Occupy Against

John Cronin who is vice-president of the Danus Factory Committee and also vice-president of his LT.G.W.U. Branch. What has happened-at Danus is typical out some of the lessons of the occupation and calls attention to some of the pitfalls that must be avoided.

QUESTION: Could you tell us what were the reasons that management gave for closing the Danus Factory. What do you think were the real reasons?

ANSWER: We were told about ten workers were being put on short time, so, we approached the Managing Director, O'Donovan, and asked what the full position was. A few days later he issued us with a written statement which explained his point of view. It mentioned the world wide economic crisis and the crisis in lreland, and it went on to say that “This has resulted in a build up in our stocks... The future looks particularly black with the present depressed state of the farming and building industries. In such circumstances we see no immediate or even long term improvements.”

In other words, the immediate problem is alleged to be that farms and building labourers are not in a position to buy Danus suits. Now, we think that this is nonsense because farmers have never really been customers, and even before the crisis in the building industry there was talk of closing down. The real reasons for the closure can be summed up as follows :

(i) The elimination of protective tariffs under E.E.C. regulations and the subsequent influx of cheap garments.

(ii) The possibility of producing a new type of suit, the Engineers Suit, with more modern machinery and with a workforce of only security people.

(iii) Bad management. In 1969 Danus was takenover by a British Company, Aquascutum, which introduced a new supervisory system THE PLOUGH — PAGE 4 decided.

REVOLUTIONARY CONCEPT abandon the employment.

The following interview was taken by Limerick members of the R.M.G. with of what is happening all over the country. The 320 Danus workers, by occupying their factory and taking possession of the company’s stocks, have given a positive lead to all workers faced with redundancies. In speaking with us John Cronin draws that did nothing to increase efficiency and, in fact, just squandered money. Before 1969 we never had a supervisor on the shop-floor; now in some cases we have one man supervising one man. In addition, O'Donovan tells us that £200,000 worth of bad debts have built up. Only morons could let something like that happen!

All these factors are the real causes of the closure and the present economic crisis has only brought matters to a head.

QUESTION: When the workers heard about the close-down what demands did they put forward? Did they demand to keep their jobs or did they simply seek better redundancy money?

ANSWER: Of course we all understood from the beginning that the plant and machinery in Danus needs to be up-dated and that changes are required to make the factory viable. We are not against progress. But we don’t think that workers should suffer because of this; the opposite is the case, we should benefit from it.

At this early stage it is not easy to see where we are going. We were offered £40,000 redundancy ° payments. This was flatly rejected. Nothing less than £120,000 will be accepted. In addition, O'Donovan can get back 90% of the money he pays under the regulations for Statutory Minimum Redundancy Payments. We are demanding that amount of money as well. Also, we claim the value of the factory machinery worth about £60,000. Finally, there is a stock of 9,000 suits to the value of £300,000 that must be taken into consideration.

With all this money and with better m During the past few years a new trend has developed in the T.U. Movement, which is very significant. It is one of occupying a factory mainly to fight redundancies. However, in El. Co. in Shannon in 1967 this tactic was used to demand T.U. recognition and more recently in Britain, it has been used by women workers in their fight for equal pay. In 1972 in the Crannac Furniture Factory in Navan, the workers occupied their factory in defence of their right to work and the outcome of that was that the workers bought the concern from the Receiver and continued production as a Co-Op. At the time of writing the outcome of the Danus workers occupation in Limerick is yet to be The questions raised by workers when occupying a factory because of redundancies are that they defend their right to work. They assert that the wealth which they created enabled the employer to purchase the plant and machinery and that, therefore, they have a right to own and control it. They deny that it is the employers that create employment. It is the workers themselves by producing and consuming, create employment, and that ultimately only they can guarantee its existence. By raising these questions workers are posing a whole new concept of fighting the employers — a revolutionary concept. Up to this workers had won the right to strike for better wages and conditions, but now workers are adopting new tactics in the fight to defend their living standards, and above all their right to work.

By occupying a factory, workers should be fully aware that by their actions they are pointing out that the employer has no right to create unemployment. After ail, it is the workers who have created the wealth. Why then should the employer make the decision to close the factory. From this follows the conclusion that the chief aim of the occupation must be to preserve jobs, and not simply to get “adequate” redundancy money and In the case of the Danus occupation the workers have been faced with this dilemma, They began their sit-in to protest against the redundancy money being offered to them. But since then they have begun to realise that the there is no reason why the factory cannot go into production again and save most of the jobs.

