Opinions This is a debate post. The post expresses the writer’s views.
Director General of Hydro, Rolf Østbye, came to Rjukan on Monday 6 January 1964 – i.e. 60 years ago – to inform the Rjukan Workers’ Association about the group’s plans for far-reaching changes in production – plans that would later prove to have quite dramatic consequences both for the factory at Rjukan, the entire local community and Tinn municipality. Østbye’s briefing confirmed what many of the employees had suspected and feared: Hydro would move some of the traditional production of artificial fertilizer from Rjukan and make extensive rationalizations at the factory. However, Østbye assured that there was no reason to panic and pointed out that no one would be dismissed.
But the downsizing, which could initially affect approximately 250 employees, most of them in maintenance, was to take place in the following way:
– Transfer to other departments and factories that had unmet needs.
– Internal transfer, possibly combined with emergency retraining, on the condition that the transfer met a real need.
– Regulation in case of natural departure.
– Dismissal with disability pension in cases of impaired health.
However, Østbye made no secret of the fact that dismissals could be relevant if someone did not accept offers of other work or relocation.
In January 1964, Hydro had approximately 1,660 employees linked to Rjukan Salpeterfabrikker.
Director General Østbye’s briefing was naturally covered with great interest and, not least, great excitement. The great hall in Rjukanhuset was full of taste. The orientation created uncertainty, fear and resentment among many. There was little doubt where Østbye and the group management could think of moving employees at Rjukan to:
Hydro’s new large and modern factory on Herøya outside Porsgrunn. My father, Per Martin Bye, came home from the meeting upset. Never forget what he said:
– Hydro is trying to do like farmers who move their cows to the meadow where they can get the most and best milk. But we are not cows. We are workers with our homes here. Many have children in school and many have responsibilities and obligations to take care of the elderly and others. We have circles of friends and social networks here. Many have bought or built their own houses. We have belonging and our roots here. Do the Hydro management believe that we will tacitly accept having to break up and move to Herøya against our will. No, we will fight for our jobs.
Sowed seeds of fear in me
– Dad, do we have to move from here, I asked carefully.
– I don’t know, he said quietly and became thoughtful.
I went into my room. I felt a sick lump in my stomach. Should I have to move away from my mates and the environments that I was strongly connected to and was so fond of. To the unknown. I felt the cry begin to push forward. Director General Rolf
Østbye had sown seeds of insecurity and fear in me. I was not alone in that feeling. Many young people in Rjukan, myself included, knew that we might be moving. Take further education and work elsewhere. But we wanted to make our own choices.
The beginning of the end
Director General Rolf Østbye’s briefing this January evening in Rjukanhuset heralded, in my opinion, the beginning of the end for Rjukan Salpeterfabrikker. The very next day, a meeting was held between the group management of Hydro and the chairmanship of Tinn municipality. Storting representative Harald Selås, Labor Party, was also present. Selås, who was from Rjukan, came to play an important role in the central political environment. Hydro’s plans to shut down the production of artificial fertilizer and scale down its operations at Rjukan would have obvious, yes, quite dramatic consequences for Tinn municipality and the entire local community. The industry was unilaterally built around Hydro’s Rjukan saltpeter factories.
The driving force in society
This was not just a cornerstone company, but the very foundation and driving force for the industrial community of Rjukan. The vast majority had either a direct or indirect connection or were somehow dependent on the factory. Hydro had established and assumed responsibility for the operation of what was clearly the task of municipal or public agencies such as essential parts of the water and sewerage system, the fire service and hospitals to name a few. Large parts of the housing stock belonged to Hydro, which had its own city department responsible for the maintenance of houses, apartments and associated external areas.
The following is illustrative of the position Hydro had: A journalist from one of the major Oslo newspapers came to Rjukan to make a report about the town that was fighting for its existence. When the journalist came towards the square, he stopped a lady and said questioningly: – I was going to Hydro. – You are at Hydro. The whole of Rjukan is Hydro, answered the lady.
Even CEO Rolf Østbye and the rest of the group management assured that there was no reason to panic. Hydro did not want to immediately take dramatic measures.
