June 11

Lord Hill announced the details of the new contracts offered by the ITA. The announcement included the proposed merger of Rediffusion Television and ABC Television. ‘Mergers’, he said, ‘are always difficult to arrange…’

September 28

It was announced: ‘Agreement has today been reached, subject to contract, to lease Wembley Studios to London Weekend Television Ltd. for at least three years from May 6, 1968.

‘London Weekend Television has indicated that it expects to use three studios and that its union-graded staff will be recruited in the main from Rediffusion staff.

‘The arrangements made in respect of the studios will materially assist and accelerate the conclusion of the negotiations relating to the formation of the new ABC/Rediffusion company.’

October 19

Following talks with the unions, two statements were made. The first, which concerned A.C.T.T. members, said :

‘The following agreement was reached between the Independent Television Companies and the A.C.T.T. as a result of recent meetings:

1. The companies fully accept that every A.C.T.T. member in Independent Television subject to re-deployment will be employed in the network under the new contract allocation.
2. The companies guarantee to employ in London, with the minimum of disturbance, all A.C.T.T. staff presently employed by Rediffusion Television, and A.B.C. Television, in London in at least their present grades.
3. Yorkshire Television, will employ all A.C.T.T. staff presently employed at A.B.C. Television’s Didsbury Studios.
4. There will be early discussions to deal with problems arising particularly in relation to 2nd and 3rd schedules grades.
5. While this situation maintains, there will be no recruitment from outside the Independent Television Companies and no one employed by one company shall undertake work in television for other organisations.

‘It was also agreed that discussions should take place between the union and each of the new companies, London Weekend Television, A.B.C./Rediffusion joint company and Yorkshire Television, as soon as possible on the question of their general terms and conditions of employment and staffing.’

The second statement was agreed between the Independent Television companies and the E.T.U. and N.A.T.K.E. It said: ‘In connection with the re-allocation of I.T.V. contracts the companies recognize that they must use their best endeavours to re-employ E.T.U. and N.A.T.K.E. members affected by the re-allocation.

‘With this in mind they undertake that in the first instance recruitment will be made from within the industry, with first preference being given to staff directly affected by the reallocation and with the minimum of disturbance.

‘The new companies are sympathetic to the problems involved in the re-deployment of staff and undertake to commence discussions individually with the unions as soon as possible on the general terms and conditions of employment to be applied within their respective companies.’

Also on October 19 a company advertisement stated: ‘Rediffusion Television’s contract ends on July 29, 1968. Until that time it is the company’s policy and firm intent to continue to improve its programme content and to give its advertisers still better service during the next nine months.

‘Already it has been stated that our programme budget has been increased by over 10 per cent. Both the programme and sales departments have been reorganised to adapt to the changing situation.

‘The sales department is geared to give the maximum service to our clients, both directly and through their advertising agencies.

‘Between now and July 29, 1968, the demand for time on Rediffusion Television exceeds anything we have previously known. With the aid of our computer our sales service has been further improved and the whole operation speeded up. We shall continue to be very much in the forefront of the television advertising scene until the completion of our operation.’

October 27

Notice boards were put up at Television House and Wembley for staff to read. They said:

‘ABC Television Limited and Rediffusion Television Limited have reached agreement with the Independent Television Authority on the formation of a new company to operate the London Weekday contract from July 30, 1968.

‘The company will be called Thames Television Limited, and will be based at ABC’s Studios at Teddington-on-Thames with central London studios and offices at Rediffusion’s Television House. The capital of Thames Television Limited will be approximately £6,000,000 divided equally between ABC Television Limited and Rediffusion Television Limited.

