An Interview With Ian Lavery, President of the National Union of Mineworkers
By Wray, David
This interview with Ian Lavery, president of the National Union of Mineworkers, was conducted at Ellington Colliery shortly after its closure in January 2005. The interview covers his early introduction to the industry and concludes with his perceptive and optimistic view of the future of the industry to which he and so many others have dedicated their lives.
Can you tell me a little about your family history in relation to mining?
My father was a miner all his life, as was my grandfather. My great-grandfather came from Ireland to work in the mines in the North East coalfield, and that’s where it started on the Lavery side of the family. On my mother’s side, the mining runs back generation after generation. So basically, I come from a family that is of 100 per cent mining stock.
Have these people always been closely involved in the union?
No, not necessarily. My father was a staunch trade unionist without ever taking a position in the union. He was one of the lads that were really well respected at the pit, and you need these guys that aren’t on the union to monitor what the union is doing. People like that are important. He was a big strong man, with a lot of influence and, you know, he always supported the union. He would attend all the union meetings while not many did. On my mother’s side, the majority of the family working in the industry were officials, on the management side-senior colliery overmen and jobs of that nature.
So where did you start work?
When I left school I went into a youth training scheme, and then went onto the building sites. When they started taking men and boys on at the pits in the January of 1980,1 got a start at Lynemouth colliery. Six months after that I got the opportunity of a mining craft apprentice, which was an excellent prospect at the time. You got your face training early, which was a big thing, because in a very short space of time you were making good money at the coalface. After six months I was transferred to Ellington Colliery and went to college and I got my HNC in mining. They wouldn’t allow me to go for the HND, but that’s another story.
What were your feelings when the strike broke out?
When it started, we had these mass meetings and I thought it was tremendous that people were sticking together, and I hadn’t seen it before. Most people had seen this togetherness in the disputes in the strikes in 1972 and 1974, but I hadn’t seen any type of industrial action on a scale of that nature. I thought it was tremendous that people stood by each other. I was on the picket lines, which was unusual bearing in mind I was doing a management course at the time. The union agreed that indentured apprentices should go to work with the blessing of the union.
I spoke to my father about this because he and my three brothers worked in the industry as well, and we were all living at home together. When I told him I had the opportunity to go to work, he said it doesn’t matter what the union say: if you go to work you’ll be classed as a scab. That was one of the best pieces of advice I’ve ever had, and I was, as far as I am aware, the only apprentice in the North East area that refused to go to work. So that’s what happened when the strike began and I was very active from day one. In fact, I think I can claim to be the first man arrested on a picket line in Northumberland. It was at Blyth Power Station in the second week of the strike. I went to the picket line in the car with my father, and by the time he parked the car and got to the picket line, I had been arrested. We were all pushing and this policeman kicked me, so I kicked him back, and was arrested. I think that arrest changed the rest of my life. I was always politically motivated, always had been, but not involved, and then the strike just swept me off my feet. Anyway, I was arrested six or seven times during the strike.
And you managed to get through the strike without being dismissed?
Yes. My arrests were all for minor offences, basically just pushing the police, and not for offences deemed serious by the National Coal Board (NCB). However, I was involved with the police over a number of things shortly after the strike, because of my activity during the strike. On several occasions after the strike they let me know that they were going to get me, and they did. I was arrested for football hooliganism; they said I ran towards 500 Manchester United supporters to try and start a fight. I know I’m a big lad, but I’m not stupid. They arrested me and threw me in the van and assaulted me. I had to have part of my ear stitched because they had torn it in the assault. One of them spat in my face, which is the most humiliating experience of my life. In court, they told lie after lie, and I was fined 1,000. That is why I have absolutely no respect for the police.
When the strike broke out, what were your initial thoughts about it?
