Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Bristol Bus Boycott

wiskey said:
I was just reading that, I'd never heard of it before. Interesting.
Click to expand...
it was on that Paul O'Grady working class programme in the first week. There is a thread on here and the consensus seems to be that the programme is a bit feeble, but I quite enjoyed it and learned about stuff like this I hadn't heard of
 
I faded out of the end of that telly show, it started off ok but got a bit dull. The second episode I found much more interesting.

I was thinking more about the fact that I've been to the revamped M Shed etc and don't remember it being mentioned there, but then perhaps when the child dictates the agenda I missed it.
 
wiskey said:
I faded out of the end of that telly show, it started off ok but got a bit dull. The second episode I found much more interesting.

I was thinking more about the fact that I've been to the revamped M Shed etc and don't remember it being mentioned there, but then perhaps when the child dictates the agenda I missed it.
Click to expand...

I'm sure I saw something on it there - but then the last time I went to M Shed I was ill and killing time before meeting my g/f for lunch so wasn't really concentrating on what I was looking at.
 
So (ignoring straight-forward racism) what was management's motivation ?
If the existing employees / union were worried about loss of overtime etc, surely management would have been all for it ?
 
gentlegreen said:
So (ignoring straight-forward racism) what was management's motivation ?
If the existing employees / union were worried about loss of overtime etc, surely management would have been all for it ?
Click to expand...
Combination of personal racism, racism projected on to their workforce, desire to keep labour they considered to be superior in a tight labour market.
 
a more in-depth article, including some quotes from managers here

gentlegreen said:
So (ignoring straight-forward racism) what was management's motivation ?
Click to expand...

a) belief that passengers would be frightened away

b) belief that existing (white) workers would start to leave the job

are the principal two apart from the obvious...
 
Puddy_Tat said:
:facepalm: (at them that is)

I can't find the answer, but I'm not entirely convinced that the conservative party of the day supported either the 1965 or 1968 race relations acts. Or the 1975 one.
Click to expand...

In terms of public institutions, I'd say unions were among the least racist in the 1960s... (and in this, and the 1955 West Brom strikes, union officials are important in gaining acceptance for ending the colour bar - not that they weren't shit in other ways and that union officials don't come with their own problems)
 
Lo Siento. said:
In terms of public institutions, I'd say unions were among the least racist in the 1960s... (and in this, and the 1955 West Brom strikes, union officials are important in gaining acceptance for ending the colour bar - not that they weren't shit in other ways and that union officials don't come with their own problems)
Click to expand...

Dunno really.

I think the picture was variable, and to be honest, I don't think the labour movement of the day was always entirely on the side of the angels when it comes to 'equalities' issues. There are no doubt good examples as well as bad.

But since the labour movement consists of rank & file members, local shop stewards and national leadership, there's always going to be some variance, and times when local workers / activists support unofficial action against the wishes of the HQ

There were (for example) disputes among London bus workers in the late 40s about the continued employment / recruitment of women conductors (women conductors had been taken on as a temporary measure during both world wars, but broadly were allowed to stay on once forces demobilisation got going after 1945, and recruitment of new women conductors continued.)

And there are recorded cases of organised labour not being supportive of rights for ethnic minorities - some (not all) London dockers went on strike and demonstrated in support of Enoch Powell, for example. The conservative party in the 50s / 60s was certainly not as antagonistic towards unions as the party of the Thatcher era was, and I believe there was a conservative trade unionist association at that time.

The reaction from within the labour movement / party to the "loony left" ideas that got floated in the early 80s (gay rights, anti racism, anti sexism and so on) was not universally positive.

Although in both cases it's probably the case that the labour movement of the day was more progressive than the conservative party of the day.

butchersapron said:
Did they vote against them?
Click to expand...

I don't know if the tories did vote against the race relations act/s either via a party whip, or whether many / most did on a free vote. I suspect they did, and note that all the race relations acts were passed by labour governments. I'd tried to find evidence that tories did vote against the act/s but failed to do so (the full parliamentary archive needs a login)
 
Puddy_Tat said:
I don't know if the tories did vote against the race relations act/s either via a party whip, or whether many / most did on a free vote. I suspect they did, and note that all the race relations acts were passed by labour governments. I'd tried to find evidence that tories did vote against the act/s but failed to do so (the full parliamentary archive needs a login)
Click to expand...

Against the whip it seems:

"That is why the action of the so-called "rebel Conservatives" in opposing the Bill in another place has, in my view, done a great deal of damage to the cause of racial harmony. They have, as Mr Powell did in his speech, provided a rallying point for race prejudice and ignorance. They have afforded a veneer of semi-respectibility, however slight and however nauseating, to those who think and act in terms of racial discrimination. The fact that some of them did not intend this to happen is neither here nor there. This is a fact which will be with us for many months to come."

