TRIBUNE on Union Blacklisting Complicity

STATEMENT FROM BLACKLIST SUPPORT GROUP

When the campaign over blacklisting started, we concentrated our efforts on exposing the conspiracy by big business and the police. It was directors of multinational corporations who ran the notoriously anti-union Economic League and Consulting Association blacklists, in an operation that lasted five decades and involved a two-way sharing of intelligence about union activists between company executives and Britain’s most secretive political police units.

Over the past twelve years, the exposure of corporate and state wrongdoing has led to new legislation, a select committee investigation, record compensation and a public apology in the High Court, and a dedicated union strand in the ongoing public inquiry into undercover policing. The Blacklist Support Group acknowledge the important role played by the trade unions in our campaign for justice.

But there remains unfinished business. It was known from the very beginning that some blacklist documentation included entries where full-time union officials were recorded as the source of the information. blacklistMultiple files include the entry ‘EETPU says NO’, a fact so appalling that the select committee investigation even discussed it. Witness statements prepared by blacklisting managers for the High Court trial claim that some union officials provided them with information.

In his statement, Trevor Watcham—a former chairman of the Consulting Association—claims to have shared a table at an Economic League event with ‘Leon Brittan of the Conservative Party (who had been the main speaker) and Eric Hammond of the electricians’ union together with some members of his union executive’. Norman Tebbit’s recent revelations about secret meetings with the EETPU General Secretary only add to the growing pile of evidence that union collusion in blacklisting took place at the highest levels. This is totally unacceptable, and the union movement needs to face up to this unsavoury aspect of its past.

But this treachery did not occur in a vacuum. To understand why this happened it is necessary to appreciate the industrial relations context of the construction industry. For decades, the leadership of the construction unions adopted strategies that concentrated on winning favour with employers rather than mobilising supposedly ‘self-employed’ workers to take action.

In their hunt for members, the union bureaucracy made sweetheart deals with employers that abandoned the most basic principles of trade unionism. The right wing EETPU was expelled from the TUC following their support of Rupert Murdoch during the Wapping dispute that saw over 6,000 unionised print workers lose their jobs overnight. Branches that opposed the leadership were closed down and leading left-wing members repeatedly disciplined or expelled. As an aside, the Labour MP John Spellar was the Political Officer for EETPU throughout this period.

But it was not just EETPU: other construction unions also adopted overtly business friendly strategies. Bulk membership agreements — where a union official strikes a deal with a manager to pay a set amount of union subs each month without ever talking to the workers—might sound like gangster-style protection money to buy industrial peace, but they were common in the sector.

The phenomenon of appointed convenors, where a union regional secretary and a major employer would jointly agree on who the full-time union representative on a project should be, in the vast majority of cases without any election by the workforce, has existed for decades and continues to this day. Companies guilty of blacklisting union activists were often the most vocal in their support for appointed convenors, who became incorporated into corporate industrial relations and safety structures. The lack of democracy and potential for favouritism in the opaque appointment process is obvious and has no place in any union that claims to be member-led.

To be clear, it is not every union official in construction. Many are honest, value-driven trade unionists who have stood up for workers’ rights. But it is beyond doubt that over a fifty-year period, some general secretaries, some senior union officials, and some appointed convenors formed overly cosy relationships with employers.

Enjoying hospitality in pubs, restaurants, and hotels, or attending sporting events with industrial relations managers from blacklisting firms was viewed as acceptable practice. Press reports from the 1990s actually name UCATT and TGWU officials accused of taking bribes and other inducements from employers, including procurement of prostitutes.

A revolving door exists through which, upon leaving the union, officials regularly take up positions as industrial relations consultants working for the very construction firms they previously negotiated against. It is in this context that gossip about ‘troublesome’ left-wing union activists gets discussed – and appears on blacklist files.

While many cases may be ‘loose talk’ encouraged by alcohol, in some cases the collusion in blacklisting appears more premeditated. It was documentary evidence that forced blacklisted union members to write an open letter in 2016 calling for a fully independent investigation into potential collusion by union officials in blacklisting their own members. The letter states that ‘every union activist in construction knows who the named officials are, as does every major employer’, and describes potential collusion as an ‘open sore’ within Unite.

Branches flooded the Unite Executive Council with motions and in 2019 an independent QC led investigation to look into possible collusion was set up by Len McCluskey. Blacklist Support Group applauded the Unite independent investigation, encouraging anyone with documents or oral testimony that may be relevant to contact lawyers collating evidence.

Solicitors have travelled the country taking witness statements from blacklisted workers who have made serious allegations, including claims that some officials gave evidence at Employment Tribunals in support of the employers, rather than in support of sacked union members. And this is only the beginning, even more documentary evidence has been presented to the investigation by activists.

This includes Subject Access Request disclosures that show that a number of senior union officials were blind copying internal emails about union activists to third parties – including to industrial relations consultants working for blacklisting firms. Searches of Companies House database have discovered that some construction union officials were directors of consultancies providing services to the industry while they were employed by the union. This needs to be fully investigated at the very least.

Yet despite making good progress early on, the Unite investigation appears to have ground to a halt during Covid-19. Jane McNeill QC, the independent lawyer who will write the final report, has only just been formally appointed, and a full search of the Unite ICT system and the archives of predecessor unions has yet to take place. Everyone accepts that the unions and lawyers have been exceptionally busy during the pandemic. But if courts and public inquiries are operating, the investigation into possible collusion should also be able to continue.

The election for the next general secretary of Unite is now underway. The Blacklist Support Group calls upon every candidate to publicly pledge that the investigation into union collusion will continue under their watch, and that if any officials currently employed by the union are criticised in the final QC written report, that they will face appropriate disciplinary action.

The investigation into union collusion in blacklisting is a key battle in the long-term struggle over the very soul of trade unionism in construction. It begs the question: what kind of trade unionism do workers deserve?

***********************************************************

Double-dealing & union blackballs?

UCATT was the trade union that merged with Unite in January 2017.  It was also the union that had allegedly full-time union officers who according to the current Private Eye 'shopped their "comrades",' and 'Blackleg', in the same journal writes:  'Two years ago, Unite general secretary Len McCluskey and assistant general secretary Gail Cartmail promised an inquiry into union officials' collusion with the big building firms - but there's still no sign of it.'

In December 2016, an open letter signed by blacklisted construction workers was circulated:

'.... one issue threatens to cause internal friction: possible union collusion in blacklisting.
Some years ago, both UCATT and UNITE carried out internal investigations into possible union involvement in blacklisting. But that was at a time when barely any of the documentation was available.
'Since the High Court, all that has changed. The employers were forced to provide witness statements and disclose 40 years worth of documentary evidence. It is now in the public domain that officials in both unions were recorded as the source of information on Economic League and Consulting Association blacklist files. Some of those named, remain senior officials in UNITE and UCATT to this day. Every union activist in construction knows who the named officials are, as does every major employer.'