Some of the lads at Ellington thought it wouldn’t affect us, that we’d have a ballot and get things sorted out. Then we heard that that there were pickets from Durham, Scotland and Yorkshire coming to the pit gates. I wasn’t trade union motivated at the time, not like my father, but I knew that if there are pickets you don’t cross the line, so I didn’t even go to work. I’ll be honest with you, I think it took me five or six days to begin to understand that it was about pit closures, communities and jobs, not about wages. At a huge meeting in Ashington, the Area union officials explained the closure of the five pits, and that a ballot would be held, although I personally didn’t believe we should have a ballot.
You mentioned the ballot, which was one of the great issues of the strike. Can you explain your feelings about the ballot?
I think ballots are fine, if everyone at the end of the day is going to have to experience the same outcome. I didn’t think it would be morally right that miners at Ellington, which at the time had a huge future, should have the right to vote someone else out of a job. That is something that I have never changed my opinion about. We had a ballot in Northumberland and we lost it, 51 per cent to 49 per cent, but the Area officials decided that because the result was so close, it would be better if we went on strike anyway, so we did. The ones that said we should have had a ballot were the ones who were against the strike, and wanted an excuse not to support the strike. We had a national ballot in 1978 over the issue of the proposed national bonus scheme. We voted against that, but in a matter of weeks, miners in Nottingham ignored the ballot result and signed up for the bonus scheme-the same Area that used the lack of a ballot in 1984 as an excuse to work. I am positive that a ballot wouldn’t have made any difference, but it gave people-the likes of Neil Kinnock and others-an opportunity to have a go at the NUM. We didn’t need a national ballot. Even so, I think if we’d had a national ballot we would have won anyway.
What was the atmosphere following the return to work?
It never recovered, because those who stuck the strike out knew that it was the end of the industry. A lot of friendships were broken through people breaking the strike, and we saw the development of teams of men who went back to work and teams of men who didn’t. You saw men who were loyal to the union working with scabs, and there was a lot of discontentment underground. There wasn’t a lot of viciousness, but those grudges are still held today. I was at my father’s grave the other day, and this man came up and said to me, ‘Aye Ian, your father was a good man and I often come to his grave. We grew up together and worked together, but we fell out because he couldn’t understand why I had gone back to work and he never spoke to me again’. I said to him, ‘I’ll tell you what, I agree with him. You shouldn’t have gone back to work; you were a scab then, and you’re still a scab’. I was really pleased that it happened because it reinforced what I felt about my father. Being a scab is something that they will have to take to their graves. The vast majority who went back to work at Ellington had only done so a week or so before the end of the strike. They have lived with that ever since, because as I said, if you go back to work you are a scab, and you stay a scab.
Of the workforce of Ellington, how many returned to work before the end of the strike?
I think it was about 70 per cent, but if you speak to everybody, there’s none that went back. That’s what’s called rewriting history. So there was a lot of people back at work at the very end, which wasn’t any different to most places. Up to Christmas we were still fairly strong, but then the NCB started to offer bribes to get people back. They would offer bonuses; they said you would save the pit if you come back. They said there had been a fire underground and they needed people back, which was a lie. They said there had been a major fall as well, but we got union officials underground and saw that the stories were not true. They were just attempts by management to get people to come back to work. They knew that once you get some people through the gates, then that’s it, others would go back.
What was your job history after the strike?
When I went back after the strike, I was still in my l\ast year of my HNC at college. I was getting a bit of stick from management, but that was fine because I actually enjoyed it, and in 1986 I was elected onto the union committee at Ellington. I had been faced with a choice, because I was offered some pretty attractive jobs that would have taken me away from the union. It wasn’t a hard choice, because I probably made it the first day of the strike. I knew my beliefs lay with the union, and it’s amazing how you follow your instincts and you make the right choice. It was making that choice that prevented me from moving on to the HND. I was the only one in the whole of the North East Area who had completed the HNC who wasn’t given that opportunity. I went to see the manager, not that I would have gone by the way, and he said that they didn’t think I would be interested. I asked him if he had thought to ask me, and he said no, not really, and he was smiling as he said it. That was fine by me because I was on the union committee by that time and then became the compensation secretary. Shortly after that I became the assistant secretary/compensation secretary, and was voted on to the Northumberland Executive Committee, and then on to the North East Area Executive Committee. The choice was either take a job in management or stick to your beliefs, so I went with the union.
