Economic and Social History 2 B – Essay
1010781
Shaping strikes: Ideological myths or economical facts?
An essay about how strikes were shaped in the 1970s and 1980s in Britain.
In the narrative of the decline of Britain there is one key factor that is emphasised above all
others: strikes. Together with low productivity they are described as symptoms of a ‘British
Disease’.1 The cause of this all was the fact that from 1953 onwards there was a return of
major national, official strikes with the grandest strikes ever seen since the general strike in
1926. These strikes pushed up wages, costs, inflation and therefore caused ‘wage drift’.2 The
question arises: why did this happen? What factors contributed to scale of these strikes? How
are the shaped? Since Karl Marx one cannot view a strike or revolution of the working class
without connecting it with economic motivations. In Marx's opinion working conditions
worsen because of suppression by a immoral capital system that focuses on profit until the
working classes of the world rise against their government to create a system of equality.3 In
the case of Britain Marx's extreme ideology of the repression of the capitalist government did
not resonate as strongly in Britain as elsewhere, as Britain had experience in negotiation
between trade unions, employers and the government. It was believed that organised labour’s
cooperation was essential for the successful management of the economy. Therefore every
British government from 1945 onwards tried to establish a close working relationship with the
trade union movement. The post-war period is therefore, according to some scholars, also the
period of increasing power for the trade unions. Nevertheless this all changed with the arrival
of Margaret Thatcher in 1979. Her government wanted to reduce the power of the trade
unions because, according to her, they had a negative influence on the economy and were the
cause of the decline of Britain.
4
In line with this view, and with the development of this
narrative, ideology began to play a major part in the strategy of the state to reduce trade union
power and to move the economy back on track. Recent scholarship has also emphasised the
power of ideology in shaping government strategy.5 For these reasons the goal of this essay is
to focus on the way strikes were shaped in the 1970s and 1980s. Moreover the central
question will be: did economic or ideological forces shape strikes more? To answer this
question, first the general view of economic forces together with the view of ideological
Lecture by Jim Phillips: ‘Strikes and Disorder’ (03-03-2011).
Chris Wrigley, Trade Unions in Britain since 1933 (Cambridge 2003) 40-42.
3
Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto (1848)
4
Robert Taylor, The Trade Union Question in British Politics (Oxford 1993) 329-345.
5
Colin Hay, “Narrating Crisis: The Discursive Construction of the “Winter of Discontent”” in: Sociology 30
(1996) 253-277.
1
2
1
Economic and Social History 2 B – Essay
1010781
forces will be discussed. Secondly, one case study, the ‘Miners Strike’ of 1984/85, will be
used to analyse on a local level the way in which both forces shaped this strike.
Forces behind the shaping of strikes
Economic arguments, as stated, were quite common justifications for strikes as is confirmed
in recent scholarship. Chris Wrigley argues by constructing table 1 that the main cause of
strikes was related to wage issues, mostly raised by employees. Issues that were raised by the
employer were more closely related to discipline, staffing levels and redundancy but also
included factors arising from economic conditions. Inflation also plays a major part in these
conflicts because prices rose faster then wages. These statistics give an important insight,
however, care should be taken in interpreting their scope. Not all strikes were included and
the definition and measurement of a strike can vary significantly.6 So whilst wages are an
important economic shaping force for strikes they do not stand alone. Unemployment is
another economic factor however it is somewhat controversial. Some scholars argue that
when the labour market is strong and the unemployment levels are low economic conditions
are better than when it is up. A correlation can also be found between unemployment and
strikes. Nevertheless the unemployment levels cannot explain everything because a harsher
economical climate can lead to more unemployment but also to a rise in the struggle to stay
employed and therefore increase the rate of strike action.7 The last economic factor involved
in shaping strikes are those connected with region. In every region the circumstances are
different and so are the local economies. Knowles examined this, concluding that regional
variations could be explained by: “Certain sociological factors, rooted perhaps deeper in the
region than in the industries themselves”.8 Therefore the local conditions were also influential
however he concludes that “regional differences prove much slighter than the industrial”.9
Gilbert also emphasises the regional variations in strikes. According to Gilbert they
demonstrate the influence of the development of new industries in which the strike activity is
much lower than older industries. Moreover Gilbert points out that “the history of strikes also
exhibits some degree of ‘regional resilience’”.10
Wrigley, ‘Trade Unions in Britain since 1933’ 42-46.
Chris Wrigley, “Trade Unions: Rise and Decline” in: Francesca Carnevali and Julie-Marie Strange (eds),
Twentieth-Century Britain: Economic, Cultural and Social Change (Harlow 2007) 279-92.
8
Wrigley, ‘Trade Unions in Britain since 1933’ 47-49.
9
David Gilbert, “Strikes in Post-war Britain”, in: Chris Wrigley (ed.), A History of British Industrial Relations,
1939-1979 (Cheltenham 1996) 148-161.
10
Gilbert, “Strikes in Post-war Britain” 148-161.