Gail Cartmail had called for a 'full public inquiry with judicial authority'.  

Now Private Eye reveals:  'The joint head of Unite Construction, formed in January 2017 when Ucatt trade union merged with Unite, is Jerry Swain, who is also a Unite national officer.  Despite the tardiness of Unite, scores of blacklisted trade unionists have received compenstation, having taken their cases to the high court.  Among them was bricklayer Brian Higgins who presented evidence to the court in pre-hearings that union officials were the source of information given to construction firms about union activities in 1992, 2002 and 2003.'

Private Eye adds:   'Although the officials' names were redacted in pre-hearings of the high court case, Higgins subsequently obtained an unredacted copy of his file.  Among those who were said to have shopped their "comrades" was one, er, Jerry Swain, from 1991 to 2016 the London and South East regional secretary of Ucatt.  Just fancy that!'

***********

Secret police document on Blacklisting

A SECRET police document has revealed how the Metropolitan Police's Special Branch helped the illegal blacklisting of trade unionists - preventing them from getting jobs because of their political views. 

In one case, detectives suggested one individual was a terrorist, despite the claim being wrong.
The illegal practice - exposed ten years ago - involved major construction firms accessing secret files on 3,000 workers and their union activities.

But until now, little has been known about the police's role, other than a Scotland Yard admission it had been involved.

Part of the secret report underpinning that admission has now been disclosed, after initially being classified as so secret it was for the Metropolitan Police Commissioner's eyes only.  The report - codenamed Operation Reuben - found "numerous areas of concern" with "inappropriate contact of Special Branch officers with private organisations", including with one of the two blacklisting groups, the Economic League and the Consulting Association.

Blacklisting: How it worked

• Blacklisting began with the Economic League in 1919 which shared records on left-wing activists with industry to keep them out of the workplace
• It was closed in 1993 after a Parliamentary inquiry. The Consulting Association sprang up to replace it
• The Information Commissioner's Office raided The Consulting Association in 2009, revealing for the first time the scale of the operation - triggering legal action that continues to this day
• In 2016 eight major construction firms offered settlements to end legal action: Balfour Beatty, Carillion, Costain, Keir, Lang O'Rourke, Sir Robert McAlpine, Skanska and Vinci 
• The Reuben investigators found no systematic records of the relationships - but one sharing incident from 1978 had been recorded after a senior officer intervened.
  On that occasion, a trade union activist had applied for a job making educational videos with a company linked to the construction industry.  
  The company passed the individual's name to the Economic League to be checked - which in turn contacted the police for any further intelligence "due to the perceived risk of involvement in education".
  "The receiving officer's initial inquiries revealed a potential link to [redacted] which in his opinion had not been resolved satisfactorily... he returned to EL asking for any further information, stressing the matter's importance due to the possible link to terrorism.
  "This was recorded as fact by the EL representative."
  EL then passed this on to the prospective employer - ending the candidate's chance of getting a job.
  
  
  The applicant appears to have learned that they had been "blacked by the security people".
  One of their relatives was a retired senior police officer who demanded an investigation - and that appears to explain why the incident remained recorded.
  One major blacklisting allegation is that an officer called Mark Jenner collected information after he infiltrated the construction union UCATT between 1995 and 2000.
  The report says that Jenner, who used the alias Cassidy, provided information on 300 people - and 16 of those appeared in the illegal blacklist database.
  Operation Reuben said it found no evidence to prove that Jenner directly provided that intelligence - but it added it could not rule out other officers doing so.
  Roy Bentham, joint secretary of Blacklist Support Group, said that many questions remain unanswered.
  "The police are supposed to uphold law and order, not spy on perfectly democratic organisations such as trade unions," said Mr Bentham.
  "Blacklisting is a national scandal and confirmation that the police colluded with this shameful and unlawful activity is beyond the pale."
• Police admit role in blacklisting workers
• New action over construction 'blacklist'

Imran Khan QC, lawyer for the Blacklist Support Group, said that the onus was now on the undercover policing inquiry to dig deep.
A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police said that the internal report into blacklisting had established that "certain conduct" amounted to improper sharing of information under the law as it stands today.
"Allegations about police involvement with the 'blacklist' will be fully explored during the Undercover Policing Public Inquiry (UCPI)," said the spokesman.
"The Metropolitan Police Service will await the conclusions of the UCPI before considering any appropriate next steps."

************

Police admit role in construction blacklist scandal

 sent by Trevor Hoyle (Rochdale)

THE Metropolitan Police has confirmed undercover Special Branch officers supplied information to the construction industry blacklist.

Blacklisted workers have fought tirelessly to expose wrongdoing photo

The admission follows a campaign by blacklisted workers to prove they were spied on by the police.

It comes in a letter sent by Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Richard Martin in response to a complaint made by the Blacklist Support Group to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

The letter states: “Allegation: Police, including Special Branches, supplied information that appeared on the Blacklist, funded by the country’s major construction firms, The Consulting Association and/or other agencies, in breach of the Data Protection Act 1998. 

“The Report concludes that, on the balance of probabilities, the allegation that the police or Special Branches supplied information is ‘Proven’. 

The letter goes on to explain: “Sections of the policing community throughout the UK had both overt and covert contact with external organization, including the Economic League” 

It also conformed an “improper flow of information from Special Branch to external organisations, which ultimately appeared on the Blacklist”.

The blacklist scandal has seen more than £75m in compensation paid to workers by major contractors.

Allegations of police collusion in blacklisting were first made back in 2012 but the claims were strenuously denied by the authorities.

MP John McDonnell said: “It is now abundantly clear that various arms of the state including the Police colluded in the blacklisting process.

“This is one of the hidden scandals of the abuse of civil liberties in our country that needs to be recognised fully and addressed. The people involved need to be brought to book.” 

Dave Smith, secretary of the Blacklist Support Group said: “When we first talked about police collusion in blacklisting, people thought we were conspiracy theorists.

“We were told, ‘things like that don’t happen here’. With this admission from the Met Police, our quest for the truth has been vindicated.”

“The police are supposed to detect crime, instead they infiltrated trade unions and provided intelligence to an unlawful corporate conspiracy.”

Unite assistant general secretary Gail Cartmail, said: “This is a major breakthrough the police have finally been forced to admit what we already knew that they were knowingly and actively involved in the blacklisting of construction workers.”

http://www.constructionenquirer.com/2018/03/23/police-admit-role-in-construction-blacklist-scandal/

Dave Smith, the excellent representative for his union members, was interviewed (fairly) by Sarah Montague on Radio 4 this morning. I will put the link up later. 

