Thinking globally about trade union density

I realise I can be a bit downbeat about the state of our trade union movement sometimes, so will post this evening some comparative international information which demonstrates that, whilst things are bad, they could be worse. Remember this is a niche blog about trade unionism, so if membership density data doesn’t do it for you look away now.

Here is a table of data from the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) showing trends in trade union density this century;

Unit		Percentage
Time		1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014
Country
Australia		25.4	25.7	24.5	23.2	23.0	22.3	22.3	20.2	18.5	18.6	19.3	18.4	18.5	18.2	17.0	15.5
Austria		38.2	37.4	36.6	35.7	34.7	34.9	33.9	31.6	30.5	29.7	29.4	29.0	28.4	28.0	27.8	..
Belgium		54.3	56.2	56.3	55.6	54.1	54.0	53.7	54.8	54.7	54.4	54.9	53.8	55.1	55.0	55.1	..
Canada		28.0	28.2	28.4	28.3	28.2	27.8	27.7	27.4	27.3	27.0	27.3	27.2	26.9	27.2	27.1	26.4
Chile		12.7	12.6	12.5	12.8	13.7	13.7	13.3	13.0	13.1	14.1	15.0	15.0	14.9	15.3	15.0	15.5
Czech Republic		30.0	27.2	23.6	22.2	22.3	21.0	19.7	18.7	17.9	17.4	17.2	16.6	15.8	14.3	12.7	..
Denmark		74.0	73.9	73.3	71.6	71.6	70.4	70.7	68.4	67.9	66.3	67.7	67.0	66.4	67.2	66.8	..
Estonia		16.3	14.5	14.0	13.5	11.7	11.0	9.7	8.4	7.6	6.2	7.6	8.2	7.0	6.1	5.7	..
Finland		76.3	75.0	74.5	73.5	72.9	71.5	70.6	70.4	70.5	69.8	69.2	68.6	69.6	69.8	69.0	..
France		8.1	8.0	7.9	8.1	7.9	7.7	7.7	7.6	7.5	7.6	7.7	7.7	7.7	7.7	7.7	..
Germany		25.3	24.6	23.7	23.5	23.0	22.2	21.7	20.7	19.9	19.1	18.9	18.6	18.5	18.3	18.1	..
Greece		26.8	26.5	24.9	24.8	24.6	24.0	24.1	24.1	24.0	23.5	22.6	22.1	22.7	22.8	21.5	..
Hungary		24.5	22.0	20.0	19.0	17.9	17.9	17.5	16.1	15.1	14.6	13.9	12.9	11.8	10.7	10.5	..
Iceland		87.4	89.4	88.1	92.5	86.5	84.0	84.0	85.1	84.8	84.6	85.1	85.4	85.2	85.2	85.5	86.4
Ireland		38.7	38.0	37.8	36.1	37.4	35.5	34.0	32.4	31.5	31.9	33.1	32.7	32.6	31.2	29.6	27.4
Israel		41.3	37.9	36.9	36.5	35.8	34.4	33.1	32.0	30.5	28.6	27.3	25.7	24.2	22.8	..	..
Italy		35.4	34.8	34.2	33.8	33.7	34.1	33.8	33.6	34.0	33.9	35.2	36.0	36.3	36.9	37.3	..
Japan		22.2	21.5	20.9	20.3	19.7	19.3	18.8	18.3	18.3	18.2	18.5	18.4	19.0	18.0	17.8	17.6
Korea		11.7	11.4	11.5	10.8	10.8	10.3	9.9	10.0	10.6	10.3	10.0	9.7	9.9	10.1	..	..
Luxembourg		43.3	42.5	41.8	42.1	42.8	42.3	41.4	40.1	38.7	36.5	35.9	35.1	33.9	32.8	..	..
Mexico		15.8	15.6	15.9	15.9	16.9	17.5	16.9	16.3	16.8	15.7	15.3	14.4	14.5	13.6	13.6	13.5
Netherlands		24.7	22.9	21.2	21.0	20.5	20.8	20.6	20.0	19.3	18.8	19.1	18.6	18.4	17.9	17.8	..
New Zealand		21.7	22.4	22.3	22.3	21.2	20.8	20.9	21.3	21.4	20.8	21.6	21.0	21.1	20.9	19.8	18.7
Norway		54.8	54.4	53.9	54.5	55.1	55.0	54.9	54.2	53.0	52.6	53.6	53.7	53.5	53.3	52.1	..
Poland		20.5	17.5	15.5	14.1	18.8	19.0	18.1	16.3	15.6	15.1	14.6	14.6	13.6	12.7	..	..
Portugal		22.4	21.6	22.4	20.7	21.3	21.7	21.6	21.2	21.2	20.9	20.6	19.8	18.8	18.9	..	..
Slovak Republic		34.2	32.3	30.5	27.4	26.1	23.6	22.8	20.6	18.8	17.2	16.0	15.2	14.1	13.6	13.3	..
Slovenia		40.4	41.6	40.8	44.7	43.7	40.1	37.1	31.4	29.0	26.6	26.3	25.0	23.1	22.0	21.2	..
Spain		16.8	16.6	16.4	16.1	15.9	15.4	14.6	14.3	15.5	17.2	17.6	17.3	16.9	17.1	16.9	..
Sweden		80.6	79.1	78.0	78.0	78.0	78.1	76.5	75.1	70.8	68.3	68.4	68.2	67.5	67.5	67.7	67.3
Switzerland		20.9	20.2	19.7	19.9	19.9	19.5	19.3	18.9	18.5	17.5	17.3	17.1	16.7	16.2	16.2	15.7
Turkey		29.3	28.2	29.3	25.1	22.3	20.0	16.8	14.3	12.3	10.7	10.2	8.9	7.8	7.0	6.3	..
United Kingdom		30.1	30.2	29.6	29.3	29.6	29.0	28.6	28.2	28.1	27.3	27.3	26.6	25.8	26.0	25.8	25.1
United States		13.4	12.8	12.9	12.6	12.4	12.0	12.0	11.5	11.6	11.9	11.8	11.4	11.3	10.8	10.8	10.7
OECD countries		21.0	20.4	20.0	19.7	19.6	19.2	18.9	18.3	18.1	18.0	18.1	17.7	17.6	17.2	17.0	16.7

