Can Take The Lead

The struggle for National Liberation and for re-unification of the country has been the main topic on the political front for the past 18 months. * However, once more the economic aspect of the class struggle is due to appear, That is the whole question of the National Wage Agreement. Each time the debate has begun, we've seen an upsurge of interest and minor outbreaks of opposition to the proposals, This time, the opposition to the Wage Agreements have new “ammunition” to use in their fight. What is this, and how can it be used?

PRESSURE ON I.C.T.U.

We refer to the position of women workers in the Irish economy and their right to equal pay. With the entry of Ireland into the EEC the gross inequality of Irish women was highlighted, much to the embarrassment of the politicians. The government and employers were forced to pay lip-service to the question. One of the results of their ‘’sham’’ concern however was a useful one, i.e, the “REPORT ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN”.

The interim report published about 18 months ago, around thet. of the ner,otiations for the 2nd Wage Agreement revealed the outrageous discriminatory practices against women, both in terms of jobs available and ‘rates paid, These revelations implicity put pressure on the trish Congress of Trade Unions to consider the question of women workers. However the final outcome of this consideration did not provide women with any real gains at all. Nor did it provide adequate steps towards procuring equal pay. IN FACT, the Equal Pay clauses in the agreement tied the hands of many female workers in their fight for equal pay.

basic pay up to £30 per week, inadequacies which would be quickly willing to participate in the procedures, female labour. sum.

EQUAL PAY — THE KEY as contained in the Wage Agreement is an Employers and Trade Union Officials have been saying for the past couple of years that the concept of a Wage Agreement helps the lower-paid workers! This is absolutely proved to be incorrect by taking a glance at the rates paid to female workers and the Percentage increases payable under the agreement; a 9% increase on — a 7%% increase on basic pay between £30 and £40 — a 4% increase on basic pay on £40 and over.

In effect, workers earning £41 per week had the combined increase of 9%%, 7%4% and 4% added to his pay packet, emerging with £3.29 extra per week. If we relate this to the average wage of female industrial workers, which is approx. £16 Per week we see that the increase here totals Unions.

approx. £1.44 per week! Most women were glad to get the £2.25 basic minimum allowed to workers, whose 9% increase on their basic wouldn't have meant that much anyway !

The equal pay clause included in the agreement was a result of the trade unions attitude towards the whole question. It established an attitude of “co-operation”, with the “Rights Commissioner’, appointed by the government to deal with the matter. This person, who not only has no experience of the methods of job evaluation employed, has no knowledge of the trade union movement, and no experience in the field of industrial relations at all! Besides, these glaring condemned in other areas are only one aspect. In addition he has absolutely no power to initiate Or act on his findings. His sole contribution is in the form of a report! For any person to Present a case before him, the employer must be What employer is willing to give away half the Profits to cut off his source of cheap-labour, Apart from these totally inadequate references in the clause, the biggest blow comes when the final stage is reached. Even if the employer agrees that a case for equal pay is legitimate, the agreement stipulates that unless the claimant is already in possession of 95% of the male-rate he shall receive no more than 17%% of the differential — not even of the male rate. Such an offer is a downright insult! A weeks travelling by bus would not be covered by this trivial The whole concept of the move towards Equal Pay example of the wage agreements complete failure in dealing with the problems of the working class. The question of equal pay for women must be used as a battering ram in the fight against a Wage Agreement. When our wages are increased by an average of 4% to deal with a cost of living which has increased by 20% in the last two years, something quite radically different is needed.

A sliding scale of wages is the only solution to the problems of the working class. Besides this increased productivity should result in increased wages for the workers over and above their basic wages. Increased productivity for the employers during the last three years is something which has been totally ignored by the Bureaucracy in the A WHOLE NEW DEAL The Trade Union movement must realise the potential for struggle around the question of Equal Pay. Militants must use this betrayal of the bureaucracy in their struggle against wage agreements, Women in the movement must insist on the Trade Union movement laying down the principles of job evaluation, to be strictly adhered to, These principles should be founded on the overall contribution that women workers make to the economy in general and industry in particular. The unscientific theories of employers must be thrown out as these are contrived in the interests solely of the employers, (b) Within the individual work place, those principles must be the only guideline to job evaluation undertaken, Any violation should be confronted by strike action. (c) \f the employers refuse to co-operate in the procedures again strike action will be necessary (d) And if in the final result employers refuse to adhere to the right for equal pay — there is and can be no other alternative but to strike!