Wrigley, ‘Trade Unions in Britain since 1933’ 47-49.
6
7
2
Economic and Social History 2 B – Essay
1010781
Ideological arguments shaping strikes are often disguised as economic arguments. In this view
the nature of a crisis is often exaggerated and the state together with the media creates their
own crisis through construction of economical causes. Colin Hay illustrates this through
analysing the ‘Winter of Discontent’ by arguing that Margaret Thatcher may even have come
to power as a result of the discursive construction of the crisis. Hay therefore summaries the
power of the state to create a myth perfectly by writing: “State power resides not only in the
ability to respond to crises, but to identify, define and constitute crisis in the first place”. 11 The
role of the media was central in this process to set the context and to convince people the
crisis was real and based on solid economic arguments. In this process the audience is
involved in an active process in which individuals for themselves decode the stories and
identify themselves with a particular subject. People therefore complete the story in the
newspapers with their own experiences of the constructed crisis. In this scenario Hay argues
that the power of the trade unions is extremely exaggerated. According to media and state
narratives trade unions and their strikes were the main causes of economic failure.12 A study
by Haas and Stack about strikes would agree because they argue that striking would become
less likely in societies that are in late stages of industrialisation. However they also point out
that “democratic political development” is important to sustain low strike activity.13
Democratisation could be accomplished by greater involvement of trade unions with the
government. However one of the largest changes in this period was in the political context of
industrial relations. Whilst trade unions initially enjoyed a strong position from which to
bargain with governments this position weakened in the 1970s and even more so in the 1980s.
Trade unions became more decentralised and operated mainly on a local level. This meant
that the trade unions did not possess the real bargaining power they used to have and held less
power on account of their membership. The image the state was constructing therefore did not
accurately describe the reality and appears closer to ideological myth. Nevertheless because of
the myth of strong labour unions, aggressive labour laws that made strikes less likely could be
justified. Moreover the economic policy could be changed from Keynesianism to
Hay, “Narrating Crisis: The Discursive Construction of the “Winter of Discontent” 255.
Colin Hay, “Chronicals of Death Foretold: the Winter of Discontent and Construction of the crisis of British
Keynesianism”, in: Parliamentary Affairs 63.3 (2010) 446-470.
Hay, “Narrating Crisis: The Discursive Construction of the “Winter of Discontent” 253-277.
13
Ain Haas and Steven Stack, “Economic Development and Strikes: A comparative Analysis”, in: The
Sociological Quarterly 24.1 (1983) 43-58.
Harvey S. James, “Economic Development and Strikes: An Examination of the Haas and Stack Model”, in:
Working Paper University of Missouri at Columbia – Agricultural and Applied Economics (1996) 1-14.
11
12
3
Economic and Social History 2 B – Essay
1010781
monetarism.14 However the direct impact of the changing government policy was not the most
significant factor in depressing the strike rate during this period. Some scholars suggest that
many of the strikes which took place in the public sector were triggered by the government’s
hostility. They argue that the harsher political climate for trade unions reinforced the harsher
economic climate and created a sharp rise in strikes.15 This presents the ideology of the
government as the main driving force for strikes.
The arguments for shaping strikes ideologically and through the politics of trade unions seem
convincing, however a comparison in strike activity with other countries is important. Table 2
illustrates the rate of collective action in other countries in the same period as Britain.
However measured, it seems that in almost all of the major West-European economies
industrial conflict increased in the 1950s and 1960s, reaching a peak in the 1970s and early
1980s, and has declined quite rapidly since.16 This shared patronage suggests that the most
important causes of changes in the level and nature of industrial conflict have been general
economic factors, because the ideological and political influences were different everywhere.
Therefore it becomes clear that these influences were also articulated and expressed in British
context. Nevertheless this does not exclude all other shaping factors.17 To get a better
understanding of the processes at work in a strike it is necessary to examine it at a
microscopic level. In this way it becomes possible to analyse how all the shaping processes
work together.
The Miners Strike
The miners strike of 1984-1985 was one of the strikes that took place in a period of high
unemployment, inflation and was for the most part aimed at maintaining employment. The
government wanted to close mines because they saw them as unprofitable. There was major
competition in cheap coal imports and from the nuclear energy program which the
government encouraged.
18
The trigger for the strike was the closure of the Cortonwood
Colliery, after which the miner's went on strike illegally without holding a strike ballot.
Therefore it was not possible to present a united front and to justify the legitimacy of the
action. Moreover the ideological narrative of the state contributed to a lack of public support.
Eventually the strike ended in March 1985 and the miners went back to work. This was a
Hay, “Chronicals of Death Foretold: the Winter of Discontent and Construction of the crisis of British
Keynesianism” 446-470.
15
Gilbert, “Strikes in Post-war Britain” 146.
16
Gilbert, “Strikes in Post-war Britain” 133.
17
Wrigley, ‘Trade Unions in Britain since 1933’ 49-54.
18
Hamish Fraser, A History of British Trade Unionism (Basingstoke 1999) 239-243.