******

Shock 'ethical award' for blacklist company

  Sent to Northern Voices by Joe Bailey with additions by NV

AN ethical labour standard award to a leading blacklisting company Sir Robert McAlpine has been described as ‘shocking and disgusting’ by the construction union Unite. In October, the company became the first construction contractor to be awarded the ‘Ethical Labour Sourcing’ standard by the Building Research Establishment (BRE).  But Unite says Sir Robert McAlpine was at the centre of the Consulting Association blacklisting operation, supplying both the first and final chair of the organisation and being one of the principal users of the blacklisting process which ruined the lives of thousands of workers, many targeted for raising safety concerns.  Unite is currently suing Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd on behalf of victims of blacklisting, having already secured millions of pounds in compensation for blacklisted workers from firms involved with the Consulting Association. 

 

The Unite union says its concerns about the firm have been reinforced by MPs, with 75 signing an early day motion calling on the company to be stripped of the contracts to refurbish Big Ben and the Elizabeth Tower because of its involvement in blacklisting (Risks 822).

Unite assistant general secretary Gail Cartmail said:
‘Awarding an ethical standard for labour sourcing to Sir Robert McAlpine is both shocking and disgusting.  There is nothing ethical about blacklisting workers and ruining their lives.’

She added: ‘While BRE’s intentions to monitor and improve the recruitment of construction workers should have been a step forward, the organisation has shot itself in the foot by glossing over the stench of blacklisting which permeates from Sir Robert McAlpine.’

The Ethical Labour Standard award created by the British Research Establishment, a certification and standards firm, in response to the Modern Slavery Act 2015.   The standard aims to verify firms that apply the proper due diligence around human rights and ethical concerns when sourcing materials, products and service.

Sir Robert McAlpine, whose projects have included the 2012 Olympic Stadium*, Bloomberg’s new London headquarters and Victoria Gate retail development in Leeds among others, are already leading the sector in its approach to sustainability and ethical sourcing.

Responding to the award Paul Hamer, chief executive of Sir Robert McAlpine, said:  'Forced labour can have no place on Britain’s construction projects; it is an unseen and evil practice that must be stopped.
“Our business is working incredibly hard to demonstrate that Sir Robert McAlpine will not tolerate it and this ELS accreditation is testament to our commitment.'

Force labour may well be unpleasant, but what of its opposite 'forced unemployment' in the British building trade?   The evidence shows that the company Sir Robert McAlpine did for years finance the Consulting Association which engaged in the blacklisting of workers.  

Force labour may well be 'an unseen and evil practice that must be stopped', but isn't blacklisting mostly unseen?  Isn't blacklisting unseen carried out by furtive firms with nosey Human Resources staff and sleek, spying secretaries like the Consulting Association's boss Ian Kerr's wife?  

One of the directors of Sir Robert McAlpine is Cullum McAlpine, who was one of the defendants eight of the contractors involved in the High Court blacklisting trial have apologised “unreservedly” after they admitted using the secret database to vet workers.

Executives at the company, including Cullum McAlpine, a director and member of its founding family, were allegedly 'intimately' involved in the operation of a 'clandestine' organisation holding a list of people barred from the industry.

Mr. McAlpine was in communication with Ian Kerr, the director of the Consulting Association (TCA), the organisation which held the list on behalf of construction firms, up until it was dissolved, it is alleged.

It is further claimed that Kerr, when he was exposed and prosecuted in 2009, was warned of possible commercial repercussions for Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd if Cullum McAlpine's name emerged in public.

Cullum McAlpine has already admitted before a House of Commons committee three years ago that he was the founding chairman of the Consulting Association, the organisation that grew out of the ashes of the Economic League in 1993 to manage a list of construction workers considered ‘subversives’ and a risk to employers.   He admitted that he was responsible for the commercial success of the blacklisting operation.   However, he said that if there were names on the list that should not have been on the list, it was nothing to do with him or his company, as he merely used the service and was not in charge of running it.

 Never-the-less, the Scottish Affairs Select Committee that questioned Cullum McAlpine, declared that Mr. McAlpine's company ought not to be awarded public contracts.  His company pleaded guilty to Breach of Confidence; Misuse of private information; Defamation; Conspiracy; and Breach of Data Protection.

The defendants which included Balfour Beatty, Carillion, Costain, Kier, Laing O’Rourke, Sir Robert McAlpine, Skanska UK and VINCI – said their use of a secret database to screen potential employees 'infringed workers’ rights to confidentiality, privacy, reputation and, latterly, data protection'.

A statement issued jointly by the firms, known as the Macfarlanes defendants, added: 
'We accept that this had consequences for affected workers in terms of loss of employment, refusal of work, reduction in earnings and an impact on their personal lives.'

At a hearing yesterday, construction companies represented by Macfarlanes solicitors – Balfour Beatty, Carillion, Costain, Kier, Laing O’Rourke, Sir Robert McAlpine, Skanska UK and VINCI – said their use of a secret database to screen potential employees 'infringed workers’ rights to confidentiality, privacy, reputation and, latterly, data protection'.

A statement issued jointly by the firms, known as the Macfarlanes defendants, added:  'We accept that this had consequences for affected workers in terms of loss of employment, refusal of work, reduction in earnings and an impact on their personal lives.'

The trade union Unite said the confession that the workers on the list had been defamed was 'groundbreaking' and opened the door to larger payouts that could total tens of millions of pounds.

The ethical award that the company Sir Robert McAlpine has now received is assessed on 12 issue areas: Organisational Structure, Management Structure, HR, Procurement, Bribery & Corruption, Forums, Management Policies, Immigration, Supply Chain Management, Learning & Development, Reporting and Assurance & Compliance.
Sir Robert McAlpine’s most notable projects include the 2012 Olympic Stadium, Bloomberg’s new London headquarters and Victoria Gate retail development in Leeds.


*   24 January 2013 - The Institute of Employment Rights website:
Director of Sir Robert McAlpine Cullum McAlpine admitted using a blacklist to recruit for large public projects including the Olympics.
As a witness brought in front of the Scottish Affairs Committee, which is currently running an inquiry into blacklisting, Mr McAlpine claimed ignorance or a poor memory over many of the key issues, but confessed to heavy use of the Consulting Association's blacklist during 2008.
However, he stated that McAlpine was not using the blacklist to look for trade unionist activity, but to look for illegal migrants following a raid on one of its sites in previous years.
In fact, Mr McAlpine denied that his company - or any of Consulting Association's members - intended to use the blacklist to weed-out trade unionists and workers who were members of left-wing parties.

******

Ricky Tomlinson asks are you on the blacklist?

