British workers unions try to overcome crisis

JULY-SEPTEMBER, 2002

VOL. 3 NO.3

British workers unions try to overcome crisis

“In the 1980s and 1990s the British trade union movement lost a significant amount of the strength and power, that it had accumulated over previous decades. The strength of a non governmental organisation depends on voluntary membership dues (as is the case for unions) and is directly determined by the number of members it has. This is logical. The more members a union has, the stronger it is and the greater possibilities it has for taking independent action.

In 1989, 39% of the employees were union members. However, in 2000, only 31% were members. In absolute numbers, 1.9 million people or 22% had been lost to the union movement (“Reaching the missing millions”, 2001).

An even more dramatic decline in membership had already occurred in the middle of the 1980s due to the anti-union policies of the Thatcher government, changes in the labour market and also the fact that unions no longer met the needs of the times – they had “aged”.

Reduced financial means that it was necessary to reduce union bureaucracy. This is one of the reasons that led to many union mergers often between sectors that were far from being similar.

Mergers became one of the strategies aimed at conserving the influence of unions by pooling finances and optimising them union activities. This strategy can be called “protective” because the main task was to conserve former union influence and membership (J. Waddington, 2001).

The second “active”strategy was to promote organisation. This strategy is called an “organizing” strategy and involves winning union members amongst those working in places where there are no unions or very low levels of membership.

The aim of this article is to analyse organising strategy, study mechanisms of union ORGANISING CAMPAIGNS IN Britain and also examine the possibility of using the experience of British Unions.

ORGANISING STRATEGY

In 2001, according to opinion polls, only 5.1% of British People totally agreed with the statement that there is no future for unions. 12.4% partially accepted it. 32.6% rejected it outright and 23.7 % were less categorical.

At the same time, more than half think that strong unions are necessary, in order to protect pay and working conditions. Most non-members answered the question “Why are n’t you a union member?” by simply saying that no one asked them to join. (“What workers want from workplace organisations”, 2001)

Thus, Majority of the population supports unions, but only 30% are members. Neither anti-union policy of some companies nor legal restrictions on union rights are at the origin of this paradox, but rather passivity and the closed nature of the unions themselves. In some sectors, unions have become closed clubs. Having understood the need for change and drawn up an active strategy of work amongst workers led the British TUC Congress to adopt organizing as a strategic activity.

Organising strategy is based on contrasting two models of trade union activity: the service model and the organising model.

The service model means that union members expect to receive defined services. These expectations are based on the idea that when one pay dues, one has the right to have defined merchandise in return, like any other purchaser. Services can include pay and conditions bargaining, help in drawing up a contract with an employer, help with complaints etc. In this case, the union is considered rather as a kind of external body which e(i) nsures workers’ working relations. Workers pay the union a certain percentage (or fixed sum) and, when in need, ask the union for help.

The same principle applies to any kind of insurance. Unions respond to members’ calls. Often, they are seen as the third party in the company: employer, workers and union. The Union representative is, in this case , an official who is recruited by workers and to whom the right to take action on behalf of workers has been delegated.

As for workers themselves, they deliberately avoid direct collective action.

The organising model, on the contrary, is based on the principle that all members consider themselves to be the union and identify with it.

Union representatives deal with training and members themselves defend their interests. Union representatives and company employees decide together which tasks and objectives to set themselves and when to take collective action.

Thus, unions are no longer something that is outside members: union representatives are there to train, co-ordinate, help, etc,. While workers protect themselves. They are active and convinced of the need to take joint action. They have voluntarily joined a union, in order to work together to improve their life.

In the first model, new members join thanks to advertising which presents the union as an organisation, that is able to solve problems related to employees’ jobs- in other words, “ a good union is expensive, because it provides good services”

The organising model, however, implies that new members are made when employees understand that the collective defence of their working and living conditions is always more effective and better than isolated action by isolated individuals.

Discussion about the advantages and disadvantages of these models still continues inside unions. However, official TUYC policy recognises that both models have their raison d’ệtre, each having “pros” and “cons”. That is why it is sometimes considered better to combine them.

This is a result of the special way, in which British union function. In order to be a member of a union in Britain, there does not have to be a union structure in one’s own company. An employee joins a sector union and pays dues to the regional organization.

If the union is recognised within the company, dues can be paid via the company. This means that before there is union recognition, the union can provide services in terms of advice and defence, legal aid and training. Once the union is recognised by the company, it can increase its services to include representation of members, etc. Although organising campaigns aim essentially at creating new union branches and winning recognition, they often also implement mechanisms of the service model.

Some unions have begun to recruit “organisers”, whose job is to encourage and win new members on the basis of the principles of the second model. Their task is followed up by the work of direct union representatives, who carry our “service” functions.

In January 1998, the TUC inaugurated an “Organising Academy”. Within this structure, organisers, who are sent and paid by their representative unions, attend a 12-month course. While doing the theoretical part of the course, they also participate actively in practical tasks during membership campaigns organized by their unions.

There are now four years of qualified organisers and the fifth year is now at the Academy. In all, more than 100 organisers have been trained. According to studies carried out by the Cardiff School of Commerce, 89% of unions agree with the statement that “the Academy is a progressive step in the union movement”( Heery et al., 2000)

Through these initiatives, the TUC tries to co-ordinate union organising activities. However, some unions prefer not to send their organisers to the Academy.

