Mr. Bromley Day by Day
Mr. ]. Bromley, M.P., General Secretary of the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen, was a member of the Civil Service Royal Commission. He signed its report, published in July, recommending rates of pay which, for the lower grades, represented a reduction of about 9 per cent, on the rates ruling when the Commission began its investigation. Mr. Bromley also concurred rejecting the Post Office workers’ demand for their hours to be reduced from 48 to 40.
Early in September, Mr. Bromley was among his fellow Trade Union officials at the Trades Union Congress. On Septcmber 6th he addressed a demonstration and “ridiculed talk of equality of sacrifice as an excuse for wage cuts” (Daily Herald, September 7th.)
Two days later he seconded a resolution on the floor of the Congress demanding a maximum working week of 40 hours. (Daily Herald, September 9th.)
Do not, however, make the mistake of thinking that Mr. Bromley is not a real fighting man. A week later he made the alarming discovery that the child elected as this year’s “Railway Queen” for a carnival was the daughter of a non-Trade Unionist. Here was a really vital question, and Mr. Bromley did not fail us. Unable (or unwilling?) to stand up against his fellow-members on the Civil Service Royal Commission, Mr. Bromley, M.P., “supported by Mr. C. T. Cramp, secretary of the N.U.R., and Mr. A. J. Walkden, M.P., secretary of the Railway Clerks’ Association,” declared that he “cannot be associated with a non-unionist who, after deserting his fellows in the railway service, tries to take advantage of their work in this connection just as he has in the conditions of service which he enjoys” (The Times, September 19th). So Mr. Bromley showed Miss Patricia Eileen Annie Clark, aged 13, what Trade Union officials are made of.
What would the workers (and the employers) do without the Labour leaders ?
H.