Trade Unionists must press the leadership to insist on legislation to protect women workers against the discriminatory manoeuvres of the employers, and to ensure that all increments contained in a sliding scale of pay should be paid to men and women equally.

A struggle is on the agenda, its up to militants to make it the strongest yet. The material is there, waiting to be used, FOR A SLIDING SCALE OF WAGES! FOR THE RIGHT TO EQUAL PAY! FOR THE RIGHT TO STRIKE! OUT WITH WAGE AGREEMENTS!

The formation of Saor Eire was not a freak coming together of latter day Butch Cassidy's as some would have us believe. On the contrary it came into being as a result of the political and military controversies which took place in the Republican Movement in the sixties after the failure of the ‘56-'62 border campaign. Saor Eire’s emergence was a signal event for the Fovement and it foreshadowed the more dramatic Official/Provisional split which occurred at the Army Convention (Dec. 1969) and the Sinn Fein Ard Fheis (Jan. 1970).

CRISIS OF THE REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT As a result of the real need for a politica! orientation, to break Sinn Fein’s isolation from the Working class, a left-wing trend developed within the Movement. Unfortunately the chief ‘political commisar’’ was a certain Roy Johnson who had received his political baptism in the British Communist Party and Desmond Greaves Connolly Association. While it cannot be denied that Johnson was instrumental in shifting Sinn Fein ina left direction he could take it only as far as his Stalinist training would allow, The emphasis was placed on an economistic reformist line and the concept of a Stages theory as the Grand Plan for the Irish revolution. Rather than viewing the process of the revolution as being @ complex combination and intertwining of the national struggle and the class struggle, the stages theory was a dogmatic abstraction. It saw the achievemnt of a Workers Republic as being a very protracted affair with distinct and separate stages. The first stage it envisages would be the dernocratisation of the Orange statelet, then the abolition of the border, and finally when the Catholic and Protestant workers held each others hands like innocent children, then and only then "could the united working class think in terms of a socialist revolution.

An inevitable complement to this reformist line was a de-emphasise on and running down of, the armed wing.

As a reaction against these anaemic politics elements in the Irish Republic Army resigned from that organisation. Left-wingers did so because they distiked the reformist socialism of the Johnsonites and right wing (more correctly apolitical!) nationalists dropped out because of the running down of the army. These groupings came together about 1967 and “‘formed’™ Saor Eire. The left wing was reinforced by several people who had been in the Irish Workers Group, an organisation influenced by Trotskyism. Besides the left and the right wing, elements there was + third element which latched 7 9 ee SG a tsett Rand whote assoc £ wuhS E. was 2 PRON Pelee ore. TG gOupIng Wes Composed of people who were on the permhery of the Republican Movement and it would be charitable to describe these people as gangsters.

Therefore Saor Eire was not a homogeneous Organisation. It had no centralised military command let alone a common political leadership. It was a loose alliancé of diverse groups who on occasion co-operated together in joint actions and used the umbretla name of Saor Eire. Needless to say the criminal eiement used the name as a cover for their Own exploits From 4 military pomt of view the Provisional IRA is a similar alliance but under the impact of the present struggle in the North the left and right wings have been welded into an effective fighting force and any criminal elements have been quickly disciplined. Saor Eire, because it operated in a totally different political situation in the South, soon became an isolated group of urban guerillas divorced from any political activity. Under these conditions it never achieved the unified structure of the Provisionals and eventually some of the right-wing and apolitical elements degenerated and fell in with the criminal faction.

But it would be wrong to make a blanket condemnation of all those who participated in S.E activities. There has to be a sharp differentiation made between the left-wing and the rest. The socialists in S.E. were the only ones who tried to work Out a political line and strategy, however naive in retrospect we consider that strategy to be APOLITICAL CONTRIBUTION The recent Portlaoise statement, in which these revolutionary militants pledged themselves to continue to strive for a Workers Republic, shows how wrong it is to tar with the same brush all those associated with S.E. In spite of all their experiences they remain dedicated revolutionaries their courage and tenacity has to be applauded by republicans and socialists.

Their contribution to the struggle in the North must be stressed. When the situation in the North blew up in August 1969 there were precious few ams available to defend the nationalist minority The SE meltants fulf died e useful purpose, which, & not demed by anybody, in channetling arms to the North. They also provided funds (expropriated in bank robberies) for arms purchases; gave arms training to Northerners both before and after the August pogroms, and participated in the defence of the Bogside.