 Ricky Tomlinson in 2015 with an issue of Northern Voices in front of a Shrewsbury 24 banner

IN an electrifying moment on Channel 4 News, actor Ricky Tomlinson brandished a copy of the Economic League‘s North West blacklist, which blacklisted thousands of workers from industry jobs over several decades.  Now, The Canary can exclusively reveal an excerpt from that blacklist, along with other previously undisclosed documents from the company that produced it.
Only a handful of people possess copies of the entire Economic League’s North West blacklist.  The original was handed to the two founding members of League Watch – a campaigning group that monitored the Economic League (EL) – by an EL regional director turned whistleblower.  That was some 30 years back.
But on 8 August, Tomlinson – who appeared in a Ken Loach film, in the TV soap Brookside and in the TV series The Royle Family – produced a printed copy of that list with a flourish on Channel 4 News, inviting anyone who believes they are on it to contact him.  It was an electrifying moment that the Channel 4 News team failed to fully appreciate.
In the Channel 4 News interview, Tomlinson referred to his own entry on the list.  An abridged version is shown below.  He also made it clear that he is determined that the Pitchford Inquiry into undercover policing examines the Special Branch surveillance he believes he suffered for merely taking part in lawful industrial action.
 Tomlinson explained that the Pitchford Inquiry into undercover policing would not allow him to be a core participant because, while the existence of a Special Branch file is known, he had no evidence he was a target of such undercover policing by the Special Demonstration Squad. According to Pitchford:

'There is no mention of the Special Demonstration Squad in connection with Mr Tomlinson that I have been able to find. Special Branch files may be created from a variety of sources including the uniformed police, detectives, informers, police records and public knowledge.'

However, to quote Mr Tomlinson: 'My arse!'

Catch 22

Basically, Pitchford is saying is that Tomlinson, or anyone else for that matter, cannot be a core participant in the inquiry unless they can produce evidence that they have been victims of undercover policing – though the only way many victims can refer to such evidence is if the police are forced to hand it over.

Presently, Pitchford has not ruled on how much information he is going to compel the police to hand over. But, in refusing core participant status to those who have reasonable belief they have been monitored or infiltrated, he is creating a situation where there is a risk the inquiry will only focus on undercover officers who have already been exposed.
 Read more:
 https://www.thecanary.co/2016/08/12/ricky-tomlinson-produces-economic-league-blacklist-channel-4-news-listed-asks/
https://undercoverinfo.wordpress.com/2016/08/12/are-you-listed-on-the-economic-le...

Blacklisting & Construction Union Collusion Claim?

BELOW is the full text of the original Open Letter dated December 20, 2016, which may have forced the hand of Len McCluskey, the Unite general secretary, to agree to commission a barrister to examine allegations that union officials colluded with a covert blacklisting operation financed by major firms(with more names added):

OPEN LETTER FROM BLACKLISTED CONSTRUCTION WORKERS:

WE the undersigned, are writing this open letter in the spirit of fraternal debate amongst members of the newly merged UCATT / UNITE construction union.
The upsurge in industrial militancy in the last few years demonstrates that when the official union works alongside rank and file activists, it is possible to mobilise workers even in a hostile environment. The merger offers an opportunity to start anew the fight against the appallingly high fatality rates and casualization of the construction industry by combining the best traditions of the two unions.
However, one issue threatens to cause internal friction: possible union collusion in blacklisting.
Some years ago, both UCATT and UNITE carried out internal investigations into possible union involvement in blacklisting. But that was at a time when barely any of the documentation was available.
Since the High Court, all that has changed. The employers were forced to provide witness statements and disclose 40 years worth of documentary evidence. It is now in the public domain that officials in both unions were recorded as the source of information on Economic League and Consulting Association blacklist files. Some of those named, remain senior officials in UNITE and UCATT to this day. Every union activist in construction knows who the named officials are, as does every major employer.
The leadership of both unions have now seen the evidence: discussions about those officials potentially implicated in blacklisting or with overly cosy relationships with industrial relations managers has been part of the behind the scenes discussions in the run up to the merger.
The High Court litigation won a multi-million pound settlement for blacklisted workers. We fully acknowledge and recognise the tremendous legal, political and industrial campaigns that the unions have undertook.
But compensation is not the same as justice: there has still been no-one held accountable for their actions. We remain resolute in calling for a public inquiry into blacklisting. But that is for a future Corbyn government. Now is the time to put our own house in order.
We the undersigned call upon the new UNITE construction section to engage an independent legal expert to carry out a thorough investigation of the allegations relating to union collusion in blacklisting, with a remit drawn up in conjunction with the blacklisted workers. If the implicated officials are completely innocent, then this is their opportunity to clear their name once and for all.  But if the independent investigation concludes that there is a case to answer, then the union should take the appropriate disciplinary action. We are not looking for a witch-hunt, we simply want answers into possible union collusion in order to avoid repeating mistakes of the past.
This issue has haunted the union for years and until it is prepared to act, it will continue to be a running sore that hinders building unity in the newly merged union. We need to unite in order to fight against unscrupulous employers and the Tories, but the newly merged union needs to start with a clean slate.
We urge members to please attend your branch or regional meetings, and send a motion in support of an independent investigation to the UNITE EC.

Yours fraternally:

Blacklist Support Group

Construction Rank and File (national)

(plus in a personal capacity)

