Against women's sections

Uncorrected machine reading. This text was read by machine (Apple Vision OCR) from a scan of a newspaper page, and the page was cut into articles by machine, at the headlines found by their type size. Nothing has been corrected: expect misread words, text from a neighbouring article, and titles that are the machine reading of the headline, some of them only fragments. Quote from the scan, not from this page.
How this article was cut and titled: headline found by type size in the OCR geometry (split_tabloid.py); 4-7 of 7; machine-segmented newspaper page; uncorrected Vision OCR.

page 8 of the scan

Section at way of women within araon o. states Anne Cesek is very mistaken to support the idea of separate womens sections in me trade unions she appears to do [Red Weekly, 16 December] when she refers to the abolition of the AUEW Women's from spreading the myth that these separate sections TeDresen OT wOmen socialists should be campaigning actively sections were originally set up be cause male trade unionists considered that snould not nave ine same nons and beners shoules meretore be snovee in a seoarate Male trade unionists then 'rationalised" this situation the same money as us, so why should they get the same benefits', ran the argument. in act me existence or ine womens oectior no more than the most open and blatant form of discrimination against women in the AUEW Anne Cesek is also wrong when she states: The AUEW has merely re-affirmed the rulings of the Sex Discrimination Act against ine separate organisation coroanisations ine existence or *Women Shop Stewards shall be directly repre sented on the District Committees on the basis Shop Steward for every 3,000 members of this section, or part thereof [men get one per 5,000). criticism than can be gained from van garaner and a more balanccu selection or reviews wouie bed I would point out that unfortunate sideHence of Women Representatives on women be at present, SECUION unionists who Was entitled to as full members of the union Anne beser reactionary Rules in the AUEW.

Rather than Socialists should telly s ana me extension or mose women -have insioe GRAHAM (Birmingham AUEW) Executive Council shall convene annually a confer District Commit Tees. ouch comerancos to consist onor loss man ai or more than s celeases. ine Dasis or such TooTE sentation to be decided by the Executive Council in 7 of this Rule the Annual Conferee hall lee ine numberto de determined ov cxecute councH.

Socialists should support such organisation embodied in the above Rule, however partial it may have it extended to th whole of the union organisation down to the shop within the unions must mean complete opposition to wish to preserve the embodied in the old Women's Section of the AUEW tematically deprived of the benefits they were rightly women's sections, and the right of women to organise as women within a unio ends up supporting one of the most which has alway: been an obstacle preventing women from enjoying rights and benefits as male members fully support their abolitio Ments to organise that STRE PROTO JOHN SURROCK (Report