‘The board of the new company will be as follows:

• Sir Phillip Warter, chairman (chairman of the Associated British Picture Corporation, and of ABC Television.)
• Robert Clark, M.A., LL.B., deputy chairman (deputy chairman and chief executive of the Associated British Picture Corporation, and deputy chairman of ABC Television.)
• Howard Thomas, C.B.E., managing director (managing director of ABC Television and director of the Associated British Picture Corporation.)
• Brian Tesler, M.A., programme controller (director of ABC Television.)
• A. W. Groocock, F.C.LS., director (director and secretary of Rediffusion Television.)
• George A. Cooper, sales director (director of ABC Television.)
• B. R. Greenhead, controller of studios and engineering (director of ABC Television.)
• J. T. Davey, F.C.A., director (chief accountant of Rediffusion Television.)
• D. R. W. Dicks, director (controller of production of Rediffusion Television.)
• Group Capt. H. S. L. Dundas, D.S.O., D.F.C., director (director of Rediffusion.)

The following senior staff appointments were announced: Jeremy Isaacs, current affairs and children’s programmes (Rediffusion); Lloyd Shirley, drama (ABC); Guthrie Moir, education and religion (Rediffusion); Phillip Jones, light entertainment (ABC); Grahame Turner, outside broadcasts (Rediffusion); Stuart Sansom, engineering department (ABC); James F. Shaw, advertisement department (ABC); M. Lawson, accounts department (ABC).

The message continued: ‘Recruitment of staff from ABC Television and from Rediffusion Television will commence shortly. ‘The redeployment of unionised staff now engaged by Rediffusion will be conducted in exact accordance with the letter and the spirit of the agreements reached at the following National Labour Relations meetings:

a. Meeting with the A.C.T.T. – October 18

b. Meeting with ETU/NATKE – October 19

‘The company will use it’s best endeavours to find satisfying and equally remunerative work for all non-unionised members of the staff.

November 8

A company press statement said:

‘The Rediffusion ACTT shop concluded a meeting with the management at 5.30 p.m. today by registering failure to agree with the company on the amount of ex-gratia payments which the company has offered in addition to the payments required in accordance with the Redundancy Payments Act of 1965.

‘These ex-gratia payments were offered as a result of the termination of the company’s ITA contract on July 29 next year.

‘All the ACTT staff concerned have already been guaranteed further employment in ITV in London after Rediffusion’s contract ends.

‘The commercial break before the ITN News at 5.55 p.m. was blacked out by the ACTT staff.

‘The company had no warning of the action from the ACTT shop. It is considering the position.’

Later there was this joint press announcement:

‘Meetings between Rediffusion and ACTT began again tonight at 9 p.m. They will continue tomorrow in the hope, shared by both parties, that a satisfactory conclusion will be quickly reached. In the meantime normal transmission will continue.’

The post The Facts appeared first on THIS IS REDIFFUSION from Transdiffusion.

The heading on the last leader in the summer edition of Fusion was ‘Fused’. Unfortunately there can be no other heading than the one now printed here.

Few editors of house magazines can have had quite the task which now faces this editor. In the last edition at the end of July the leader started: ‘Next month the clouds of obscurity which mushroomed around our future following the ITA announcement about the changes in ITV should begin to clear’.

At the time of going to press in the first week of December they are still as murky as ever. The decision was taken not to publish an autumn edition of Fusion as scheduled unless some facts could be printed about the future of the staff. It was felt that it was better not to bring out Fusion at all rather than to ignore the situation.

There were no facts so Fusion did not appear. There are still few facts as this is written but now the editor feels it is right to bring out a bumper Christmas edition in which he hopes his readers might find some cheer. In the tradition of Fusion there are some features in which we laugh at ourselves. We hope they will provide a few smiles and that nobody will be provoked to take offence.

We hope, too, that by the time this reaches you the murk will have cleared a little; that, for example, the situation of redundancy payments and the winding up of the pension fund will be clarified.

We hope, also, that a few more will have been reassured about their future careers, inside or out of television.

Indeed, we have all been hoping since June and after six months that hope has begun to wear pretty thin. There are many whose patience has been tried to the limit.

We have lived through a miserable period with bouts of industrial action, threats of more and rumours galore. When 1,400 people have their jobs taken away from them there must be upheaval, distress, anxiety and downright dismay.

But need there have been so much? Could not a lot of it have been avoided?