Steve Acheson – ex-UNITE branch secretary & safety rep

Dave Ayre – ex-Crook UCATT branch secretary

Royston Bentham – ex-UCATT steward & secretary UNITE Liverpool construction

Graham Bowker – treasurer UNITE Manchester contracting branch

Graeme Boxall – branch secretary UNITE London construction branch

Ian Bradley – UNITE London contracting branch

Terry Brough – ex-UCATT North West Regional Council

John Bryan – retired Bermondsey UCATT

Daniel Collins – UNITE London construction branch

John Connolly – UNITE Liverpool

Paul Crimmins – ex-UCATT branch secretary & steward

Dan Dobson – ex-UNITE SE construction branch secretary

Stewart Emms – ex UCATT full time officials

Peter Farrell – UCATT, Construction Safety Campaign

John Flannaghan – ex-UCATT, now UNITE

Jack Fawbert – ex-UCATT convener

Lee James Fowler – ex-offshore safety rep, UNITE

George Fuller – ex-UCATT safety rep

Jim Grey – Jubilee Line steward, UNITE London contracting

Jim Harte – chair UNITE Combine Committee

Brian Higgins – ex-UCATT Eastern Regional Council & branch secretary

Kev Holmes – chair, UNITE Manchester construction branch

Stewart Hume – UNITE construction NISC

John Jones – ex-UCATT London Regional Council

Tony Jones – UNITE Manchester construction branch

Bill Kaye – UNITE Eastern Region

Steve Kelly – Jubilee Line steward, ex-UNITE branch secretary

Stephen Kennedy – Jubilee Line steward, UNITE

Greig McArthur – UNITE construction NISC

Frank Morris –UNITE EC member for construction

Tony O’Brien – ex-UCATT Southwark convenor & branch secretary

Jason Poulter – secretary UNITE Manchester construction branch

Jim Ryan –Crossrail steward, UNITE London contracting

Tony Seaman – UNITE construction NISC

Pete Shaw – UNITE construction RISC, Combine committee

Dave Smith – ex-UCATT branch secretary & London Regional Council

Frank Smith – ex-UCATT branch secretary & steward

Billy Spiers – chair UNITE construction NISC, ex-AMICUS EC member

Tony Sweeney- ex-UCATT Liverpool convener

Colin Trousdale – ex-UNITE NW Region RISC

Victor Williams – Unite construction

'Builders crack' & Private Eye

THE current issue of Private Eye reports that '... after its dirty employment tricks were exposed, the (British) construction industry has finally - if reluctantly - agreed to cough up £75 m to settle the claim brought by hundreds of people who were unable to find work because they were on an illegal blacklist (Eyes passim).
'Hundred of victims are to receive between £20,000 and £200,000 for having their livelihoods blighted because they protested about safety or working conditions, or simply because of their trade union activities.... 
'Companies funded Ian Kerr, who had worked for the (Economic) League and who set up the Consulting Association to hold blacklisting files which also featured troublesome politicians, journalists, lawyers, and academics.  The full scale of the operation was exposed in 2009, when the Information Commissioner's Office seized files and shut down Kerr's outfit.  (Even then the practice continued, however.)
'As Roy Bentham, a carpenter blacklisted since 1995, told the Eye:  "They finally made us an offer we could not refuse, because of the threat of astronomical legal costs.  But it was to save their reputations; it wasn't about justice.'  As a Hillsborough survivor, he knows all about justice.  "It's about getting to the truth.  We want to know exactly who did what and who we ended up on the dole". 
'Despite the group apology from Balfour Beatty, Carillion, Costain, Kier, Laing O'Rourke, Sir Robert McAlpine, Skanska UK, and Vinci (companies involved since the 1990s), the Blacklisting Support Group cast doubt on its sincerity.  After all, the firms could have put their hands up when the Information Commissioner caught them red-handed...
'Nor is it lost on the workers that the companies preferred to pay fees to ranks of lawyers to protect corporate reputations and defeat claims, rather than offer reasonable compensation.  The legal costs for the case are estimated to total about £50 m for both sides - nearly the size of the compensation bill itself....
'Lawyers for the companies told the court they hoped the apology meant "this matter can be treated as a closed chapter".  Not so:  the blacklisting victims allege that some senior executives were involved in destroying evidence and a cover-up.  A detailed dossier alleging perversion of the course of justice is being prepared.  The victims may still have their day in court.'

Companies Coy About Admitting Blacklisting

Roy Bentham Denounces 'Failure of British Justice!'

THIS happened at the High Court today:

9:30am - John McDonnell MP joins blacklisted workers outside the High Court celebrating their legal victory against the major construction firms. McDonnell reminds the crowd how he chaired the first ever meeting of the Blacklist Support Group back in 2009 with less than 10 people present - but now we have won a famous victory. McDonnell tells the 100s of supporters and the world's media and his millions of twitter followers that 'compensation is one thing, justice is another'. 

10:30am - Roy Bentham, blacklisted carpenter from Liverpool, makes an application not to be bound by the settlement agreement but to be able to continue to the full trial representing himself.  Bentham tells the court how as a Hillsborough survivor he had waited 27 years for justice with many false hopes in courtrooms over the decades.  He explains that he wants to continue to ensure that those responsible for the blacklist are called to account:

'A bit of compensation here and there is not justice.'  

There was a spontaneous round of applause and cheering from the packed public gallery. 

Lord Justice Supperstone ruled against Roy and denied him the right to appeal. 

Responding Bentham said: 

'This will be judged in time because this hasn’t been justice today.  I look at the episode in this courtroom as a failure of the British justice system.'  

11am - Construction firms at the centre of the blacklisting conspiracy were forced to make a grovelling apology 'for the distress and anxiety caused to workers and their families'. A six page agreed statement (attached) was read in open court which reads like a history of blacklisting in construction from the 1960s, covering the covert operations of the 'Services Group' within the notorious Economic League until the discovery of The Consulting Association blacklist in 2009. Senior company directors including Cullum McAlpine are named in the statement which ends with an apology from the firms. 

While welcoming the agreed statement for putting on public record the shameful activities that have tarnished the reputation of an entire industry, blacklisted workers remain extremely skeptical about how genuine the apology really is.  Even now the firms cannot bring themselves to use the toxic word 'blacklisting', despite the British Parliament passing the Blacklist Regulations 2010 in order to outlaw the disgraceful practice as a direct response to the Consulting Association scandal. 

11:30am At the point where Caldercott QC apologised on behalf of the firms, the High Court hearing was interrupted for several minutes by chants of 'No Justice - No Peace' by blacklisted workers and an impromptu speech by Dave Smith who told the court, "Under no circumstances do we consider this to be a sincere apology."

12:00 - The judge rules the High Court blacklisting group litigation  is concluded - blacklisted workers, lawyers and supporters went to the pub to celebrate our victory. 

BSG would like to publicly thank all the legal teams who have worked on out behalf over many years but especially JC Townsend and Liam Dunne who have been with us from the very start.  Without GCR, there would not have been any High Court litigation. 

Blacklist Support Group statement:

"The victory in the High Court is vindication for our campaign..

The multi-million pound settlements are a major hit for any organisation. 

The admissions wrung out of the blacklisting companies are enormous.  

The grassroots campaign combined with the legal fight has brought us to this point. But the Blacklist Support Group do not agree with the wording of the apology, nor do we think it is sincere. 

The only thing the firms are sorry for is getting caught.

This is not the end of the matter - this is unfinished business. 

Blacklist Support Group demand a full public inquiry to fully expose the blacklisting human rights conspiracy and the collusion between big business and the shadowy anti-democratic elements within the police. We are hardworking men and women used to getting our hands dirty. We are not giving up until the job is completed

Full justice still needs to be fought for - but tonight we celebrate

All those who have stood with us over the past 7 years, raise a glass to celebrate".  

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/11/construction-firms-apologise-in-court-over-blacklist

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/business/news/payouts-for-blacklisted-workers-confirmed-amid-high-court-protests-34705298.html

http://m.building.co.uk/5081639.article?mobilesite=enabled

Blacklist Support Group

book: http://newint.org/books/politics/blacklisted-secret-war/

video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlCa8yQmZ70

blog: www.hazards.org/blacklistblog

facebook: http://www.facebook.com/groups/blacklistSG/

UNITE Report on Cullum McAlpine!

‘Blacklisting mastermind’ refuses to give evidence

Shaun Noble, Tuesday, April 12th, 2016

THE alleged architect of the construction ‘blacklisting’ scandal, Cullum McAlpine, has declined to give evidence in the High Court case, due to start next month, to establish the extent of wrong-doing in the industry.