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1968/jul/15/race-relations-bill
 
Puddy_Tat said:
Dunno really.

I think the picture was variable, and to be honest, I don't think the labour movement of the day was always entirely on the side of the angels when it comes to 'equalities' issues. There are no doubt good examples as well as bad.

But since the labour movement consists of rank & file members, local shop stewards and national leadership, there's always going to be some variance, and times when local workers / activists support unofficial action against the wishes of the HQ

There were (for example) disputes among London bus workers in the late 40s about the continued employment / recruitment of women conductors (women conductors had been taken on as a temporary measure during both world wars, but broadly were allowed to stay on once forces demobilisation got going after 1945, and recruitment of new women conductors continued.)

And there are recorded cases of organised labour not being supportive of rights for ethnic minorities - some (not all) London dockers went on strike and demonstrated in support of Enoch Powell, for example. The conservative party in the 50s / 60s was certainly not as antagonistic towards unions as the party of the Thatcher era was, and I believe there was a conservative trade unionist association at that time.

The reaction from within the labour movement / party to the "loony left" ideas that got floated in the early 80s (gay rights, anti racism, anti sexism and so on) was not universally positive.

Although in both cases it's probably the case that the labour movement of the day was more progressive than the conservative party of the day.
Click to expand...

I certainly think the trade unions could've done a lot more to tackle racism in the workplace, and there are a handful of examples of disputes where racist groups of workers used trade unions to exclude people. But given the levels of racism in society at large (one poll estimated support for Powell's speech at 74%), it's actually remarkable how few incidents there were - especially when you consider that for most workers in that period the trade union was their main means of expressing grievances.

I don't think you can hold the unions as institutions responsible for the attitudes of some of their members in Bristol, Wolverhampton and West Bromwich, and the response to such attitudes was universally that they didn't support a colour bar, and the workers should get back to work and accept it. And when the West Bromwich bus drivers brought a resolution on the matter to TGWU conference in 1955 it was easily defeated. So overall, I think you could say that the union as an institution was a force against racism, if not a very active one.

Beyond that, there's the extent to which unions were an institution in which black and south asian workers could and did participate (probably second only to churches in this regard), and by the 1970s, minority ethnic workers were actually more likely to be union members than white british workers.

In fact, I'd say the main criticism I'd make of trade unions at this point was not racist exclusivity, but actually their excess of ideological "colour blindness". One of the reasons why trade unions recruited among black and south asian workers was because their official ideology was that a worker was a worker was a worker. In the later period that manifested itself as a tendency to ignore problems that were specific to black and south asian workers or to treat them the same way they would any other dispute.

So you get something like the Imperial Typewriters dispute (1974), where the TGWU regional organiser responded to a wildcat strike by ignoring their grievances, and telling the strikers to go back to work. Now, that's what a local union official would have done with any wildcat strike (although from his public statements, the guy clearly was also a racist) - but he was clearly ignoring a load of factors which made his stance untenable: that the union organisation in the plant was the exclusive property of the white workers, that the shops where most of the workers were South Asian weren't being allowed to elect a steward, and were being discriminated against over pay and working conditions - things the union and the shop floor organisation would've usually responded to if they'd been white. By just saying "a worker is a worker", a lot of unions were blind to a lot of discrimination - and there's not that many cases where unions take action against discrimination until the 1980s (although there are a few, the stewards at Cowley forced management to end the practice of only employing white workers on assembly).
 
I only found out recently that bus company backed down on the same day as MLK's 'Dream' speech,a fact made better considering the organisers of the boycott were inspired by Rosa Parks and the American civil rights movement. Considering Britain's sensitivity at the time about its relationship with its former empire, the MLK story would have been a godsend as it totally overshadowed this event.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

gentlegreen
Bristol Centre fountains being filled in
Replies
2
Views
154
gentlegreen
gentlegreen
X
  • Poll
Bristol drinks. Early 2024.
2
Replies
45
Views
1K
Callie
Callie
B
Moved to Bristol a month and a half ago. WHEN WILL IT STOP RAINING?
2 3
Replies
64
Views
2K
Brainaddict
B
DaveCinzano
Underfall Yard in Bristol burns down 😱
Replies
14
Views
763
Dogsauce
Dogsauce
gentlegreen
Drum & Bass On The Bike - Sunday 2nd April starting 14.00 at the Bristol waterfront.
Replies
2
Views
331
gentlegreen
gentlegreen
Back
Top Bottom