Of course it is entertaining to see unruly folk at the back of the class thumbing their noses at teacher, who has been spending so much time away from class sojourning in foreign parts. Labour, a party born out of the trade union movement, has failed to define its critical relationship with its paymasters.
Some union leaders have been making serious points made about unilateral action in Iraq and the indignity of president Bush's coattails. Yet much as it suits the right-wing press to exaggerate the threat from insurgent trade unions, no one should get carried away. There is a possibility of action this autumn from firefighters and railway workers, but the bad old days of the 1970s are not about to return; no winter of discontent lies ahead.
That's not just because Tony Blair has no intention of repealing Thatcherite reforms such as pre-strike ballots and the ban on secondary picketing. The social fact is that trade unionism has been and remains in decline. Unions have made some impact on professional employment and among managers and there has been an expansion in the number of "partnership" deals between unions and employers.
But the gross numbers tell a brutal truth. Between 2000 and 2001, the proportion of workers in unions declined from 29.5% to 29.1%. Fewer than one-third of all workers are represented by unions.
Pay and conditions are mostly set by employers unilaterally. At a guess, over a half of RSL staff are members of unions, though the bargains negotiated by the likes of Unison do set a "going rate" which may benefit non-unionised staff.
Unison says it has 850,000 members who work in local government, including the voluntary sector and RSLs but throughout public administration – far more unionised than the private sector – membership is only 60%; in the construction sector, only one in five employees is unionised.
What that all means is that Unison is perfectly entitled to take a view, say, on stock transfer. But RSLs, councillors, the government and tenants are entitled to ask just who is being spoken for when such views are expressed.
Listen to Dave Prentis, Unison's chief, and you might conclude his members' and the public interest are entirely the same. When he says the Blair government's enthusiasm for business, the private finance initiative and all has harmed morale among those employed by local authorities he has a point. When he condemns ministers for failing to extol public service, he ought to command widespread assent. But he also ought to admit the public's willingness to pay taxes may be reduced by union action perceived as selfish. Councillors have to extract money through tax or support grants; RSLs depend on rent.
Councillors – like RSL management – have to balance the demands and interests of various stakeholders, of whom staff and the unions representing them are only one. Unionisation may conflict with tenants' rights. Justice for the workers does not always and everywhere translate into better service for residents, especially if it implies rent rises. RSL boards and managers rarely say that out loud – perhaps they should.
Source
Housing Today
Postscript
David Walker writes for the Guardian and is a non-executive member of the Places for People Group
No comments yet