Unions in politics: in defence of Unite
Posted on Tuesday 16 March, 2010
Filed Under Industrial relations
IT’S not the sort of thing I would necessarily mention if I was having a organic beer made only from sustainable malt, hops and yeast with George Monbiot. But yes, I am regular business flyer. If I was faced with disruption to a long-planned trip on account of the strike at British Airways this weekend, I would not be overjoyed about it.
But meetings can always be rescheduled and holidays can always be postponed. There is an important and non-negotiable democratic principle at stake here, and that is the right for any group of workers to withdraw their labour. That, in short, represents the difference between the definition of an employee and the definition of a slave.
Yet this is something that a wide section of the rightwing press – predictably led by the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph – seems to think should not apply to cabin crew. Hence the obviously co-ordinated barrage of scare stories over the last few days.
So headline writers freely brand Unite officials as ‘bully boys’ and ‘red barons’, simply for doing what unions are supposed to do, which is to defend the working conditions of their members.
In reality, Unite has made every effort to compromise with BA boss Willie Walsh, up to and including the acceptance of a pay cut. As late as yesterday, it offered to suspend the strike in return for only minimal concessions from the company.
But there is a subtext to this near hysterical coverage. There is another thing that media apologists for the wealthy detest even more than industrial action, and that is the notion that trade unions should have a voice in politics. They have hated this idea for the last 110 years, and they will continue to hate it for as long as it persists.
Unite has given Labour £11m over the last three years. It is providing the same sort of assistance Ashcroft is giving the Tories in key marginals across the country. It has got 60 members running as Labour candidates.
This is hardly a ‘buy a policy’ racket; if it was, a lot of legislation restricting union activity in the workplace would have been repealed years ago. The support really does come with no strings attached.
But bring the two together, and the stories write themselves. How dare Unite organise a stoppage after twice securing overwhelming majorities for a walkout in democratically conducted ballots? How can Labour possibly accept cash from such a tainted source?
Nobody is suggesting that the current system by which unions channel money into politics is perfect. Indeed, the left is numbered among its sharpest critics. Blair and Brown have governed on a political programme that is anathema to every socialist, and have offended plenty of non-socialist radicals.
As a result, many feel that union political funds should not be going exclusively to Labour, or even to Labour at all. My argument would be that while disaffiliation would be a retrograde step, the case for democratisation can certainly be debated.
But be certain of one thing. If unions pulled out of the process, British politics would be reduced to the sole province of the super-rich. Unite should ignore the pressure from the people who would truly love things to turn out that way.
<<Go back
Comments
19 Responses to “Unions in politics: in defence of Unite”
Leave a Reply
-
- Yemen: an unfinished revolution
- Comment Is Free: An honours system for those who fight to make Britain a better place
- Democracy crushed; elected President arrested; World wrings its hands
- Fabians change policy on unpaid internships
- Kamal al-Fayoumi arrested as Egyptian regime retaliates to strikes
-
-
Meta
-
“the notion that trade unions should have a voice in politics.”
No, Dave, what gets me and every other Conservative and Lib Dem voter really angry is that the trade unions now have a guaranteed say in how this country is run. They are literally changing national policy behind the scenes (as Michael Gove listed in a speech earlier this week) when they are neither elected nor accountable.
Labour voters can cry all they want about Ashcroft donations, but he has never influenced policy.
In Barrow-in-Furness, which was considered a ‘safe’ Labour seat for many years after 1945, the Conservative Party HQ on Abbey Road had a large sign outside urging disgruntled Trade Unionists to refuse to pay the Labour Party levy and generously issued forms to facilitate this.
So much for one set of funding; in those years the Conservative Party was bankrolled by big business for years and there was no way in which a normal citizen – unless he or she lived in a barrel like Diogenes, and subsisted on spring water and wild herbs – could ‘disaffiliate’ monetary support and refuse to support the Tories financially.
There was always something foul and iniquitous about the Union-Labour relationship. When an election was in the offing and the selection committee met to pick a candidate [this was in Lancaster] up popped hitherto-unseen people from the effing Bleachers’ and Dyers’ Union with their block vote handy. Little bleaching or dyeing had been carried out for many a long year and one of those present enquired loudly whether we’d be joined by the accredited delegates of the Amalgamed Coracle-Makers’ and Stone-Axe Chippers’ Union.
