by Jonathan Roberts
It was early in 2006 when I first joined Unite the Union (or Amicus, as it was then known). I was active in my constituency Labour party, was running a blog and was ambitious to learn, grow and participate as fully as I could.
Soon afterwards I was encouraged to attend a residential course run by Unite to ‘educate’ those they felt may one day become a politician – as mad as the idea of my participation now sounds. The surroundings seemed a little odd for a trade union HQ. The huge mansion in Esher (“modelled on a French Chateau” as the Unite website describes it) was set amidst acres of sprawling Surrey countryside, slap bang in the middle of the banker belt. It was so posh I swear it took me a week to shower off the smell of quinoa. I don’t say that disparagingly – I’d love to live somewhere just like it.
It was a fascinating experience. It started with a debate with German trade unionists, and moved through mock Newsnight-style grillings, writing and delivering a speech bestowing the virtues of the Labour-Union link and concluding with an interview conducted by two Labour MPs who questioned me on my ‘labourness’.
Everyone was very nice to me. And as I was the youngest in attendance, I was genuinely grateful for the experience, not least because it prepared me for the unexpected media attention given to Thirsk and Malton at the general election in 2010, for which I was the candidate.
It was a few years later that I first publicly criticised union behaviour. I was promptly told off by one of my fellow Esher students – didn’t I remember that a union had put me up in a mansion? I should show some gratitude and toe the line.
That was the beginning of a journey that concluded last night when I resigned from Unite.
I should say immediately that I won’t be missed and nor should I be. I’m not remotely important to the union movement, and you’ll be pleased to know that any political ambitions I once had have long since left my mind. If you want to read the opinions of someone important, please do find them elsewhere.
My resignation is not a mark of being anti-trade union. It is the exact opposite. When trade unionism works well, it benefits everybody. But the persistent antagonistic tactics of the Unite hierarchy have resulted in a loss of good will not just from industry, but from the general public, and I fear that the harm done cannot now be reversed.
I’m sure in person he is an affable man, but in my view there is no greater threat to the hope of strong, responsible, decent and successful trade unionism than Len McCluskey and his most loyal supporters.
I won’t offer an in-depth analysis of the Grangemouth disaster – enough has been written already. But if you think picketing the family homes of company bosses and intimidating their children, or putting hundreds of jobs at risk because one trade union official was under investigation for skiving off work, or ordering the PR team to ”dig up the dirt” on Labour MPs who disagree with union policy, is a decent way of representing the workers, then we’ll have to agree to disagree. Likewise, if you believe that Grangemouth was the result of a “rogue official” and not an example of everything that is wrong with how Unite does business, I suspect we will not agree on that either.
I am not one of those people who says that the dramatic fall in union membership is down solely to Thatcherite laws, I believe instead that the behaviour of certain union leaders puts off millions of ordinary, decent people from joining. For shame.
Now, whenever I’ve written anything criticising Unite before, I normally get two types of response.
1) Criticising Unite’s behaviour is akin to criticising millions of ordinary working people.
I had this on Twitter last night. This argument is simply a system of control – an attempt to guilt members into supporting appalling tactics and weak policies. It says that you can’t really believe in trade unions if you disagree with the senior individuals who run them.
The real flaw with the argument is that it assumes the vast majority of the membership actually do agree with the behaviour and policies of the leaders and officials. But a poll commissioned by Lord Ashcroft in July found that, when given a choice, just 16% of Unite members believed that Len McCluskey best represented the things they cared about.
I suggest the reason why the overwhelming majority of members don’t think he represents them is not because he isn’t socialist enough, but because he spends too long fighting his personal ideological crusades and not enough time listening to what his members want.
He has openly demanded a reversal of the benefits cap of £26,000 a year. But according to the Ashcroft poll, 86% of Unite members agree with such a cap.
He has called for the voting age to be reduced to 16, but 72% of his members disagree.
He has called for mass strikes and civil disobedience – but 57% disagree. 54% even disagree with his call for a 75p tax rate.
It begs the question, just who is it who is betraying the membership? And does Len McCluskey genuinely represent the Unite membership when so few members agree with him?
Which leads me to the second argument.