QUESTION: How did the idea of occupation arise, and what were the feelings of the workers on taking such a step?

ANSWER: When we heard that the factory was closing most of us were shocked. For three or four days we couldn’t talk or do anything.

Then we pulled ourselves together and began to get our demands ready. When we looked at the situation we could see that there was no alternative but to move into the factory.

A picket, for example, would not have been any use. It would not have allowed us to act en at night it wouldn’t have allowed us to keep our fight going twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. We had to think of an effective way to defend our interest. | suppose you could say that our interest is in what we produte — the manufactured goods on the factory floor. Since everybody else let us down, the management, the Government and the Trade Union leaders, we decided the best thing to do was to sit-in and personally look after our own interests.

Once the idea arose everybody was in favour of it. A few wanted to wait a little longer because negotiations were going on between the Union, Management and the Government. But we decided not to lose any more time so we went and took over the factory. We have our own critics who say that we lost too much time as it was.

QUESTION: Once you had decided to occupy the factory how did you go about organising the sit-in?

ANSWER: To begin with we had our own section committee in the factory which is elected by the workers and which was active in the past in defending our interests. So we didn’t have to create any new group. But we did appoint four section representatives who are responsible for discipline; for seeing that the decisions we take are observed by one and all — and that goes for leaders as well as rank and file.

There are some vested interests who are just question of maintaining employment is very importar O'Donovan, has alluded to, on numerous occasions, t continuing productivity with a reduced workforce. | must hold out and demand that all work be shared wi the workers give in and accept rationalisation, they a: © Donovan te make some of them redundant, they a jobs, and so adding to unemployment.

NATIONALISE!

How, then, can employment be preserved. To oct threatened closure of a factory, whatever the confusi: of the workers, is a step in the right direction. And o been taken, the objective situation in the Irish econo: pressures on the actual aims of the occupation. For t problem, in that, as it is explained in other articles, tt employers are deliberately creating unemployment as to hold back wage increase in order to deal with the c Given the fact that unemployment is part of their po! resist any demands to make the factory economically the proposition of establish of a Co-Op. is not a realis Co-Op. the workers would be subject to the same pro capitalist economy at the moment. Without direct ai Government subsidies and backing the Co-Op. would wall, Therefore, the only course open to the workers is direct subsidy from the Government, i.e. to nationali: workers retaining control; that the Government give form of tariffs etc.

The demand for nationalisation springs from the 1 ation of the workers concerned to serve their jobs. J property of the workers who presently occupy them. all workers and to future generations of workers. Th preserve particular jobs is in fact a fight on behalf of | waiting for us to make a mistake. This meant that we had to make some rules. For example only those working in the factory have a right to come in and everybody has to be searchéd | the way out. Security is very important. At1 moment we are not warried about manageme: trying to re-occupy the factory or remove the machinery. But we have had trouble with the management trying to interfere with our stoc Some of the stores are not in the factory and management tried to let in a Dublin carrying firm, Tippet and Britain. The workers ina nearby clothing factory are minding this store for us, and they passed us a warning. We wer down and removed the garments from the vai But the men in charge didn't seem to pay any masse and because we would have had to go home attention, so we made our feelings known in stronger terms — you know? They then left empty handed.

Another thing should be noted: rules and regulations, if they are made by the workers themselves, don’t restrict them. On the cont they help develop the workers’ confidence. | example, Stevie Coughlan strutted into the * factory one day to patronise us. So one of tl workers told him that he wasn’t a worker am get out!

QUESTION: What role have the Gardai pla ANSWER: They are watching us, of cou!

but they are keeping well out of the way. W hope that there wont be any interference wi Anyway, after facing a close-down we are re for any emergency! We know how to handli intimidation and provocation - you know?

QUESTION: How has the press reacted? ANSWER: For the most part, as you cou expect from the capitalist press, it has playec down the importance of our fight and it has distorted our views and activities. We have blacked the Limerick Leader, and we only sp with sympathetic journalists from the Lismeri Echo. We'd get bad publicity no matter wha did, so we can’t let the reaction of the press influence us one way or another.

the changes that came about after the take-over. They became very enthusiastic; women and men began to speak up; they became confident; they discussed things. For the first time, | suppose, As for the response of other workers — that has been very encouraging. Even without asking, money and support has been coming in. | think workers realise that we are fighting not only for