This much must be said: if anybody had sat down deliberately to devise a situation so complicated that it was almost beyond the bounds of reason for anybody to solve promptly, then that person could hardly have done better had he been the architect of the present muddled position.

Any reasonable person must understand the position with which management has had to cope … winding up Rediffusion Television, agreeing with ABC on the formation of a new board for Thames Television, settling on the disposition of the assets of this company, negotiating with Weekend Television on the lease of Wembley, negotiating with the unions on re-employment and ‘terminal payments’. Enough headaches there to last for quite a few months, and indeed they have.

Also any reasonable person must understand the fears and insecurity with which the unions have had to cope. There has been the whole vast question of what was to happen to their members: some to Weekend, some to Thames, some to Yorkshire, none looking at any of it with much enthusiasm.

There have been problems over the seniority acquired with this company, compensation for the loss of security and the tragedy of reduced pension rights which is particularly severe for those over 50.

Any reasonable person must also understand the problems with which the new company, Thames Television, has still to cope. Who are to be the section heads in the various departments? Who are to join from Rediffusion and who shall come from ABC? Will ABC’s 11-6 domination of the first batch of appointments be reflected in the final figures? Many of these question marks still hang over us.

We are all reasonable persons. We can all see that there are many points of view to be considered. Why then has the situation been so unreasonable?

The editor of this magazine can, perhaps, take a neutral line, supporting neither the management nor the unions. Certainly this editorial has been vetted by neither.

If a neutral line is taken what does one see? Fundamentally there has been a terrible lack of communication. But, again, any reasonable person can appreciate the reasons for this.

You cannot make announcements when valuable acquisitions are under negotiation. You cannot communicate when in the middle of delicate negotiations. This applies as much to the unions as the management.

Or can you? Is not this inability to communicate a disease of this country and, indeed, of the world? How many of the current disputes in British industry could be resolved before the strike, go-slow or work-to-rule occurs if there were better communication? How many international disputes and grievances could be settled with better communication?

To come back to home, the irony of all this is that Fusion is supposed to be a method of communication. As a house magazine it has won more awards than most for its contents, for its design and, presumably, for its ability to communicate. Yet, in a situation which demands clear and prompt communication, it has failed utterly to do so. We can take comfort from the fact that many house magazines really limit their communication to pompous statements by the chairman or managing director. Fusion has never had those, nor been asked to publish them.

So when it does come to a crisis how do you communicate? Some industries have a complex system in which house magazines, newspapers, news letters, bulletins and all types of meetings are integrated. It would have been interesting to know how much more all this would have achieved in our situation. Fusion is inclined to think that it is not so much the method as the ability and willingness to do so which matters. And of these two, ability is the key. As the structure of society becomes more and more complex, the need for unequivocal, expert communication grows.

In our present situation, the word ‘communication’ not only covers the obvious statement of facts to others but also – and this is possibly more important – the exchange of views and opinions by those taking part in negotiations.

Everybody knows how a word-of-mouth message can be distorted after passing round a circle at a party game. This, too, is happening far too frequently in everyday life. Put those words into the mouths of people who have an interest in seeing them distorted and confusion piles on confusion.

Too often in this country, negotiations break down or are misinterpreted because of the inability of those concerned – both unions and management – to communicate clearly and without allowing their viewpoints to distort the situation.

It is possibly this endemic disease which has prolonged the negotiations in the present situation.

Every reasonable person will agree that it has all gone on too long. Unfortunately those who have probably suffered most frustration by the silence are those who have had nobody to put forward their views – the non-union members of the staff.

We might send men to the moon and know how to transplant hearts, but we have still to learn how to communicate with each other. And that is the lesson from our sorry situation.

As can be seen from the following two pages there have been quite a few decisions but for the majority of the staff none have yet answered the key questions: ‘What shall I be doing at the end of July?’ ‘How much will I be earning?’ ‘What is going to happen to my pension?’ ‘What compensation do I get for my loss of seniority and security?’

To pile on the agony the death has also occurred of Capt. Brownrigg, our former general manager. That event is dealt with on pages 6-9 of this issue. However, it has a deeper significance which anybody who attended the memorial service must have felt.