Unite condemned the decision by Cullum McAlpine not to take the witness box as ‘a further gross insult’ to the thousands of construction workers who have lost their jobs because of the machinations of the secretive Consulting Association and Services Group of the Economic League.

The revelations about Cullum  McAlpine, a director of Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd, came when the companies’ evidence was filed for the High Court  trial which is due to start on Monday May 9 – and is expected to last 11 weeks.

The complex multi-strand case will centre on a number of key legal issues, including defamation, breaches of the 1988 Data Protection Act, conspiracy and misuse of private information. The outcome of the trial will determine the level of compensation those ‘blacklisted’ may receive.

Unite is supporting the claims of about 290 construction workers for damages for years of lost income because they were ‘blacklisted’. The claims are against Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd, Balfour Beatty Engineering Services and more than 30 other firms.

Unite also pledged to challenge Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd every time that the company tenders for future public procurement contracts, unless Cullum McAlpine gives evidence at the High Court.
 
'Despite last October’s unprecedented admission of guilt by construction firms involved in blacklisting, those that masterminded this campaign of blacklisting are still twisting and turning to avoid appearing in court where the media and public will be present,' said Unite director of legal services Howard Beckett.
 
'It is Unite’s belief that that Cullum McAlpine, as founder chairman, was the key architect in the operation of the Consulting Association until it was raided by the Information Commissioner in 2009.
 
'The fact that he is refusing to give evidence to help bring closure for the suffering that our members and their families have endured is shaming.
 
'You judge the character of a person if they are prepared to stand up and defend their actions in open court – you don’t skulk in the legal twilight protected by a platoon of expensive City lawyers,' Beckett added.
 
'How can a company run by a man who hides from his victims and the justice system ever hope to convince ministers that they have learnt from the sins of the past and deserve to be involved in public procurement contracts.
 
'Unite says loud and clear to Cullum McAlpine: Turn up and give evidence or expect your dispute with us to go on long after this litigation has concluded. We will object at every turn to your company benefiting from public procurement contracts.
 
'It is only now after sustained legal action, with the support of Unite, that the lid is being finally lifted on a scandal which has ruined countless lives and led to hardship for many more,” Beckett noted.
 
'However, the stain of blacklisting won’t be removed until there is a full public inquiry and the livelihoods of the blacklisted are restored by the firms involved giving them a permanent job,” he added.
 
'Many Unite members, who are the victims of blacklisting, have rejected the employers’ financial offers. The employers make mention of headline figures in regard to their top offers, but the reality is that they continue to attempt to buy off the majority of claims with low offers.
 
'The employers need to understand that compensation is only one part of the blacklisting struggle and until the employers are prepared to issue unreserved admissions as to the practices they undertook, prepared to disclose all documentation they hold regarding the blacklist and show a willingness to positively intervene in favour of employing victims then the fight goes on.'
 

Blacklist Companies Wave 'White Flag'

DURING yesterday's hearing at the High Court for the blacklisting group litigation conspiracy trial, the majority of blacklisting firms in the trial represented by McFarlands solicitors submitted a revised set of legal pleadings.  The document accepts virtually all of the facts about the workings of the Consulting Association blacklist argued by lawyers representing the 700 claimants.  Hugh Tomlinson QC representing the blacklisted workers called the revised document a 'radical transformation' and a move 'on the path to righteousness.' 

David Kavender QC representing the major blacklisting firms told the court that his clients effectively accepted vicarious liability for the misuse of the blacklist. The admission and apology is the result of High Court legal action by the Blacklisting Support Group, Unite, GMB, UCATT and  against 40 major construction firms involved in blacklisting through the secretive Consulting Association and Services Group of the Economic League.  Those companies include Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd, Balfour Beatty, Carillion, Costain, Skanska, Kier, Vinci and Laing O’Rourke. It is estimated that compensation payouts could be around £100 million.

Full implications are still to be discussed and agreed as most lawyers have only seen the revised pleadings today.  Other remaining blacklisting firms have not made any decisions whether they are to prepared to 'hitch their wagons to the McFarlands caravan.'  Lawyers for blacklisted workers will now be discussing their combined response.

Dave Smith, secretary Blacklist Support Group was in the court and commented:

'The blacklisting wretches have run up the white flag.  They are guilty as sin and this is a desperate attempt to to try and avoid the spectacle of a High Court conspiracy trail.  Personally, I want to see the directors of this national scandal given evidence under oath about their involvement in this systematic human rights abuse.  Real justice would see those responsible for ruining so many lives sent to jail.

'Unfortunately the British legal system is unlikely to provide real justice but we will continue to push for full disclosure of the evidence that has been deliberately concealed and a public inquiry to expose the full extent of this national scandal.' 

Commenting Unite assistant general secretary Gail Cartmail said:

'Blacklisting has ruined lives and led to hardship and misery for thousands of people. The admissions from the blacklisters and the damages for the blacklisted are an important step on the road to justice in righting that wrong.  That road won’t be completed though, or the stain of blacklisting removed, until there is a full public inquiry and the livelihoods of the blacklisted restored by the firms involved giving them a permanent job.  Those Tory ministers, who profess to be on the side of workers, while attacking trade unions should take note of these landmark admissions.  They need to drop their draconian Trade Union bill which will make it easier for bad bosses to get away with injustices like blacklisting.'

Notes:

Blacklist Support Group claimants represented by Guney, Clark & Ryan solicitors

UNITE represented by Thompsons solicitors

GMB represented by Leigh Day solicitors

UCATT represented by OH Parsons

Ethical Silence of the Grave

Trade Unions in a time of apathy

 

THE failure of the Unite North West Local Authority Regional Industrial Sector Committee, to seriously consider at a meeting on the 5^th, March, a motion from Bury Unite Commercial Branch on a proposed Ethical Procurement Policy for local councils is something which will raise a spectre of impotence for one of Britain's largest trade unions. 

 

Addressing blacklisted workers in March 2013, Michael Meacher told the Blacklist Support Group:

'You have been victims of the worst conspiracy of silence and inaction that I have ever known in my parliamentary life.'

 

In 2013, two academics from the University of Westminster published their research into industrial relations on the Olympics' building site in London.  Six union officials were questioned as part of the project.  Their names were with-held, but one union officer went on the record to say that blacklisting on the Olympics' site was 'one of the myths of the site'.  Commenting on this Dave Smith and Phil Chamberlain in their book titled 'Blacklisted:  The secret war between big business and union activists' write:

'It would appear that some officials, at least, still prefer the assurances of the major contractors over the "anecdotal evidence" of blacklisted workers.'

 

When Tameside Trade Union Council pressed forward with a motion together with the Greater Manchester County Association of Trade Union Councils at the Annual Conference of the TUCs in 2005, the Trade Union Congress later told us that the Labour government had stated that the evidence for a blacklist was only 'anecdotal'. 

 

Dave Smith and Phil Chamberlain conclude in their book's chapter 'How much did the unions know':

'The sooner the trade unions accept that there have been failings in the past, the sooner the clean-up process can begin.'