14
4
Economic and Social History 2 B – Essay
1010781
victory for the Thatcher government. Jim Phillips argues that strikes have often been
overlooked as a ‘social phenomenon’ and that it would be useful to also look at the
background of the miners themselves to examine what shaped the strikes. According to
Phillips the ‘Miners Strike’ should be seen as: “a direct product of a workplace conflict as
well as the consequence of deteriorating peak levels relations in the context of coal’s
diminishing market position”.19 He argues that the strike was not imposed on the miners in a
top-down manner by an ideologically rigid national union leadership. Moreover it should be
seen as resistance to the managerial strategy of cost control trough pit closures and the
downgrading of joint industrial regulation.20 The difference in collieries and communities
where the miners worked and lived also had a large impact on the way in which the strike was
shaped. In this respect individual and not nationwide developments and attitudes were crucial
and these were normally based upon economic factors. Influential variables included quality
of management-worker relations, the miner's contrasting age profiles that determined their
view of their own future, the variable weight of political traditions and the economical and
cultural support of women.21However ideology also plays part in the way this strike was
shaped. It was the government's strategy to close the mines on ‘economic’ grounds.
Conversely there was a great deal of debate as to whether this was actually accurate because
the mines had higher social costs of ‘non-production’ than private mines. Therefore it could
be an ideological construction by the media and the state. Nevertheless there was also a strong
correlation between relative good financial health and strike endurance in 1984-1985. So it
seems that economic factors were a decisive factor here also because the strikes in collieries
that were relatively financial healthy lasted longer. This could be simply because they had
more to defend.22
Conclusion
First it should be noted that in shaping a strike there are always several factors at work, not
only economic and ideological ones. All influence each other and lend the whole process it's
complexity. However in my analysis and the case study of the ‘Miners Strike’ it seems that
the economic conditions had the greater influence in shaping strikes. The reasons for striking
are almost always economic ones and begin with the dissatisfaction of individuals about their
Jim Phillips, “Workplace Conflict and the Origins of the 1984-5 Miners Strike in Scotland”, in: Twentieth
Century British History 20 (2009) 152-72.
20
Phillips, “Workplace Conflict and the Origins of the 1984-5 Miners Strike in Scotland” 152-72.
21
Jim Phillips, “Collieries and Communities: the Miners Strike in Scotland, 1984-5”, Scottish Labour History,
45 (2010) 1-19.
22
Phillips, “Collieries and Communities: the Miners Strike in Scotland, 1984-5”, 1-19.
19
5
Economic and Social History 2 B – Essay
1010781
work. As seen in the ‘Miners Strike’ people resisted the closure of their pits and this had no
ideological justification. It was the individual's own reasons including dissatisfaction with
management-worker relations and the context in which a person lived that determined
whether they would strike or work and that shaped these strikes. Also the comparative study
indicates that even excluding these local economic conditions there is also an influence of a
wider global economic system. Nevertheless the ideological aspects are also important,
especially in the aftermath of a strike. The way in which strikes are described in the media
and the reasons governments give to justify a crisis are also important. However these
ideological narratives also always use economic situations or conditions to justify their view.
Table 1
6
Economic and Social History 2 B – Essay
1010781
Table 2
Bibliography:
7
Economic and Social History 2 B – Essay
1010781
Fraser, H. A History of British Trade Unionism (Basingstoke 1999).
Gilbert, D. “Strikes in Post-war Britain”, in: Chris Wrigley (ed.), A History of British
Industrial Relations, 1939-1979 (Cheltenham 1996) 148-161.
Haas, A. and Stack, S. “Economic Development and Strikes: A comparative Analysis”, in:
The Sociological Quarterly 24.1 (1983) 43-58.
Hay, C. “Narrating Crisis: The Discursive Construction of the “Winter of Discontent”” in:
Sociology 30 (1996) 253-277.
Hay, C. “Chronicals of Death Foretold: the Winter of Discontent and Construction of the
crisis of British Keynesianism”, in: Parliamentary Affairs 63.3 (2010) 446-470.
James, H.S. “Economic Development and Strikes: An Examination of the Haas and Stack
Model”, in: Working Paper University of Missouri at Columbia – Agricultural and Applied
Economics (1996) 1-14.
Marx, K. The Communist Manifesto (1848).
Phillips, J, “Workplace Conflict and the Origins of the 1984-5 Miners Strike in Scotland”, in:
Twentieth Century British History 20 (2009) 152-72.
Phillips, J. “Collieries and Communities: the Miners Strike in Scotland, 1984-5”, Scottish
Labour History, 45 (2010) 1-19.
Taylor, R. The Trade Union Question in British Politics (Oxford 1993).
Wrigley, C. Trade Unions in Britain since 1933 (Cambridge 2003).
Wrigley, C. “Trade Unions: Rise and Decline” in: Francesca Carnevali and Julie-Marie
Strange (eds), Twentieth-Century Britain: Economic, Cultural and Social Change (Harlow
2007) 279-92.
8