The congregation consisted of all sorts of people. There were executives of the company, past and present. There were rank-and-filers. There were leaders in ITV. They all came to mourn his death and remember his achievements.

Tragically, though, the service also marked the end of an era; the end of the first chapter in the history of ITV; the end of Rediffusion Television.

Capt. Brownrigg and the staff of this company played their part in setting up Independent Television in this country and carrying it through its early years.

It has been an exciting time and we can only hope that, when the present murk lifts, the future will be just as stimulating and exciting as the past. And that lessons will be learnt from all we have recently been through.

The editor

The post Confusion appeared first on THIS IS REDIFFUSION from Transdiffusion.

Next month the clouds of obscurity which mushroomed around our future following the ITA announcement about the changes in ITV should begin to clear. The end of a period most people will only want to go through once in their career is near.

It has not been a happy time and it must be stated clearly that for some the future will still bring only worry and indecision. The quart of staff at present working for this company and ABC Television will not go into the pint pot of a new joint company.

Nevertheless there has been a categoric assurance from John McMillan, our general manager, that the first consideration in all the many problems to be thrashed out will go to the staff. One cannot ask for more than that.

As soon as possible next month personal interviews will be held with everybody and those who have been selected to join the new company will be informed. The union shops will be told simultaneously. Then the ITV companies and the unions are to organise a Register upon which the names of those not offered jobs will be placed. A similar Register is to be set up at the same time for nonunion staff.

The aim with both these registers is to ensure that everyone is given the chance of re-employment in the industry at the same basic rate of pay as at present. The unions have their own weapons to see that this is done. The non-union staff must depend on the goodwill of others which surely must be forthcoming.

Both must also rely on Lord Hill’s public statement at the press conference on Sunday, June 11 at which he announced the proposition that ABC Television and Rediffusion Television should form a new company.

In reference to the appointment of the Harlech Consortium in place of TWW he said:

‘It will also be a requirement that, when appointing staff, the new company will give prior consideration to the employment of those now working in Independent Television in Wales and the West. I may say at this point that the Authority will make the observance of this principle a requirement in all cases of change (Fusion‘s italics). The sum of the changes we are making will lead to an increase in overall employment in Independent Television; and there should be no reason to fear general redundancy, though there will be individual cases where goodwill and care will be needed and these will be exercised.’

The demise of TWW made the main press headlines. The merger of Rediffusion Television and ABC Television was a secondary story. Yet, in terms of human predicament, the merger presents far more complex problems than those arising from what will probably be a straight takeover of staff and equipment by the Harlech Consortium from TWW.

There will be ‘an increase in overall employment’ (more jobs) but, the formation of a new company in Leeds is not of much value to those whose homes and lives are centred around London.

So that leaves London Weekend Television, the new London weekend group, as a source of jobs. How far they will wish, or be forced by the unions and, possibly, the ITA, to take on Rediffusion staff not re-employed remains to be seen. John McMillan has told Fusion that in his opinion all unionised ITV workers, except those soon to retire, will get jobs starting July 30, 1968 or before with either the new ABC/Rediffusion company or London Weekend Television. One good thing which will, in Fusion’s opinion, probably arise from all this is a transferable pension scheme between all ITV companies and possibly with the BBC as well.

This is vital in view of the fact that a similar situation involving others, if not ourselves, could arise in another six years’ time – or eight – when new contracts are again handed out.

For the present, however, the immediate concern of everybody must obviously be to see that Rediffusion Television continues to operate at the highest possible standard right up to the time it comes off the air on July 29, 1968. We must do this for the sake of our own personal professional reputations quite apart from loyalty to the company and to the public we have chosen to serve by working in television.

This will not be easy but anyone who has decided to make television a career must have a basic desire to serve the public and this service must not be allowed to deteriorate.

As this edition went to press, detailed discussions were being held to form a new direction and management structure and to agree with ABC Television on the disposition of offices, equipment, transport and all the many other factors involved in the merger. One of the most important, of course, will be a decision on the future use to be made of Studio 9, Television House, Hanover Square, Wembley studios and Teddington studios.