Such reticence can be explained by two factors : because they do not agree with the organising strategy or it is too expensive to pay for the organisers’ training and stay in the Academy. Unions have to pay 28,000 pounds sterling for each organisers’ training (Heery et al., 2000).

ORGANISING CAMPAIGNS

Some companies and groups of employees, who are “weakly organized”, may attract union attention. In the first case, it is a matter of “expanding” unionisation and in the second, of “widening” membership of existing branches.

Expansion means that priority is given to workers in companies where unions do not exist at all or where the union is not recognised and the level of membership very low.

Widening, however, applies essentially to workers of companies, where the union is recognised, but where – for whatever reason – some groups of workers “abstain” from joining (Heery et al., 2000).

The first case is directly part of the area of organisers’ activities, whereas, the second concerns union representatives. In the second case, organisers are considered as union officials, who are responsible for increasing the number of members in existing union branches.

We are interested in the first case, because such campaigns occur in the context of what we call “the green field”, i.e., in companies where unions are absent. This gives us the possibility of studying precise aspects of organising campaigns, which one simply might not notice in successful cases. As for organisers, they are not simply another union officer, who is interested in conserving the union, but actually create new union branches.

CHOOSING PRIORITIES

Organisers make a list of companies in their sector and region. On the basis of union data, they note the places where there are branches, those where there are none, those where there were attempts to create a branch, etc. On the basis of the information they find, companies are classified into four categories:””cold”, “cool”, “warm”and “hot”.

“Cold” companies : small number of staff (less than 20 employees), very unstable workforce, strong anti-union policy, totally passive employees, who are satisfied with their situation.

“Cool” companies: average or fairly small number of employees, absence of complaints by employees, presence of a rival union, unsuccessful attempts to win union recognition.

“Warm” companies: average or big number of employees , presence of “friendly” union members, complaints made by employees, low wages.

“Hot” companies: workers themselves have approached the union and are ready to actively defend their interests, but do not know how to do so.

This classification implies choosing certain priorities . It would be more rational to work on “hot” or “warm” companies than “cold” or “Cool” ones. However, this does not mean that the latter are simply struck off the list – they are left to later.

SEARCH FOR ACTIVISTS AND WRITING UP COMPANY DATA SHEETS

Once they have chosen some comapnies, organisers then look for additional information about them and people who could help to recruit new members. If there are already some members in the comapny concerned, then they can become activists, who are able to carry out this task, but if that is not the case, they have to be found.

Generally, organisers go near the workplace and thus meet employees as they leave and talk to those who are ready for a”chat”. An important point is that they must devote 70% of their time to listening and only 30% of their time to talking.

Their main task is to advertise the union and the services it provides for members. The point is that workers themselves understand the advantages to be gained from collectively defending their interests.

In discussions, organisers seek to collect:

· maximum information about the company (shifts, workshops, services, pay LEVELS etc.);

· information about potential activists

· information about issues, whose solution could unite workers

They develop informal relations and establish “contacts” in the company, in order to obtain the information they need- lists of workers by type of job and workshop, names of union sympathisers, etc. All this information is put on a “company data sheet” . Such comapny data sheets are organisers working documents.

WIDENING CAMPAIGNS

Most organisers give special priority to direct individualised contact with workers and the search for activists. Some prefer to use the telephone and media for that, others prefer to organise public initiatives. Generaly, organisers distribute leaflets outside the company when shift change-giving information and union calls.

But leaflets are not sufficient – they are just away of attracting attention. Organisers invite those, who are interested, to meet them in a neutral place where they can discuss without fear. Amongst them, future activists are always found. Some join the union. But, in Britain, simple membership does not solve all problems- there have to be sufficient numbers of members.

Campaigns last several months. They make it possible to fill in the company data sheet in detail. Activists and moderates are identified amongst members. Sympathisers and adversaries are identified amongst non members.

If sufficient members and activists are found in a particular company, the union may suspend its campaign and classify the company as “cool” or “cold”.

RESULTS OF THE CAMPAIGN

Unions invest resources in training organisers and hope to get results they need. After 3 years, the organising Academy had trained 104 organisers. They found 871 activists and 7500 new members. In all, their campaigns led to more than 18,000 people joining unions.

But, just in order to maintain current levels of unionisation, unions, need 500,000 new members per annum. This means that the results are not to so very good. It is therefore necessary to back up organising campaigns by reinforcing existing recognised union branches.

At the same time, the activity of organisers has made it possible to win recognition of rather a large number of union branches.

In Poland, for example, an organising strategy has also been attempted. In a few years, a team of a dozen organisers won more than 3,000 people to union membership. This, in turn, made it possible for the union, Solidarnost, to recruit new organisers.

But the question of which strategy unions should adopt remains an open one. Union organisers have not yet achieved the necessary level of unionisation. However, they have managed to change the image of unions, which have become more open and, therefore, more attractive. Their activity will bear more fruit in the near future.”


Home \| Voice of Electricity workers \| Press Release \| Resolutions \| Feedback \| About Us