 

Smith and Chamberlain, while they 'make no accusations of illegality or deliberate collusion with blacklisting against any union official', elaborate their case further:

'The virtual conveyor belt of union officials immediately taking up posts as senior industrial-relations managers or consultants with construction firms after leaving office adds to the impression of a cosy club.'

 

Derek Pattison and I wrote in the conclusion to our book for Tameside Trade Union Council titled 'Boys on the Blacklist'  that '[There] seems to have [been] imported a climate of collusion between some paid union officials and some building site companies in which the union officials helped to identify individual workers.' 

 

And we were driven to argue that:   'The historic introduction of an American style of trade unionism through the Joint Industry Board (JIB) with the Electrical Engineers & Plumbing Trades Union (EEPTU) in the 1970s, may have been responsible for promoting this situation and creating this culture.'

 

Since we wrote those words we have both read what Jonathan Jeffries, who like me was involved with the TGWU in Gibraltar, he joined UCATT in London in the 1990s and told Smith and Chamberlain how unions recruit companies rather than workers:

'The contractor would suddenly bring in all these membership forms filled in, in a bundle and then deduct the subs.  This isn't the usual situation where an individual worker decides to join the union or a shop steward approaches them and recruits them.  This is their employer saying you have to be in the union.'

 

One sub-contractor, Michael Fahey of Daf Electrical Contractors Ltd., even told the Manchester Employment Tribunal in 2004:

'Amicus [trade union] is our union... we pay the union dues for the men.' (see 'Boys on the Blacklist')

 

In her evidence to the Scottish Affairs Select Committee the Assistant General secretary of Unite, Gail Cartmail said:

'Sometimes employers change tactics.  We have a prominent site in London with Crossrail, and there is evidence of a contractor company suddenly having a conversion on the road to Damascus and paying the trade-union contributions for its workforce.'

 

Jack Winder, former director of information and research at the Economic League, told MPs on the Scottish Affairs Select Committee;

'While I was with the League we had very good relations with certain trade-union leaders, who were concerned about problems caused by the far left.'

 

In the light of all this evidence of possible complicity one would have thought, if only to clear the air, that a Regional Industrial Sector Committee [Risc] sitting in Liverpool, with lay members on it,  would have been keen to consider a motion on the Ethical Procurement Policies of local Councils from the Bury Unite Commercial Branch.  The idea of ethical procurement being to ensure that local authorities don't continue to give public contracts to companies that blacklist workers.  What we have here is a kind of conspiracy by a class of bosses in the British building trade, that seeks to weed out people for raising problems of pay, conditions, health and safety.  Gail Cartmail in her e-mail to me describes 'blacklisting [as] a sin of employers'!   If that is the case ought not the North West Unite Local Authority Risc., chaired by Sid Grave, to have at least discussed the motion, and not to have met the proposal with the silence of the grave?

George Orwell said somewhere that all societies suffer from the problem of apathy, and in England trade unions like Unite demonstrate a degree of apathy when they fail to tackle motions over the blacklisting of members.  Yet, if such unions should consequently go on the challenge the freedom of their members to speak out about these things then they display a weakness of spirit and robustness, which suggests that they are about to go into decline.

Crewe Conference of Trade Union Councils

Where Are The Workers?

THE Sunday Times in an editorial following the May 2015 elections declared:

'Trade unionism is a minority cause.  The days of an economy dominated by large manufacturing industries are long past.  The proportion of private sector employees who belong to a trade union is just 14%.' 

Last weekend's Crewe Conference dramatically displayed the gulf between private sector trade unionism, and  public sector unions like the PCS.  Some eight Motions were dedicated to the attacks on trade unions and about half referred to the PCS union.  Other Motions  expressed concern about the representation of the working class following the defeat of the Labour Party in the General Election.   

A Motion 7. from Cardiff noted 'attacks by local government on union branches' and the 'clear intention of (Francis) Maude and the Tories is to destroy PCS financially by withdrawing the check-off from government departments'.  From the building trade, a UCCAT delegate questioned this domination of the public sector when things were so bad on the building sites, and the anarcho-syndicalist trade unionist Dave Chapple from Bridgewater TUC, challenged the call in Motion 17. from Merseyside TUC that the TUC should 'wave affiliation fees from [the] PCS [union]'. 

Similarly the reference to the 'blacklisting and victimisation of union reps' in Motion 7. must strike people working in the British industrial wild west of the building sites as strange, when they have suffered for donkey's years from blacklisting on a massive scale.  To a former blue collar worker like myself; the delegate from UCATT; the thousands of workers in the British building trade; and even a postman like Dave Chapple, the Secretary of Bridgewater TUC who said that his delegates 'would be displeased if the PCS delegates had their affiliation fees waved'; the plight of the PCS would seem somewhat feather-bedded.


In Spain, in the famous anarchist trade union, the CNT, there were times when the land-labourers of Andalucia had their union dues waved because of the hardship they suffered through the irregular work pattern in the field with unpredictable harvests:  the anarcho-syndicalist industrial workers in the factories of Catalonia and Barcelona were more than willing to shoulder the costs of their Andalucian brothers and sisters. 

But, comparing the English PCS union today to the Spanish trade union confederation the CNT of the 1930s is like comparing a white-collar pygmy to an industrial giant: it just doesn't bear comparison on any scale of reference. 
In 1966, I led a raid with group of Manchester anarchists on my local dole office in Rochdale to obtained a my labour exchange file.  When we examined my file compiled by Labour Exchange staff (the kind of people who are now members of the PCS) we found that it contained a section marked 'Derog' in this derogatory dossier, as part of my labour exchange record since I was involved in the national apprentice strike in 1960, there was a stream of derogatory references entered by those law abiding employees at the Rochdale Labour Exchange who had interviewed me over the years after I'd been sacked after the apprentice strike up to 1966 when we purloined my dole documents. 

It's nice to know that the people in the Labour Exchanges of the 1960s, and would now be members of the PCS union working in Job Centres, were routinely black-balling me back then and for all I know may still be blacklisting claimants now.  Yet, these people in the PCS, who operated as willing blacklisters of working people in the 1960s, are now asking me and my Trade Union Council for support because the Government, to which they have been for years the loyal  servants of the State is getting at them. 
I have a heart, but isn't this kind of cant and humbug asking rather too much of me under the circumstances?

Glasgow Rank & File Conference

From Building Workers' Charter to Blacklist Support Group

At last Saturday's Rank & File building workers' conference in Glasgow I was reminded that as a young electrician I first attended a meeting of the Building Workers' Charter in Manchester in 1970,  when Peter Turner, then an anarchist editor of Freedom and a joiner I knew from London, invited me to the event in Longsite.  At that time, the Building Workers' Charter attracted shop stewards from the sites of London, Liverpool and Manchester: the demand of the Charter at that time was for £35 for a 35 hour week.  It was estimated that at its peak in the strike of 1972, more than a quarter of a million building workers on 9,000 sites were involved in actions across the country.  In the end the building employers' federation approved the largest pay rise ever agreed in the history of the British building trade.  