2) “Trade Unions are the most democratic organisations in the world”
Really? It is true in the sense that members are balloted regularly. But remember that McCluskey himself was elected on a turnout of just 15%, which means less than 10% of the membership voted him into office. True democracy is not just about ballot papers, it’s about inspiring people to take part in the process. The fact that the overwhelming majority of the Unite membership take no part whatsoever indicates not just a democratic deficit, but a disease at the heart of the organisation that acts as a barrier to their claims of representation.
Billy Connolly once said “don’t vote, it just encourages them.” I disagree. Mass abstention encourages the Union establishment to maintain the status quo – and the status quo serves the Union establishment just fine, allowing them to claim democratic mandate whilst driving their own personal agendas.
86% of Unite members do not feel McCLuskeyite politics best represents their views, and 85% did not vote in the general secretary election. Maybe these numbers are too close to be a coincidence.
The moderate majority of members are the only ones who can save Unite from itself – but they have long been silent, and show no signs of finding their voice.
I leave in sadness rather than anger. I wish Unite was, well, nicer. I wish it wasn’t so antagonistic. I wish it stood up for working people in a way that was productive through respectful negotiation and collaboration, not threats and political deviance. But it just isn’t going to happen.
The arguments to stay in membership – the solidarity and friendship, the belief in building a better society, the standing up for ordinary people – are all arguments for trade unionism as it should be, but they simply do not reflect the reality of how Unite actually behaves.
My membership of an organisation that behaves in such a depressing, devious and combative way reflects badly upon me as a person. I don’t like the idea that my friends and family might see the way Unite behaves and think I find it acceptable. I don’t. If the moderate majority of Unite members cannot find a voice from within, then maybe they should join me in searching for a better trade union to join.
Jonathan Roberts was Labour’s parliamentary candidate for Thirsk and Malton at the last election
Tags: intimidation, Jonathan Roberts, Len McCluskey, leverage tactics, Unite
Well written, revealing, honest and brave.
Sounds like we are goiung down the route towards Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamsters.
“Can I have a run at another parliamentary seat now?”
You know, when I was younger the basic Labour response to mass-scale intimidation by billionaries and Tory attacks on trade unions wasn’t to join in. Times have changed.
Bravo.hopefully many more Unite members will follow Jonathon’s lead.
Bravo Jonathan
An excellent decision and post.
The thing is there is NO major difference between politicians. They all crave power to the exclusion of all else.
They all agree on the big picture issues. it’s only the relatively small things that they pretend are grand canyons for Question Time and PMQs.
Hence we’re moving towards Marxism/Fascism – no difference in practice to you and me.
see my blog jonathandaviswm.wordpress.com
“there is no greater threat to the hope of strong, responsible, decent and successful trade unionism than Len McCluskey and his most loyal supporters.”
What we have to watch out for is Miliband’s reluctance to deliver effective trade union reform within the Labour Party. You bravely campaigned against Ken Livingstone during the run-up to Johnson’s victory in London’s mayoral election and now you have commenced a campaign against McCluskey.
Clearly, we have to bite the bullet. If, at the Spring Conference, Miliband fails to drive through desirable Labour Party internal reforms and deprive McCluskey of influence then surely the time will have come for a campaign against a Labour victory in 2015.
I wonder how many Unite members would bother to vote, if it where one of “no Confidence” in Len Mcclusky?
A well-argued article. That matches my own experience.
I joined MSF 1988 as a graduate engineer at a large eng site, on the recommendation of my dept manager as the company talked to them. On the ground there were excellent volunteer reps.
Went to a national conference as an observer in 1994. Discovered just how nastily partisan were the politics of the leadership, and how they addressed people who didn’t toe the line.
When I left the company a year or two later I let my membership drop. I would not go back.
The crucial issue is that Unions exist to represent their members, they do not exist to be political education camps to turn normal people into mini-me Len McCluskeys.
I’d say that the Labour-Union link as exists is a corrupting relationship – look no farther than Union leaders claiming for the last decades that their members support Labour in their hundreds of thousands – which has been a simple lie in many cases, as we all know.
One other Unite area that needs attention is Parliamentary representation – which MPs are speaking for Unite, and who are their members?
In the Grangemouth dispute Michael Connarty MP has been speaking up as the “Local MP”. He appears to be a member of Unite (based on being a TGWU members some years ago), but has not declared his interest as far as I can see (open to correction).
Until that relationship is resolved, Labour will not be getting my vote.
“Pentangelis says:
November 1, 2013 at 11:19 am
Sounds like we are goiung down the route towards Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamsters.”