A stoppage in the production of lime saltpeter was not relevant for a few years and the eventual downsizing of the business in general had to be seen in a longer perspective, according to Østbye.
Pulled out the trump card
Tinn municipality did not settle for those signals. Just a few days after director-general Rolf Østbye’s briefing, the chairmanship of the municipality issued a statement in which it was pointed out that Hydro could not only look at its own profit margin. Hydro also had to take into account its employees at Rjukan, the municipality and other victims, according to the municipality.
The fight to secure Rjukan’s future was started and strong political forces mobilized. One of the first things the trade unions and the municipality did together was to pull out the trump card – the license terms relating to the transmission of electric power from Rjukan. Hydro, which produced large quantities of electricity at its power stations in Vestfjorddalen, was not free to export electricity. On the contrary, the group had to fulfill the terms and obligations contained in the license provisions and obtain permission from the Ministry of Industry.
Loss of large tax revenues
According to the concession terms, Hydro had to undertake to continue finished production and maintain a certain number of jobs at Rjukan – I think at one point it was around 1,500. The concession provisions did not only cover the employees, but also Tinn municipality, which would lose a large amount of tax revenue in the event of a lapse of jobs. In any case, the municipality believed that it had to be involved as a party in the process. Tinn municipality, the Rjukan Workers’ Union and other organizations carried out an active and purposeful political mobilization to ensure that the employment base in Rjukan does not erode as a result of Hydro’s plans. Contact with politicians in the Storting and the Government was central to this work.
The Prime Minister’s visit
On 18 January 1967, Prime Minister Per Borten together with, among others, Minister of Industry Sverre Walter Rostoft came to Rjukan at the invitation of Tinn municipality. Borten spoke to a sea of people in the square. The Prime Minister said it was unthinkable to close down a society like Rjukan and believed that the Storting would take the position that this society must continue.
New businesses to Rjukan
Hydro acknowledged its responsibilities and obligations and became actively involved in facilitating new jobs and restructuring of the industrial community of Rjukan. The group itself created Rjukan Maskiner and contributed both financially and in other ways to other new companies coming to establish themselves in Rjukan. The boat manufacturer Selco in 1966. Askim Gummivarefabrik and Helly-Hansen in 1967. Central to the process was the development of a new industrial area at Svadde.
Nervous time
When I look back, I must state that it was a difficult and tough time, but also interesting and exciting. I followed the Rjukan situation from the mid-60s to the beginning of the 70s at close range. My father, Per Martin Bye, sat for several years during this period as chairman of the Rjukan Workers’ Association and naturally took an active part in the work to secure jobs in Rjukan. There was heavy pressure on him and the other shop stewards in the association. He did not hide that it was nerve-wracking at times and experienced it as having to fight with his back against the wall.
Fear of the future
From being a safe and good workplace, the environment in several of the departments in the factory became characterized by uncertainty and fear for the future after general manager Rolf Østbye’s briefing in 1964. Rumors and unclear signals from management did not improve the situation. The thought of falling victim to the rationalizations and having to break up and find new work was tough for many union members, especially older ones. The management of the association had to try to deal with their uncertainty and dawning despair alongside negotiations and contact with the management of the company and the group and, not least, strong pressure from the media.
Strong decrease in the number of employees
In 1966, the number of employees had fallen to approximately 1,500. By the end of 1966, it had fallen to 1,035 employees. In 1968, Hydro sent letters to a significant number of its employees at Rjukan with offers of work at the magnesium factory on Herøya or the factory in Eidanger. It was naturally taken as further confirmation of which way the factory in Rjukan would go.
Tinn municipality experienced population growth until the mid-1960s. If there was any connection, but after director-general Rolf Østbye’s briefing in Rjukanhuset on Monday 6th Monday 1964 and until 1966, there was a decrease of 700 people. In the same period, employment fell by approximately 500 jobs.
Invaluable effort
It is natural to ask the following question: How would things have gone if campaigning had not been carried out and targeted work undertaken to secure employment at Rjukan. In my opinion, an invaluable effort was made by the political and administrative leadership in Tinn municipality. Mayor Sigurd Koltveit, councilor Erling Eriksen and not least deputy mayor, later mayor, Reidar Engell Olsen, deserve all credit for their efforts.