I blogged
about the publicised decision of our National Joint Council to call for
further strike action on 30 September. The news report on which I based that
blog post is still online (thanks
to Google) but is no
longer available on the UNISON website.
The bulletin
to local government branches of UNISON, dated Wednesday was unequivocal;
“The UNISON NJC Committee met
yesterday to review the J10 strike and decide next steps in our campaign. It has decided to hold a second day of strike
action on Tuesday 30 September rather
than the earlier dates suggested. 30th September is the last
date local government pay is above the National Minimum Wage. On 1 October, SCP
5 will fall below the new NMW of £6.50 per hour.
This means that the ballot timetables
for the 15 national MATs have now been revised to enable members to take action
on 30 September. Education and Children’s Services will issue separate guidance
about this and related matters shortly.
The NJC TU Side Executive is meeting
on 29 July to discuss coordinating second wave action and further information
will follow. The UNISON NJC Committee also agreed to set a date for industrial
action in October should there be no movement by the Employers.”
The GMB Press Office on the other
hand hasn’t tweeted about the dispute since announcing
the success of action on 10 July. Informally I have been advised that “The GMB’s current position is further day
of strike in the week commencing 13th October along with other
public sector unions. But with a day of non-strike protest in August.”
UNITE also lauded
the success of the action but, the inconclusive outcome of the (National Joint
Council ) NJC trade union side on 22 July hasn’ t produced any subsequent reference to the local
government pay dispute on twitter.
It appears that the Executive of the NJC Trade Union Side, which will meet next
Tuesday, may not produce a consensus in support of action on 30 September.
Our leaders – lay and full-time – across all three local
government unions (and the other unions whose support we all need, as they need
ours) need to be dunked repeatedly in cold water until an agreed strategy for
action on public sector pay is arrived at.
I don’t have an easy or immediate answer. Certainly if we
wanted effective unified action across
all unions we would not want to start from here – but that is the one thing
about which we have no choice.
We should – but do not – have a unified rank and file
movement across the major trade unions so that activists could try to hammer
out a common position for which we could argue. We do not have such an effective
body. All we have are risible front
organisations, declining captives of
sectarianism and obscure fossils
(and worthy campaigns which
are incapable of intervening in such matters).
In the absence of such a unifying force we probably need to
start by finding some way to have an honest debate about our strengths,
weaknesses and tactics. This has to be conducted in public, because otherwise
it is hidden from our members, even though this means that it is also conducted
in full view of the employers.
There are a few things we shouldn’t do.
We shouldn’t “talk up” the impact of and support for strike
action to the extent that it bears no relation to the experience of our
activists (ourselves) on our picket lines. We need to be honest about the room
for improvement which always exists, and try to assess it accurately so that we
can try to use it. To improve. This is difficult because such honesty will
always be seized upon by the defeatists
and careerists to call off action – but it is unavoidable if we are to make an
informed assessment of what to do next.
We shouldn’t pull our punches when criticising the absurd
timidity of our officials in the face of this year’s bugbear “legal jeopardy”.
I confess to guilt on this point since I haven’t said before that it is both
pathetic and absurd that UNISON has adopted such a restrictive approach to
balloting members in Academies. (It is not acceptable that branches and Regions
are told that the UNISON Centre may need them to chip in to run ballots as it
lacks capacity. UNISON staff should be redeployed as necessary and immediately to
ensure we ballot everyone we can.)
We shouldn’t fall in to the trap of “union chauvinism”. I don’t
support UNISON for the sake of supporting my own union – indeed one
of the most read posts on this blog dealt entirely with circumstances in
which UNISON was falling short. In the same way, GMB members shouldn’t be
precious about defending GMB, nor UNITE, nor NUT members – not even members of
PCS. Socialist trade union activists are on the side of the workers (rather than this or that trade union) and, as a
general rule, we want to see a meaningful unity of trade union leaderships, not
to volunteer as cheerleaders even for the most leftwing.
We shouldn’t subordinate our fight for a decent pay rise to
the cause of supporting a change of Government through support for the TUC
demonstration in October. We should support that demonstration
of course – and we should certainly be doing all we can to see that we have
both a Labour Government and a movement capable of exerting meaningful pressure
upon it. We are not, however, a stage army for Ed Miliband – and we’ll face a
continuing fight under any Government a year from now.
Our members – across all the unions – expect us to deliver
united action for fair pay in the autumn.
They know we didn’t get everyone out (and that we never will)
but expect us to do our best to maximise the impact of their action (including
the impact of favourable publicity).
They know the law is against us but don’t expect us to run
away from it.
They know that the leaders of each union want to promote
their own union – but can tolerate this if together our unions can show unity.
They know we would be less worse off under a Labour
Government, but expect more than Labour will offer us.
Tuesday’s meeting of the Executive of the NJC Trade Union
Side needs to start getting this right.
No comments:
Post a Comment