‘Going down the route’?
Red Len and his mates have been treading that fellow-travelling path for years.
What is the point of this article? The facts are clear, Trade Unions work extremely hard for workers every day.
They are not in it to get to Parliament and claim thousands in expenses, they are in it because it right. In my view, you are exactly the problem with politics, people with no idea how real people have to fight for the very basic standards and are treated like dirt. Unfortunately because you have never experienced this real world, you’ll be like all the other ‘career politicians’ without substance, without experience basically without a clue. Good luck but don’t stand for Labour join the Fib-Dems…
Beautifully summed up, Fred.
You must go where your heart takes you. Unite is a good union but like political parties it is reliant on participation, many people do not see the relevance of Trade Unionism outside the work situation.
Ashcroft polls are probably not the most reliable, polling is dependant on the questions asked.
I would suggest that the Labour party internal workings are probably not as democratic as you (or I) would like, so will you leave the party? I dont think so.
Unions form the backbone of the Labour party, the conscience, the drive and the funding.
If you want to change something, win the argument, change the face of organisations. At the moment Unite allows participation in the Labour party from members , who are less well paid then the glitterati: professionals , doctors, solicitors and managers.
Learn the lesson who pays the piper calls the tune, many aspiring politicians I have met fail to see this so its ‘the party activists” when trying to be elected but “the constituents” once thy are elected.
If you are criticised, then take it but win the argument, only dead fishes swim with the current. Good Luck , keep fighting for what you belive in.
Unite is a representation of society in general. when the majority are uninterested in the political process it makes it easy for an unrepresentative minority of activists to take control. If we had mandatory voting, as in Australia, we might get a more representative Parliament. Similarly, if the same process was applied to union membership we might have a union leadership more in step with the members.
Politicians and union officials need to remember they are our servants not our masters.
Very good post and well argued.
Unfortunately you will find those on here like @Danny in a previous thread who believe Unite, its leaderships and intimidatory tatics are perfectly acceptable.
I left my union 15 years ago and I left Labour 5 years ago after 30 years in support when Brown came to be the PM. My view is that they no longer represent the normal working person / family anymore and are ruled by leftwing progressive metropolitan activist elite.
Miliband has tried to sweep “falkirk” under the rug, but this Grangemouth link with Unite will reopen wounds which Miliband will find difficult to heal. The public are not stupid, they will see an note what is happening.
The more I see of Unites tactics, the more they remind me of the tactics used by Scientologists.
Not technically ilegal, but certainly not ethical.
But they are right so any means are justified
Socialist Agenda
You’re on the wrong forum. Read the article and comments, they are well reasoned and rely on a factual stance.
Perhaps you can address each point made, or is that you’re an emotional ideologue and you have nothing?
Well-written but revealing in the worst way – fundamentally dishonest and cowardly. But also strategically inept.
It’s dishonest by omission to ignore the massive amount of good work that unions do, which is a real feat of both solidarity and organisation. It’s far too easy to focus on the cracks that inevitably appear in solidarity and the power-struggles inherent in any large organisation, but to ignore its purpose or achievements is absurd.
It’s cowardly to uncritically accept the Thatcher/Blair attack-lines against unions when any critical thought immediately reveals them for the self-interested neoliberal sophistry they are. The turnout argument has always been laughable – MPs often win elections with less than 50% of the vote, let alone of the whole electorate. Democratic revolutionary change, even in mass-membership organisations, has always been led by a committed, educated and well-trained elite, with a larger core of people following in a less engaged manner and with less political education. Yes, many union-members are more interested in the benefits than the struggle, read The Sun, and in opinion polls report incoherent opinions influenced both by media barons and plain lack of critical thought.
Should we feel ashamed? Not at all! We still regularly democratically consult and ballot such members. We actively attempt to engage them with political re-education, and confront lazy or backwards thought (particularly in our campaign work against patriarchal, racist and homophobic behaviour). We support them in their class interests, irrespective of any false consciousness that capitalist society has imposed, through our work in the struggle. We do these things and we are proud of it. If some right-wing rag polls our members with leading questions and its editors have a chortle about some unprogressive opinions, they are missing the point – these are millions of working-class people, who regardless of their political views, we are providing with the support and solidarity that they desperately need. Moreover, if their employer starts to screw them over, at the ballot we always see that a sense of fair play that trumps any pro-corporate, anti-union propaganda the media has pumped at them.