What were your feelings as a trade union official?
Absolutely fantastic. It meant that I met with management all the time and they came to despise me with a great passion, though probably not as much as I despised them. At that time at Ellington we had probably thirty-five productive units, all of them with different bonuses, and I was in charge of those negotiations. It was a very important job, and you had to know what you were doing.
My education really helped, because I could go in there and everything was fresh in my mind, particularly the legislation. If you can bury the management in legislation you’re on a winner. I was going to meetings with management and they didn’t have a clue, and I was saying ‘you should look up regulation such and such’, and they didn’t like it.
With the bonuses, they had a clerk who used to come in and say, ‘if you reach this target we’ll give you this much bonus’, without taking account of all the variations that can exist underground.
I would work out all the variations, and say ‘if you set that target the men will get that bonus’, and when they had worked it out they saw that I was always right. It really was a superb job, and that was my life at Ellington until 1992, when I became a full-time official.
Can you tell me a little bit about the reorganisation of the union since the strike?
In 1998 there was an amalgamation between the Northumberland Area and the Durham Area. It was a forced amalgamation by the National Executive Committee. It was a restructuring that should probably have happened years before, but the Areas were like fiefdoms and changes were resisted because it meant an end to the power local officials had. When our amalgamation took place everything was voted on, and the three officials of the North East Area all came from Durham because that was the largest area. Despite that amalgamation, we retained both the Northumberland Area and the Durham Area. These operate more than the North East Area does now, because they deal with compensation claims, etc. Northumberland and Durham still operate separately on most things, but officially it is the North East Area that is the umbrella organisation for the NUM in the region.
What was your first full-time job with the union?
I was elected as the Northumberland Area secretary and Ellington Colliery secretary, so I was funded from both. I was asked if I would consider standing for these positions, which I was absolutely delighted to do. There was one sticking point though, which was the issue of my redundancy. I was told that I must have my redundancy, which would have been about 25,000 to 26,000, but I said that there was no way I would accept redundancy. They said I had to, so I said the deal’s off then, I won’t stand. They were the ones who gave in. Again, I think this was a very wise decision, because no one can ever accuse me of taking my redundancy from the mining industry. Some people said take it and give the money to the sacked miners, and I said that’s a great idea, but they’ll still be able to say I took redundancy. I’ve stood on platforms ever since then, telling people they mustn’t take their redundancy and I can hold my head up high when I do so, and I can say in all honesty it’s probably the best money I’ve ever spent.
How did you become involved at a national level?
In 1992, when they announced the hit-list of thirty-one pits, certain people asked me if I would stand for the National Executive Committee. At that time we had two representatives on the NEC from the North East Area, and because of the reduction in membership, that was being reduced to one. So I said, OK, I’ll stand. We didn’t have a good relationship with the Durham Area at the time, with a lot of in-fighting between Durham and Northumberland, particularly because Ellington was seen as a right-wing pit, which I thought was unreasonable. I think it might have served a political purpose for those in Durham to see us like that, so when I was asked to stand I said yes. In the ballot, I was elected in the first round having gained more than 50 per cent of the vote, and I’ve been on the Executive Committee ever since. Ellington might have been a right- wing pit at one time, but I think we had turned it around once I become secretary. We got the membership’s confidence up by speaking to them and educating them. When I say educating them, it was educating them to understand what we should be doing as a union. As a result, we were able to organise a strike against the use of contractors that wouldn’t have happened a few years earlier.
Can you tell me a little about this strike?
They were getting rid of people by offering them redundancy packages and then bringing contractors in to do their work. Some of the contractors were the same ones who had taken redundancy, and they were coming back on hopeless wages. The strike got us a guarantee from the NCB that they would stop bringing contractors in. So we did turn this pit around and we got a change of reputation, where people saw we were prepared to fight.