Having said this we would be failing in our duty as revolutionary marxists if we did not take a critical attitude towards their concept of how revolutionary change is to be achievegl, in the south Any criticisms we do make are not done so as to score cheap political debating pormnts, but rather as un attempt to learn from thei mistakes so that revolutionaries in the future will not repeat these same mistakes.

posed are inter-woven, thus giving an to endless defeats’. they say:

basically one of politics. They failed to and Nationalist aspects,”’

Free State”.

Eye te The only time that they publically expressed their views clearly and concisely was in the short but explicit ‘Saor Eire Manifesto’ published in May 1971. It was quite obviously drawn up by the left wing of S.E. because it states that the main enemy of the Irish working class is British Imperialism, which controls lreland both militarily and economically, with the 26 counties having a neo-colonialist relationship with Britain. Therefore the struggle "must be in the 32 County context and not solely confined to the North’, and Imperialism “must be smashed The Manifestoe also totally rejects the Stages theory and the following quotation shows that they had a very good understanding of the fundamental dynamic of the Irish Revolution:

There can be no distinct, separate stages in the Irish Revolution. True there are stages, but these stages overlap each other and the tasks uninterrupted revolution which will drive out ‘ the forces of British Imperialism anu their agents once and for all from treland. Unless this lesson is grasped by Republicans we are assigning ourselves Another valid point that is made is that previously republicans have viewed the fight for self-determination in purely military terms and that what s needed now 1s an analysis structured “Their reasons for failure dare cliverse but it is understand and Were incapable and unwilling to grasp the dynamics of the Irish Revolution and the inter-relationship between its Socialist They also emphasise that revolutionary armed violence is essential in order to smash the Imperialist connection and that '’at some stage during the Irish Revolution it will be necessary to defend ourselves against the forces of the discussed. ARMED STRUGGLE Vs MASS STRUGGLE? So far so good. But the conclusions that they derived from their overall analysis, linked with their ‘Debray ist’ concepts of armed struggle, led them into a political and military cul-de-sac, One of the weaknesses of this analysis was to ignore the uneveness of the development of the Irish Revolution. The political situation in the North was and is far different from the South.

Precisely because the National Democratic Revolution (1916-1921) had been aborted {its prime task was to achieve a 32 country independent bourgeois republic) and the six counties remained under direct imperialist domination, the spark for the socialist revolution would come from the attempt to rectify this subversion of the Democratic Revolution. Thus the North would naturally be the cockpit of the struggle and the first phase (rather than stage) would be centred around the question of smashing the Orange State. The anti-imperialist attack in the 26 counties wil! for obvious reasons, develop at a slower pace. But because the predominant idealogy of the Southern working class is still Republican (although in certain periods it remains in low key) they can be mobilized in support of the National Struggle, Witness the demonstrations in Dublin over Bloody Sunday, the Mac Stiofain arrest and the protests against the “Offences Against the State Amendment Act’, From such mobilisation, in the future inevitable due to British Imperialism, necessary to increase repression North and South owing to the failure of its political ‘solutions’, an anti- imperialist movement will develop in the South. The Free State will increasingly come into a collision course with this movement and from the heat generated the struggle may take a 32 County dimension, Flowing from this a 32 country Workers Republic would possibly materialise.

But what is essential to grasp is that armed struggle in the South, to succeed, can only be based on such a mass movement, which is in confrontation with the Free State. To try to establish an urban guerilla movement in the Free State, as Saor Eire did, before these conditions ripen means to court disaster. Surely these are the lessons of the *56—'62 campaign. Unless the masses sy mpathise with the guerilla forces they will remain indifferent to their fate however courageous their actions.

It is correct to see the Free State as the enemy of the National Struggle, but it is incorrect to launch an armed attack on it before the political situation has matured. In the present context the main task of the revolutionary forces in the South is in buriding a broad based ante imperialist front which of the struggle in the North and thus lay the foundation for the opening up of the Second Front in the South. From such a movement will a serious assault be launched upon the Free State.

Unfortunately we haven't been able to cover all the political and military problems posed by the S.E. Manifestoe. We have only been able to deal, very briefly, with the main mistake of S.E. There are many interesting points raised in the manifesto which need discussing, but we hipe that this article will stimulate an open debate in the Irish Left and these other issues will be more fully their own interests. Furthermore, these people

----- pull-quotes -----

a farewellto arms and replaced by a socialist system’.

around the concept of the unmterrupted, or Permanent Revolution. This is neatly put when