I don’t understand why picketing bosses’ homes is regarded as heinous – are we meant to sympathise with the robber-barons? I’m sure their mansions are comfortable enough. It can only be a good thing if every day they wake up with a tinge of guilt for their place in the capitalist order, and would it be so bad if every time they considered harming innocent people (destroying their lives and livelihoods by laying off hundreds of workers, jacking up prices so the poor must choose twixt freezing and starving, pocketing the unholy profits without paying due tax) that they should feel a little scared of the potential consequences? If they don’t have a conscience, intimidation is at least a partial substitute. The most basic threat a union poses to them – the withdrawal of labour – is very much a defensive reaction, not an act of spite or aggression like the corporations and their managerial class regularly indulge in.
There’s also a strategic naivity in this article that worries me. Its author seems to think he is exposing what happens at Esher, as if readers should be shocked by some kind of conspiracy theory. But this is something that unions have always been completely open about. In the bigger picture, we all know that progressive forces must struggle against conservative ones in every field of the public sphere! Doing it at Westminster is not enough – there are battles to fight in local councils, in public organisations, in industry, in academia, in the media, in secular/religious life, in the school system, in minority rights, in disabled rights, in women’s rights. Everywhere. How is revolutionary change going to be achieved without a network of highly-motivated, well-trained and effective leaders? It’s no good being a firebrand who is shredded on Newsnight, or who can’t leverage their position on a committee to drive through change, or who can’t use new media to communicate with the grassroots. This is what places like Esher are all about, and we should look upon them as an achievement of the Left, not as a dirty little secret.
We all know that right-wing forces have very expensive education and training, and all the resources at their disposal that money can buy. It is vital for the wellbeing of millions that we possess a cadre that can counter and ultimately defeat them. That means driving out the right-wing sell-outs and selfish careerists in the Labour party too. The idea that organised labour has no role in helping select candidates with real commitment to the struggle, or helping them develop the tools they need to be effective within it, is barmy.
‘We support them in their class interests, irrespective of any false consciousness that capitalist society has imposed, through our work in the struggle’
‘intimidation is at least a partial substitute’
‘How is revolutionary change going to be achieved’
It appears Citizen Smith is alive and well! I don’t know about anyone else but I get the strong feeling the author of this would secretly like to see some people hanging from lamp posts or kneeling down ready to be disposed of by a quick bullet to the back of the neck, a truely frightening mind set that absolutely typies the very worst aspects of some of the UK’s unions
speaking personally I am one of unites millions of ordinary working people. I criticize unite frequently especially the endless emails exhorting me to strike for no other reason than simply to make len feel he’s hung like a carthorse.
I agree with the benfits cap
I disagree with voting age reduced to 16
I disagree with mass strikes and civil disobedience
I disagree with the idiocy of a 75p tax rate.
Len McCluskey does not represent my views … his brand of idiocy is not why I joined a union … however when unite were called on to represent the workers in my office … they actually managed to negotiate a worsening of our terms and conditions. Not exactly competent either!
Good point Fred,
LeftIsForward,
The article is not to denigrate the good work of unions. It points out the worst excess’s of the backward left. The author argues to great lengths to provide the factual basis for his conclusions.
Your response is largely irrelevant as he’s not disputing the good work done. Its the age old problems of lefties not accepting the issues on the left, because their moral compass means that is is okay coz they do such a good job. Well the world is changing and the left will get LEFT behind. The average man in the street does not spout blinkered lefty politics.
Well, I’m still a member of UNITE, and will be sticking ith the Union, even though I don’t like what the Lesadership is doing at the moment. Maybe unite is just geetting too big with mergers; there’s little to connect engineers and bus drivers except solidarity. But solidarity of the right sort; I’ve always been a bit uncomfortable with secondary picketing and flying pickets; I’d rather the workforce itself downed tools and had everybody out on the picket line. Also, some of the tactics used by some picckets are pretty unsavoury intmidation, bordering onto criminality. We don’t want to see another incident like 30 years ago, when rogue miners dropped a block of concrete onto a motorway. But the reason we have people like Len and Scargill coming up top of the heap is because of participation or lack of it from members, which always means the activists to get away with murder and not held accountable. Members get the leadership they deserve; if you don’t agree, challenge through democratic means. And we could do with a little less whinging from so called ex-Labour individuals. who’ve thrown in the towel. To borrow aphrase from the Great Samuael Johnson: Sir, anyone tired of London is tired of life.