So then you were on the National Executive Committee.
Yes, I was elected to the National Executive Committee, and the Durham Area was not very happy, because they had been the leading lights in the North East Area. It was a bit of a hostile campaign because they wanted the seat for themselves, which I can understand because I would have been the same in their position. I think it’s called politics; it’s a dirty game. It’s all changed now, and we’re all close personal friends. It changed because we realised that we weren’t too far apart. You go to a lot of conferences and meetings and we realised we were all fighting the same battles, and that we needed to get rid of trivialities. We held a lot of meaningful and deep discussions about the future of the industry and what would happen to Northumberland and Durham, and how best could we achieve things for the members, instead of looking at who should have this and who should have the other. I think once we had realised that, the personal relationships grew. Unfortunately, we have no pits left in the North East Area, but we have a great relationship. I have the utmost respect for the North East Area officials.
Was there a big change in the industry following privatisation?
Huge, but not at local level because they were the same managers we had prior to privatisation. When the industry was privatised in 1994, Ellington Colliery had been put on a ‘care and maintenance’ basis, so we weren’t sure whether it would ever open again. However, it reopened in 1995 under RGB Mining, and the whole of the management structure was different. There were only 450 men working at the pit as opposed to the 2,500 men who worked there prior to the ‘care and maintenance’ period, so there was a lot less activity underground. The wages were a lot worse than they were under nationalisation, because due to the ‘care and maintenance’ period, the men had been made redundant and were consequently not protected by the ‘Transfer of Undertakings’ (TUPE) legislation when they came back. One of the problems, of course, was that the management knew who they wanted to take back and who they didn’t. For example, there was no trade union official taken on until after I had threatened the manager with a press conference. What was it like? Well, history tells you privatisation is a bad thing, and it’s proven to be the case. We’ve seen a reduction in wages and terms conditions, to get what they see as a lean industry, which is a disgrace. It was also divisive as pits like Ellington and Rossington in Yorkshire were not protected by TUPE, and were working for worse wages and conditions than the rest of the industry, and then you had Nottinghamshire and the Union of Democratic Miners protected by the employers. It was a whole mixed bag because they were trying to fragment the workforce.
Unfortunately, the redundancy culture was very important within the industry because everybody wanted redundancy, and a lot still do. It’s human nature-if there’s a possibility of a large sum of money, and you’ve never had money, you’re tempted. Some miners thought 30,000 was a lot of money-that they could retire on that. By the time you give your wife the money for a new carpet and then you get a new car and have a holiday, you’ve got nothing left. Redundancy has been a huge problem since the strike, right up to the present day. People have focused on a redundancy package which they think they’ve got to have, rather than fighting for their jobs. I think redundancy has been another thing that really affected the i\ndustry.
Tell me how you became chairman of the NUM.
Well, I’ve been afforded the great honour of being the chairman of the NUM. The only regret that I have is that I’m not at Ellington anymore. I became chairman when Scargill stepped down in August 2002. I was elected through the normal balloting procedures, but I wasn’t opposed. Every Area of the union supported me, I think because a lot of people thought I was the natural successor to Arthur Scargill. At conferences and meetings, people are always looking to see who will take over from who; who’s been in the movement for years, or who will do the best job. It happens in all walks of life, and I think that I must have impressed people somewhere along the line because I was nominated by every single Area-South Wales, Scotland, Yorkshire, Midlands, COSA, Northumberland and the North East Area. I was very pleased about this and very proud that so many thought I was the right man for the job. I would have happily gone to ballot with anybody, because that’s democracy, but I was delighted to be unopposed. I have to say that I don’t think there were many people that could have kept all the different Areas happy because the politics within the national union is just unbelievable. But I think we’ve turned all that around now, and I think there’s some general and genuine trust in me. I spoke to people, asked for their support, and gave a few guarantees, and it worked.
