We have reported before on this blog about the unending arguments about what UNISON members can and cannot debate in relation to the Labour Party in our union meetings. The daft structure we were saddled with at the time of merger in 1993 prevents proper debate amongst the membership as a whole about our ramshackle intervention in the Labour Party.
Watch this space for news about whether we are allowed to discuss the fact that the Party in Government is set to elect a new Leader who will become Prime Minister of the whole country (including all UNISON members, regardless of which part of our political fund they pay into…)
As an old fashioned trade unionist who believes that members should run their unions I prefer our Rules to be interpreted by elected rather than appointed officials. It doesn’t seem fair to me that our Union should put people in the position of deciding upon the correct reading of a Rule Book which, under that Rule Book, they could have no say in writing or amending.
Particularly not if we put people in a position where they could be accused of having a conflict of interest. It amounts to a cop out by our lay leadership – and it just isn’t fair.
I'll keep you posted...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I hope the rumours aren't true but I fear that would show precisely the lack of judgement which appears to me to be the hallmark of our Labour Party intervention (but maybe I am an old cynic).
Post a Comment