Great stuff. Unite is just a hard-left pressure group that is trying to turn the Labour Party into a Bennite party. It’s not worthy of being called a trade union.
A very strange article. Jonathan never once mentions Unite negotiating on his behalf with an employer. That is why people join a trade union and not to make a political statement!
Robert, I think we all know that, maybe he felt he didn’t need to mention it,
Why quote Lord Ashcroft how extraordinary, of all the people in the country he has the most to gain from smashing the unions. Sounds llike an anti union Tory rant to me, very poisonous
Robert: “A very strange article.”
From his article it appears he joined UNITE because he wanted to become an MP and thought it would be helpful.
People join the undemocratic Progress organisation for exactly the same reason…
Swatantra:
You speak a lot of sense, in that many if not a very large majority of union members do not participate in union decisions, in particular about industrial actions. We just have to look how many vote as a percentage of the membership and of that percentage how many vote for action. Surely to make it more democratic, it should be 50% plus 1 of the total membership to initiate action. Unless members take part in activities then do they have a right to complain when THEIR union has been taken over by extremists of left or right wing.
That Unite have raised their head above the parapet by using so called ‘leaverage’ in this dispute at Grangemouth, they have just given their opponents a very large to club to beat them with. I do remember the two people who were killed when a concrete slab was thrown on their taxi during the miners strike.
GSilver: and Tribal Labour Supporter
You also speak a lot of sense but until Unite members stand up and take action against the so called executive and control of your union, this sort of action will continue in your name.
As we approach 2015 elections, the Conservatives will hammer Miliband with a campaign using pictures of the 70s, and asking the question, who will rule Britain, Miliband or McClusky, Prentice et al. They will ask who finances the Labour party, a lot of the big private donors moved on when Blair left to make his fortune, so that leaves the unions. The vast majority of union membership is within the public sector and the electorate have little sympathy with industrial action in those areas and it impacts little on their daily lives and if they are on strike, it saves having to pay them.
Remember the circulation of the Daily Mail/Telegraph/Express/Sun is vastly bigger than the Daily Mirror/Guardian, and the former are read by a very high proportion of union members. the BBC has opened itself up to the charge which in my opinion, well founded of bias. just look at the appointment of Purnell and possibly Smith who was Blairs mouthpiece and spin doctor after Campbell, jobs not advertised anywhere.
Labour wake up, Unite is a danger to your existence.
Excellent article. Since the 1970s at least the close ties between Labour, Unions & The Co-op have damaged all of them. That relationship seemed to make sense at the end of the 19th Century but The World has moved on, those links dont go with the grain of society any more.
Labour, Unions & Co-ops can manage an amicable seperation or destroy each other in a very nasty divorce, its not settled yet but time is runningout.
One I forgot, Labour Party rules, you have to be a member of a union to be considered for a position as a PPC.
Oh, comrades, this is priceless – exactly what I’ve been hoping for, although, ideally, you’d have done all this two years ago when there was still a chance of having your civil war, choosing a winner and then getting ready for 2015. As it is now, the next realistic shot Labour has at power is going to be 2020 and you’d better hope and pray the economy tanks during the next Parliament or you’re finished.
God bless the hard Left and the union apparatchiks for fighting for the soul of Labour and God bless, as well, the soft Left and the centrists for fighting for the chance of Labour actually being given the chance to govern again – because that’s the choice. Hard Left thinking is deader than vaudeville among the electorate and the fight is for the middle ground. Unite and its tactics worry and frighten ordinary working folk, who, quite sensibly, are generally uninterested in the nuance of party politics but actually have a pretty good idea of how the world works – and don’t have a great deal of trust in Labour’s competence.
That argument is for you guys to make and win. Have your bloodletting, fight your ideological battles and then, finally, remember what you’re actually for. Throwing bottles from the sidelines and playing “I’m more Labour than you” with each other is no substitute for governing.
Incidentally, as a point of information, I can’t help noticing that the Left go ad hominem by default. This is known behaviour, of course, we outsiders in the Centre and on Rhe right tend to think those who disagree with us to be mistaken, or wrong, or in some cases, stupid, but rarely evil – while you guys default to wild accusations of wickedness and malice.