What have you learned since taking the leadership of the NUM?
The main insight I have had in the job is that you see things in a completely different light; you see the things that are happening in different areas and at different collieries. I’ve come to see what a really bad employer we have in UK Coal. They are hell-bent on furthering UK Coal as a property developer, rather than as a mining business, which presents us with problems. On one hand we’ve got a government who say they are committed to coal, and on the other you’ve got a company who say they are not committed to coal, and it is the company that are in charge of the coal reserves. It’s a huge problem, and we’ve highlighted this; I’ve met Blair, and I’ve met anybody who will help us highlight the situation. UK Coal is worth about 170 million on the stock market, but the land they own is worth 250 million. Now you tell me where their interests lie. At this point in time, we’re trying to get the government to take back what we have left of the industry. Last year we produced between 15 and 20 million tonnes of coal; however, in the same year we imported 36 million tonnes into Britain. We’ve got the coal here, and now we can produce it cheaper than you can import it. Oil prices are higher than they have ever been since the Arab-Israeli war, in excess of $55 a barrel. Some energy analysts are arguing that oil could actually get to $155 a barrel, and you know what will happen to the economy if that’s the case. The people of this country aren’t very happy with nuclear power, so any extension to the nuclear industry will be difficult to achieve, particularly because of the expense of dealing with the waste. Which leaves gas, which is becoming increasingly expensive, and which we’re going to have to import from the most unstable of countries. By 2020 we are going to be importing 90 per cent of our energy requirements, and 70 per cent of that is going to be gas from countries such as Iraq, the former Soviet Union and Algeria. Coal is now at a premium, somewhere around about 1.80 to 2 per gigajoule, which translates to around about 48 a tonne. If you add to that the situation caused by the economic development of China and India, the price of coal will go through the roof. These issues will have a major bearing on solving our national energy needs in the future. If we can produce coal cheaper than we can import it now, and if the price of coal is going to increase, why do we not plan to meet the nation’s needs for coal here in the UK? The problem, and I keep telling people this, is privatisation. The industry needs a huge injection of cash to develop and redevelop the UK coalfields. For example, here in the North East we’ve got a huge Klondike of coal in the Amble area here, and under what was Wearmouth Colliery. It’s the same all over the UK, and just under Easington we have 300 million tonnes of good coal. Things appear to be moving in this direction with the Markham project in South Wales under consideration for re-opening, and in Scotland, Scottish Coal are currently drilling. So you can see if there was money injected in the industry that we could produce a lot more coal, and I’ve got to say that it’s got to be government money.
So you think there will be an expansion of the coal industry?
Without a doubt, I think you’ll see collieries in Northumberland and Durham and I think you’ll see the Markham project take off in South Wales. I’m not sure what will happen in Scotland, but you know there is potential there for them to reopen the coalfield. You see at the moment, people can make fortunes from coal, and when you can make a fortune from anything, people will try, it’s as simple as that. I think the problem is in convincing the government about the role coal should play. At the moment, they are convinced that UK Coal is doing a marvellous job. We are in the process of trying to change their mind of course, but it might be too late. Our position is that we should have some sort of non-profit company, similar to Railtrack, where the government would ensure that any profits would be put straight back in the industry. The other thing, of course, is clean coal technology. We have to seriously look at the development of clean coal technology, because the environmentalists are probably right. It’s a fact of life that we can’t keep on burning carbon fuels and eating away at the atmosphere. There is a lot of talk about renewable energy, but whether we like it or not, renewable energy is not the answer. You see bloody windmills all over the place, but they are not the answer. So if we look to the future, coal should be right there at the top of the pile, it really is the fuel of the future. Coal is the cheapest option, it’s the safest option, the best option. We’ve got the coal, we’ve got the technology, and we’ve got the workers, so why not dig it? Why not provide some stability, some security to the country’s energy needs? Why rely on other countries to keep us afloat, because I’ve got this great fear that they’ll eventually hold us to ransom. We’ll be relying on other countries, such as the ones I’ve already mentioned, to keep the lights on, to keep our hospitals and schools open. So the future should be rosy, and I’ve heard this for years, and so have you, that coal will make a comeback; but I dearly believe that coal will make a comeback within five to ten years. I think it’s nothing short of certain, because our options are very limited if we are going to avoid an energy crisis.
