Although it is
now almost two years since I stood down from the last of my elected positions
within UNISON, I remain (of course) a member (all workers should be trade union
members), encouraged by the news that trade
union membership increased last year. If a socialist Labour Government is
going to stand any chance of success we will need to be able to mobilise
working class people in support of that Government – and the trade unions are
the most significant and effective means we have of mobilising our class.
This means that
the leadership of our trade unions is an important question, and therefore I
was interested to see the summary
results of the latest biennial elections to UNISON’s National Executive
Council (on which I served seven terms from 2003 to 2017). These were the first
elections fought under recent amendments to the election procedures which
sought to prohibit groups of UNISON members from getting together to support
candidates in the elections.
This was obviously
a response to the outcome
of elections two years ago, which saw a contest between “Stronger UNISON”
candidates supportive of the current UNISON establishment (who took 31 seats)
and “UNISON Action Broad Left” candidates (29 of whom were successful). That
election had been the first time that supporters of the status quo within the
Union had organised openly, and plainly they didn’t much enjoy the experience. “Stronger
UNISON” has morphed (on Facebook) into “UNISON Unity” which makes great play of
not being a “faction”.
(Students of
the history of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union will understand
something of the political origins of some of the most enthusiastic supporters
of the status quo in the Union from the fervour with which “factions” are
denounced).
UNISON Action
Broad Left, the most recent attempt to unite the disparate forces of the “organised”
left within the Union, was clearly in the sights of those who succeeded in
changing the election procedures which had served perfectly well for twenty
five years without the need for draconian restrictions on organising support for
candidates in elections – there were not, this time, candidates of UNISON Action
Broad Left any more than there were “Stronger UNISON” candidates.
Those in the
Union who were most concerned to see positive and democratic change
nevertheless promoted a slate
of 41 candidates, 27 of whom have been elected. This slate included
left-wing Labour Party members, and also members of other political
organisations (the Socialist Party and the Socialist Workers Party for
example). From my years of experience in UNISON I understand the need to
organise those who want to see change in a bureaucratically dominated
organisation, and I am really pleased to see the re-election of a number of
those candidates, who were friends and comrades in my time on the NEC.
I was very
sorry that my successor on the NEC, Sean Fox, was not re-elected in the Greater
London Region, as I was to see that my friend and comrade, Sonya Howard was
defeated. The reality is clearly that there is limited political space between
those who want to keep things as they are and those who want change in UNISON.
23 (more than a
third) of the NEC members were elected unopposed – none of whom were from the slate
of 41. Were it not for “factional” organising from the left the state of UNISON
democracy would be even less healthy than it is.
Supporters of
the status quo will no doubt continue to organise as a faction on the NEC as
they did throughout my seven terms, even as they denounce the very idea of
factions within the Union in public. Over the years I would occasionally get
reports from secret meetings attended (sometimes) by a large majority of the
NEC. Once I sat next to a newly elected member who shared with me their disappointment
that their name had not been put forward for the Labour Link Committee (because
a caucus which did not exist had decided that it should not be).
Trade union
activists will always organise alongside likeminded colleagues. There isn’t a
problem with “factions” in UNISON, and it is profoundly disingenuous that those
who maintain that there is are invariably those who have organised factionally
in secret at the highest level of the Union for many years.
Perhaps now the
Union could deal with the real problem of how to ensure that there is never a
repeat of the disgraceful
conduct of the former Greater London Regional Secretary in the last General
Secretary election – perhaps even responding meaningfully to the recommendations
from the Assistant Certification Officer?
There will be
another General Secretary election before the next biennial election to the NEC
and it would shame the Union if it did not have a reasoned response to those
recommendations before that election takes place.
No comments:
Post a Comment