@Robert: Funny you should mention the importance of Unite negotiating on an employee’s behalf with an employer, but Grangemouth was a bit different, wasn’t it?
The threatened shutdown wasn’t even about pay and conditions, which could have been quite understandable. It was about one man, Stevie Deans. Unite threatened to shut down the only refinery in Scotland, risking hundreds of jobs, over one union convenor, who has now resigned anyway. Yes, makes total sense.
Even when it finally came round to pay and conditions, Unite ended up with worse conditions than had originally been on the table, thanks to a thoroughly incompetent negotiation.
Oh yes, they were really looking after the interests of the workers with the employers there.
But Rob, didn’t you see Uncle Lens article in the Guardian? He personally went there to safeguard the jobs of 800 people.
Henrik. Love your post.
Trade unions help workers against bad employers.We need more labour people to speak up for the trade union-labour link.
Trade unions are a force for good in a free society and labour’s link with trade unionism makes it stronger as a political force.
Unite want to keep their noses out of local planning issues as well.
Especially as the majority of their membership at local level in the area concerned are against, as are the majority of the local population.
Mummy, mummy that Len McCluskey is not a nice man!
Instead of confronting the right-wing press, you agree with them….Ashcroft polls as evidence? Oh dear.
Your views are eerily reminiscent of the Gang of Four’s arguments for abandoning Labour back in the early 80s. Perhaps you should toddle off to the Liberal Democrats as well.
Frances O’Grady said at yeterday’s CLASS Conference(sponsored by UNITE btw) that the Unions shouldn’t forget their core business and that is collective bargaining. The Unions seem to have diversified into more and more political activity, but who can blame them when Govts of all complexions don’t seem to be taking any notice of them, and the only way to bring about change is through political action. Really in an ideal world the Unions should be acting as a pressure group. Ian Lavery gave a great speech on the relevance of Unions. We need them. All work places should be unionised; unions should be negotiating on behalf of all their workforce with Ministers. Where is the Minister for Labour? a specially designated member of the Govt to deal with labour issues, and industrial relations. where is the wages Council? Both abolished some time ago. Lets bring back collective bargaining. Lets defend that link, but it has to be a new renegotiated link with the Unions and Labour. And thats what the Spring conference is all about. The Unions have changed and more so Labour has changed into a Party of Govt for all the People.
Join USDAW or community then they better suite your position of “always compromise”.
I originally joined MSF in the early 90s, shortly after starting work. Being a trade union member has never been really relevant to me personally in that I’ve got nothing out of it for me. I’ve mainly worked in very small businesses or for myself so most if not all of what unions offer has been fairly irrelevant to me. I joined because I believed that unions are a force for good in society and to show solidarity with my fellow workers.
However, I never really felt like the union wanted me. Unless you’re working in a unionised workplace trade unions are very unwelcoming places. I was never welcomed and invited to participate. I was never even told how. I was never given a rule book. Unlike the Labour Party’s NPF and policy making process the union doesn’t provide a clear, transparent policy making process.
I stuck with MSF, despite my doubts and kept going with Amicus and eventually Unite. But, I quit last year, long before Falkirk, as I realised that I was paying more than £10 a month to fund Len McClusky to hurt the Labour Party and damage the best opportunity to improve the lot of working people in Britain. Len’s ludicrous rants don’t represent what I believe and I don’t feel any sense of collective responsibility as I don’t recall once in 20 years ever being asked to contribute in a meaningful way to Unite policy.
Why should I pay for that? The Labour Party is far better equipped to deliver a better future for Britain. I believe in the principles of Labour. That means sometimes I’ll agree with some policies and disagree with others. But even the ones I disagree with I’ll sign up to as I’ve had an opportunity to have my say.
Grangemouth, a multi-millionaire who pays no tax in the UK closes one of Scotlands biggest industrial plants just to force the workforce to accept a pay freeze and an inferior pension. These are the tactics used by 19th century mill owners with their lockouts that literally starved the workers into submission. Is this what we aspire to as a nation?
It’s clear to me that Len McCluskey and the leadership of Unite are filling the vacuum left by a real Labour Party and are doing such a good job the Establishment have to take every opportunity to smear him and the union.