You’ve told us your views on the future of the coal industry-can you end with your views on the future of the trade union movement in the UK?
I don’t think it’s my place to talk about specific unions, but there are some general things that I would say, particularly about the NUM. I don’t believe in the American-style ‘superunion’ that seems to be the fashion, because I believe that there should be a relationship between the unions and the communities they recruit in and serve, because that’s the best way to represent people. If you ask any NUM member, even if they dislike the leader or they dislike their local officials, they always feel they’ve had good representation from the NUM, because the union is part of their communities. That’s why I’m not keen at all on these super-unions, because I believe that you have got to be in there at the grassroots level. People have got to know who their union representative is, and they have got to know that if they pay their dues, then the union will be there to represent them. You’ve got to be in the trade union movement for the right motives and the right reasons: those are to protect yourself and to protect others.
The NUM has a proud history in those respects, as well a proud heritage, and a proud culture, and I think that we could do more in the mining communities to help former miners. We are doing a lot in that respect, but I think we could do more. Here in Ellington, we get people coming in every week with problems. It might be a housing benefit problem, financial problems, anything, it doesn’t matter because we are here for them. People are aware that we are here and I’ve given a pledge to everybody in Northumberland that the union will not leave them, and it’s the same around the coalfields-or should I say, ex-coalfields. The jobs might be gone, but the people are still there, and so too is the union. The union officials are still carrying out their work in a voluntary capacity. These people are needed, because if you look in Northumberland or Durham-at Easington for example-you see it’s a God-forsaken place.
Mining communities were thriving places and the vast majority all worked at the pit, and things were always sorted out through the union, all their problems. People in power now tell them they have to move on, leave the past behind, and it’s an absolute joke because thirteen years after the last pit was closed, there’s still nothing in the communities to replace what was lost when the pits closed.
The people of these communities worked very hard, as you well know, and they’re not people to shirk responsibilities. They were characters, and they built communities at work and away from work. People think its awful when the pit closes, but what they mean is that it’s awful what happens to the people. The people at Ellington in many ways were very lucky that they’ve been there till the very end of the coal industry in the region, but I know people that are now alcoholics, spending a\ll day at the allotments, drinking the cheapest spirits they can get. These same people would be the first ones at the pit, and the first ones on the union committees.
What’s really terrible is that as soon as mass redundancies are announced, the government will set up a taskforce, and provide retraining for people. I mean, honestly, there must be a million- and-one forklift drivers out there now, because that’s the sort of opportunities you get. They’ll train you, and they’ll train you, but there’s still no work. If they built a forklift for every man that was trained to drive one, I’d be frightened to drive around the streets. They train you and put money into training, but what they should be doing is putting money into keeping people in jobs. Again, it’s political: the NUM and coal mining has been a political thing; it’s never been about economics or anything else, it’s always been about politics, the enemy within. As a result, so many good people have been thrown onto the scrapheap, and I think we’ve seen a benefits culture develop, where people find they can manage on benefits. This area is a different place now to what it once was. It always had a reputation as a hard place, but now there’s proper crime and viciousness. Kids grow up not having any self respect or respect for others. When the pit was there, people had respect that came from working. They had respect for themselves, for other people, and for their community. I believe that the union should be involved in trying to bring that respect back, and it will be if I have anything to do with it.
Interview conducted by David Wray.
David Wray is senior lecturer in the division of Sociology and Criminology, and director of the Work and Employment Research Centre at Northumbria University. As an exminer, much of his research interests are concerned with post-industrial mining communities.
Copyright Conference of Socialist Economists Autumn 2005