had agreed to do so, from making the agreement legally binding. But I think the noble Lord, Lord Byers, was on to an important 485 point. Although I must not quote what Mr. George Brown said in another place, noble Lords will know what he said, and they will know that my right honourable friend entirely agreed with him that progress in the improvement of industrial relations must depend on the honouring of agreements that have been entered into.
I would say that my right honourable friend is showing her usual tremendous energy, and her officials are hard at work in this delicate business of attempting a conciliation. Therefore I will not say any more, other than that I think the House is quite right, as indeed is the country, to look with alarm and anxiety at this very dangerous situation.