If the workforce at Grangemouth had chosen to fight Ineos and the closure had become permanent who would have been blamed for the closure?
swatantra:
So you advocate a ‘closed shop’ approach, how undemocratic, annoy the union and your thrown out and then no job. I say NO to this idea. Make voting for union members a priority, like voting for our so called political leaders. What about those who fundamentally disagree with unions and prefer to bargain their own wages and conditions, or that unions do not represent them. i am in the RCN only for its insurance, it is an organisation that I take part in its votes to try and keep the frontline as the leaders. They and Unison are far too close to management and have in my experience sold out staff to management,for to quote one rep about a manager as the target of a grievance ‘she’s now my boss, I can’t afford to antagonise her’ So the grievance was stitched up without the staff knowing and the manager survived to continually bully and harass staff now being fireproofed.
Just wait till the 2015 election and watch Miliband being asked who if it isn’t declared bankrupt after the Co-op going down, who controls Labour, You or McClushy et al.
Henrik, ouch, but true
Bob: “who controls Labour, You [Miliband] or McClushy et al.”
It certainly isn’t McCluskey – many policies favoured by UNITE are quite different to those promised by Labour (e.g. UNITE is opposed to austerity).
The Blairites have lost all economic credibility by running the economy into the ground with a debt fueled boom, by involvement in expensive and unnecessary wars and by destroying as many manufacturing jobs as Thatcher. And now the Blairites want the Labour Party to break the strongest link connecting it to the reality of life in Britain.
I’m tempted to say: cut ’em loose. It’ll be a fine old spectacle watching the ship of fools drift off towards the oblivion of New Labour LaLa-Land.
Steve, the Blairites were ousted in Sept 2006′ the spending didn’t get out of control to at least a year later.
Harry steel you want people to leave labour like the SDP did, remind me how well did labour do in 1983′ oh yes 27%’
It’s the right wing press that’s pointing out what Mclusky has done, the daily mirror, and yes the a times, so we haven’t confronted the times about this. What would you expect labour voters to do, when they see this whole chapter ,is making labour look bad, and a Tory paper like the Times is getting ,print out of this, say to the Times, you don’t really want to try to point out that Mclusky has tried to un democratically impose a candidate, you’re ( the times) only going on about this, to make labour look bad,
We’d be laughed out of mainstream politics,if we tried to argue that,
Bob, sorry where did Swantantra say he wanted the closed shop back,
Did I read this correctly? Did Jonathan join a union only to help with his political career? I wonder if he is leaving it now for exactly the same reason.
No, I’m not for a closed shop; thats getting back to the bad old days of unionism. And I don’t believe in a free for all either. What I and most employees would want is a recognised fair rate for a fair days work, and that can only be achieved through collective bargaining; not trying to trump your fellow worker by getting ‘extras’ through individual bargaining. And, most employers would prefer negatiating with a representative of the workforce as a whole instead of each and every employee.
Steve;
Remember the old saying ‘when you have them by the balls their hearts and minds will surely follow’. Now the Co-oP bank has in effect gone into receivership and is being bailed out by a US hedge fund, what will happen if Labour’s 10 million pound debt is called in? I suspect, up will step McClusky et al offering money galore. Then they have Miliband by the balls and not Ed’s, but total control of the Labour party and if it God forbid gets into office McClusky will demand not just a pound of flesh but a couple of tons of it, and watch the electorate destroy Miliband and the Labour party.
The Group will sitll have a 30% stake in the Bank and ensure that those ethical principles are adhered to. In fact that is the Coop Bank’s unique selling point which makes it very different from its money grabbing competitors. So it will still appeal to many principled investors and customers. And these days customers are very aware of ethical involvment, and green issues, and a better world, even in times of autserity. Thats what makes co-operators very different from the run of the mill individuals involved in the rat race. And it is to be remembered that The Labour Party is no longer the Trade Union Congress at prayer. Thank goodness.
Shouldn’t we join unions so they collectively can help you with out pay and conditions, and to argue the case using the power of working to rule or striking, plus hopefully we won’t have to need the, if disciplinary or sacking measures are put to us,
@Bob
Too many ‘what ifs’ there mate – just conjecture.
With more credibility, one might say: “What if the Progress Tendency takeover, enact Blairite policies and drive the economy into the ground as they did when last in office?”
At least this has already happened once so we know it’s possible and, to a degree, this increases the likelihood of it happening again particularly as many of the culprits remain influential.