By the time this edition is printed decisions may have been reached and announced. If this has not been done rumours will, no doubt, start to circulate. Again management has stated categorically that, as soon as there is anything to say, the staff will be the first to know. So, if rumours are flying, they can be summarily shot down.

It is obvious that there will be many delicate negotiations to be handled with ABC Television and it would be wrong to expect a day-by-day account of them. Indeed, they would be likely to attract press publicity which could prejudice further negotiations.

So the only reasonable attitude must be to wait patiently knowing that we have been promised information as soon as it can be given. There is one happy side to all this which must not be overlooked. Few people have the opportunity in the middle of their careers to review just what they are doing with their lives and what they wish to do in the future and to be given virtually a whole year to think about it.

Obviously this does not apply to those nearing retirement age and one hopes that some system will be devised to ensure that they do not suffer because of the high level decisions which have been made and over which they had no control.

But for those with some years still to work – and the average age of the ITV industry is low – the situation does present an opportunity to make a reassessment of their careers and the pattern of their lives.

As for the pattern of the industry, this would need a really magical crystal ball to unravel. One thing is clear: we have not seen the last television upheaval. Here, verbatim, are the words spoken by the Postmaster General in the House of Commons last month:

‘There remains … the question of the longer-term organisation of broadcasting in Britain. The recently awarded contracts will run from next July to 1974. Two years later, in 1976, the franchise of the ITA and the BBC’s charter, Licence and Agreement will end together. Recently, I have taken steps to ensure that licences of the relay companies, which make up a very important element in our broadcasting system, will end at the same time. So, nine years from now, an opportunity will arise for a fundamental review of the whole system, because ITA, the BBC and the relay companies will all terminate at the same time.

‘As I have said on a number of occasions since I became involved in the subject, I cannot see the present kind of organisation lasting for very much more than the decade which we have ahead of us before those changes take place. In 1969 the Post Office becomes a public corporation. The residual Minister will then have under his wing the two broadcasting authorities, the Post Office Corporation and a number of other residual activities, but he will be freed of all the day-to-day administrative work of the Post Office – that great mass of administrative work which weighs down the Postmaster General. From that time the residual Minister will be able to devote more of his time to broadcasting, and I hope that, in the spring of 1969, a long, cool look will begin at the whole system of broadcasting in this country.’

What other group of people in the country has to work under these terms? Are long, cool looks and the upheaval of individual lives going to be a continuous reward of working in ITV?

Possibly. And possibly it is right that such an important industry should be the subject of long, cool looks – as long as they are not positively frigid. It is not Fusion‘s job to comment on this.

But what Fusion must do is to point out that such events as the breaking up of companies, the holding of ‘fundamental reviews’ (remember Pilkington?) are not likely to create the most conducive atmosphere in which either companies or individuals can flourish. We have the compensation of working in what we all obviously regard as the most exciting, challenging and interesting industry there is. Perhaps we must expect to forfeit the security which comes from working in a bank or insurance.

But, whatever the reasons for ending Rediffusion Television may have been, it must not be forgotten that very talented and dedicated teams of technicians and programme people, and accounts, advertising, publicity, administrative and secretarial staff are also being broken up.

There is no doubt that those who are picked will recreate similar teamwork in the new company but it will take time.

Further, although Fusion does not want to be accused of chauvinism, we do believe that the spirit of the ‘workers’ in Rediffusion Television is and was second to none. The co-operation between individuals, the help one section gives another, the happy working relationships between people from post-room to management, are all indefinable. But they added up to something pretty considerable. Furthermore in the last three years and more there has never been the faintest whisper of a possible stoppage.

The new company will have a flying start if it inherits only this happy spirit.

Meanwhile there is plenty of work to do until July, 1968 and on the remaining 34 pages of this edition Fusion, too, gets back to normal …

The editor

The post Fused appeared first on THIS IS REDIFFUSION from Transdiffusion.