An Economic League pamphlet quoted a National Federation of the Building Trade report about the 1972 dispute:

'The end result of the incidents recorded in this file was that small but well-drilled groups were able to hold to ransom a whole industry employing a million or more men and thereby cause incalculable damage and loss.'   

Later the bosses hit back which some now say resulted in the arrest, trial and ultimate imprisonment of the Shrewsbury pickets.     

Last Saturday's Rank & File building worker's Conference in Glasgow, was confronted with issues such as the blacklist, health and safety concerns such as the recent death of Rene Tkacik on the Crossrail project, and the victimisation of whistle-blowers such as the building Daniel Collins who was recently dismissed after he raised safety issues.  Helen, a representative of the solicitors Leigh Day, addressed the Conference about the Inquest verdict on the death of Rene Tkacik.  The Umbrella company scam was discussed, as  was Rule 17., and the use of agency workers on the building sites. 

Conference decided that it would engage in a series of actions across the country in the coming months against Scanska -  the company  involved on Crossrail, considering that 4,000 electricians were going to be engaged on the project.  Dates such as the 11^th and 18^th March were suggested, and Dave Smith of the Blacklist Support Group said that civil disobedience and direct action was going to be the way forward.  

Dave Smith distributed copies of the new book that he and the journalist Phil Chamberlain have written entitled 'Blacklisted:  The Secret War between Big Business & Union Activists' to those present at the conference.

 

A Guest Speaker - Ian Davidson, the Labour MP for West Glasgow, spoke at the meeting.  Mr. Davidson MP, was chair of the Scottish Affairs Select Committee investigation into blacklisting and he poured praise onto the campaigning work of the Blacklist Support Group, and ended his speech by saying that he supports the call for a full public enquiry into blacklisting as the only way of exposing the full extent of the conspiracy. 

During questioning from the floor Ian Davidson was asked by some of the building workers about the alleged involvement of paid trade union officials in both providing intelligence and enforcing the blacklist.  One speaker wondered what would happen if the names of full-time union officials implicated in the blacklist were revealed during cross-examination or examination in Chief, when the case goes to the High Court.  Mr. Davidson was careful in his reply saying that he had seen the item 'EEPTU says No!' in the blacklist files but said that he had seen nothing specific incriminating any individual trade union official. 

Floodlight of Publicity, 'Organisation' & Jim Pink!

Was Bob Miller a public figure?

THE father of Northern Anarchism, Jim Pink from Ashton-under-Lyne, who was in 1960s the international secretary of the anarcho-syndicalist Syndicalist Workers Federation (SWF), used to tell me that 'anarchists must always be ready for the floodlight of publicity to fall upon them.' Many English anarchists these days dread falling under the floodlight of publicity because they say that they have their 'jobs, careers and pensions to protect'.

'Jim Pink', as the engineering apprentices playfully used to call him after the national apprentice strikes in 1960, was really called James Pinkerton, was mentioned in a document circulated by the Economic League in 1964 to local employers in Oldham as being a political pal of mine, and was also accused of being a contributor to the paper 'Industrial Youth', put out by the Manchester Apprentice Wages& amp; Conditions Committee in the 1960s. Jimmy Pink was then a copy-taker at the Daily Herald and later worked in the same capacity for the Sunday People Copy Department. Although he insisted on describing himself as a 'syndicalist'as well as an 'anarchist', because he thought it was necessary to present a convincing organisational argument for social change to the public, and he felt it was harder to do that in England if one just simply called oneself 'an anarchist'.

Thus, what Colin Trousdale said at the branch meeting of the Manchester contracting electricians that the notion of 'anarchism'conflicted with that of 'organisation' * was not so strange if one of the most major intellectual figures of northern anarchism in the 20^thcentury, Jimmy Pink from Ashton-under-Lyne, believed the exactly same. Jimmy Pink thought that the Spanish tradition of democratic anarcho-syndicalist trade unions offered a possible alternative structure to that of parliamentary democracy: it was not totally proved in Spain that anarcho-syndicalism could offer a working alternative, but some like Pedro Cuadrado have said that anarcho-syndicalist Barcelona was the first city in the world to halt the march of Fascism in July 1936, and the Italian writer Ignazio Silone (the Italian Orwell) has claimed that the Catalans with their sprite of improvisation and initiative had qualities that the more disciplined German, Austrian and Prussian trade unionists and other north European's lacked. Colin Trousdale would do well to consider how George Orwell describes the efficiency and decency of the Spanish anarchists in his book 'Homage to Catalonia' published in the 1930s. 

The argument about Bob Miller and his obituary in Northern Voices No.13, revolves around the question of whether you regard Mr. Miller as a public figure. It boils down to this, was Miller sufficiently important to warrant an obituary? There are those that argue that he was not politically significant, and therefore his obituary ought not to have appeared a publication such as the Voicesthat appeals to Joe Public and sells outside the narrow political area, but we published an obituary for Harold Garfinkel in the same issue, and he is not a well known intellectual in this country this too was somewhat critical of the subject.  In the Miller case I was comparing Bob Miller from down South to Ken Keating from Salford, and I was much more complementary to Mr Keating than Mr Miller the schoolmaster, because I believed then and I believe now, that on balance Keating was the more distinguished 'anarchist' of the two. Some people obviously believe that I was not entitled to that opinion, but they should bare in mind that I was treating each man as representative of a particular type of 'anarchist' just as George Orwell referred to W.H. Auden and Stephen Spender as the 'Pansy Poets' and 'Parlour Bolsheviks' when he wrote a letter about them to Nancy Cunard. I have discussed this matter with Bob's son Tom Miller, and neither he nor anyone else has persuaded me to alter any of the views that I expressed in the original obituary, although I wish Tom when he rang me in November 2012, had kept his promise to write a letter of 300 words to Northern Voices putting the other side of the story. .

* Significantly Colin Trousdale made a comment about what he actually said:
'Colin Trousdale did not attack anarchists (at the branch meeting of the Manchester electricians - see post entitled "Laughter as Militants Mock English Anarchists!"), Colin Trousdale (me) laughed at the thought of Anarchists having a Federation/Organised structure which I feel flies in the face of my interpretation of Anarchy . NEVER MIND THE BOLLOCKS WE ARE THE SPARKS M/c CONTRACTING BRANCH. Brian please refrain from mis-quoting me in print to further your petty arguments that now having the benefit of both sides of the story I feel you were in the wrong about . This problem is hardly the re-unification of Ireland or the rights of Palestinians to live in peace in Gaza. Grow up.'