UNITE seems to onto a real winner; fully 60 members running as Labour candidates. Out of 650 seats [at the next election] the UNITE Party will be a formidable party-within-a-party.
Jesus wept, there’s a lot of ill-informed crap on this subject.
Who pays the piper calls the tune (or at least has the ability to, should they choose to use it). For the Tories and Lib Dems it’s their rich financial backers, for Labour it’s the unions.
Despite this, Labour have spent the last thirteen years doing their best to alienate trade unionists; it’s hilarious to imagine the Tories doing the same to their bankrollers – company directors and The City. If you’re worried about how many Labour candidates are trade unionists (they all should be really), check out the stats on the professional backgrounds of the current Tory candidates by clicking on my name link.
I don’t know where LFAT gets the idea that Unite are ‘neither elected nor accountable’ from. Union policies are decided at democratic annual conferences and the responsibility for overseeing their implementation lies with elected (sometimes not very good…) senior officials.
“Labour voters can cry all they want about Ashcroft donations, but he has never influenced policy.”
F…….HILARIOUS…. he’s just a humble-bumble Channel 4 Belize Billionaire into charwity work, in’ it! “Anover million Dave? No problem my son, here have this no-strings bung off the back off my absurd shell company. Books? Nah! We don’t keep ‘em!”
Meanwhile, in today’s FT, Gordon Brown (“A Fair Future for All”) has successfully pleaded with the European Commission to back off cracking down on the activities of City based hedge funds until after the election. “Cos they are my bestest mates ever”.
Banker’s Money? Can’t buy you love but it most certainly CAN, did and will buy you the f/ckwit Labour Party. 13 years and counting. Neo liberalism, “it’s a song without end”.
Yes Letters from a Tory has produced the most laughable contribution to any thread ever!
Personally I would like to see the unions exercising a far greater influence in the Labour party, we may then start to see real progressive policies develop that takes us away from the failed neo liberalism and towards social democracy.
The UN stats clearly show that countries with the most neo liberal policies score far worse than those that have held onto at least some form of social democracy. I was reading that infant mortality in the US was the worst among the industrial nations and that nations with higher trade union density scored better in health, education and general standard of living. That is the kind of policy influence I would love to see.
Also good to see that US and Australian workers are siding with BA workers, that is what I call a special relationship!
Perhaps Letters from a Tory might like to supplement his contribution by listing all the many heinous ways in which Unite is influencing government policy. Because from where this trade unionist (and Labour member) is sitting, the rewards look remarkably slim.
Also, I thought the whole, you know, point of the Labour Party was to represent the labour classes. Labour should by all rights simpy be the parliamentary wing of the unions. Although, and I don’t have the statistics to back this up, but I’m going to assume that it is nowhere near a majority of working people in this country who are members, let alone activists within Trade Unions? While I support the unions and their right to strike and defend their workers, I think the argument that they are not representative of the British people does hold water. Which is to say that a serious left turn in our politics can’t take place until we work towards an engaged and organised work force.
“I think the argument that they are not representative of the British people does hold water.”
From a purely statistical point of view this is correct but from a philosophical and programmatic point of view they represent workers interests.
The sun newspaper may represent the British people by your logic, but that doesn’t mean they serve their interests. Quite the opposite actually.
I agree, and more generally than that I wouldn’t be a Socialist if I didn’t think that a Socialist political, economic and cultural system is the only way of truly representing the majorities interests. But, living as we do in a parliamentary democracy, we need to convince the majority of working people of the same.
“The Conservative leader, (David Cameron), has privately held talks with the head of the TUC while party officials have met with the unions more than sixty times since the spring…trade unions have also been asked to help DRAW UP OPPOSITION POLICY, the Daily Telegraph can disclose… The initiative mirrors Tony Blair’s so-called “prawn cocktail” offensive to win more support among business leaders in the early 1990s.” (Telegraph 15/8/2008)
Trade Unions determining the policies of our untainted “national interest”(sic) political parties! OUT BLOOODY KEIR HARDIE RAGEOUS!!! Where’s the Tory Party when we needs ‘em. Cometh the hour, Cometh the Chameleon Cameroooooooooon. Sic ‘em pigs.
Meanwhile, Lord Ashcroft relaxes his ample business interests in the ample bosom of William Hauge… a hairless zone easily greased with greasey backhanders.
Would that UNITE actually had some influence.
For all Charlie wheelan’s wet dreams – no it does not.
UNITE has, to cite but one, policy against the Government’s Welfare Reform. I was there when Tony Woodley spoke, with feeling, at a meeting/lobby in a House of Common’s Committee room against this Bill. You could see then how he has contact with the members: he really does have a bond. Result? Nothing.
We are facing the coming Workfare programme – Ipswich Unemployed Action’s site has exploded with comments from people upset at how things are developing.
http://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/
I imagine that Wheelan is now tryign to sell Brown’s position as a cunning plan to win over the electorate. That is, the kind of people that piss in their pants everytime something inconveniences them. Especially when it’s the act of those who do not know their place.
If Labour is re-elected, I wonder if it will decide that the spending cuts should be at the expense of the public sector workers whose union gave it the least money, with the most generous unions spared.
An interesting poll of the political opinions of a sample of Unite members was published a few days ago.
My comments on it are here:
http://hegemonics.typepad.com/new-hegemony/2010/03/the-politics-of-unite.html
Here is Daniel Finkelstein in the Murdoch-owned ‘Times’ …
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/daniel_finkelstein/article7064620.ece
Being me, I have two concerns.
The first is that in the short term the BA strikers will incur widespread public hatred; not only the posh and rich are fliers these days.
The second is that they might well end up striking themselves out of a job. Like it or not, other people can and will do the job cheaper – as on bloody awful Ryanair and First Choice.
That’s their problem to worry about, not yours. If you were cabin crew, you could make those ‘concerns’ known to your colleagues and vote accordingly in the ballot.
But you’re not, and they’ve voted (twice), despite those concerns, to take action against high-handed management.
Socialists support the democratic decisions of the workforce. Victory to the BASSA strikers!
An interesting poll of the political views of Unite members has recently been published. More here:
http://hegemonics.typepad.com/new-hegemony/2010/03/the-politics-of-unite.html
Having mentioned First Choice [the insurer of First Choice reimbursed us 90 quid for two lost bags] and budget-airline-hell Ryanair, here’s something from a source which may be unfamiliar to some of you:
http://www.newsbiscuit.com/2010/03/20/ryanair-to-save-costs-by-getting-the-passengers-to-fly-planes/
Firstly, I sincerely hope that Unite wipe the floor with the BA management. i don’t know anything about their case, but the psychological fillip from a victory would be immense. Secondly, it’s no surprise that a very large proportion of trade unionist have declared that they will vote Tory. As someone, it may have been Winston Churchill but I’m not sure, remarked, ‘Oppositions don’t win elections; Government’s lose them.’.
My thirteen year-old daughter was asking me how I would vote in teh elections. I was brought up as a ‘red diaper’ baby (as the Americans say), so I have always tried not to inflict my politics on my kids as to be honest, it’s a different world now and I don’t want to load them down with prejudices that may hamper them, anyway, my daughter asked me what was the difference between Labour and Tories (and Lib Dem) and I was stumped. She actually asked what was the difference between socialism and communism, and as I explained it to her (without endorsing either position, totally value free)I realised how it was like a snatch of a song from another decade. A good few decades ago. I explained that once upon a time in this country the Government owned the electricity company and that that was a very mild form of social sharing which some people would consider socialism. (I did not care to confuse her with social democracy.). That’s why, if they appeal for support on the picket line, I shall bloody well be there!!
“Yet this is something that a wide section of the rightwing press – predictably led by the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph – seems to think should not apply to cabin crew. Hence the obviously co-ordinated barrage of scare stories over the last few days.”
I have to correct you about this – those papers don’t think the right to strike and to organise should apply to anyone. Sure, in the abstrace they may (only may) concede the principle, but whenever any strike action takes place there will be a million and one objections.
You are going to make the situation worse, you are going to inconvenience loads of people, we should all muck in and sort everything out, etc etc.