Across the OECD union density has fallen from a point at the turn of the century where just over one in five workers were trade unionists to a point now where it is around one in six. This masks some quite significant differences between nation states. In some West European countries (Spain, Italy and Belgium for example) density has remained steady or even inched up. At the other extreme in some East European countries (the Hungary and the Czech and Slovak republics for example) density has fallen to less than half what it was at the turn of the century (there appears to have been an even more catastrophic decline in Turkey).

The “meaning” of trade union density figures for trade union power and influence clearly varies between different national settings. The French trade unions have very low membership density but are not proportionately less influential than their counterparts in many other countries.

The decline in trade union density in the United Kingdom has been slightly less severe than the OECD average and remain comfortably in the second quartile of national density figures, so our dilemma is no greater than that faced by trade unionists in most advanced economies.

If there is anything to be learned from this data it is perhaps that we should spend a bit more time and effort finding out what it is that trade unionists have been doing in (for example) Belgium or Italy to sustain their membership density and resist the decline which is being experienced here, and in many other countries.

Sometime inertia is better than momentum?

I don’t rate “Momentum” as an organisation.

It seems to be a haven for ambitious people who want to flock around a Labour Leader respected above all for his lack of personal ambition. I know that many good people have joined Momentum, including many good friends whom I respect. I regret that I am unable to join them.

The decision of the (unelected and unaccountable) Committee currently calling the shots for this unappealing outfit to oust their Vice Chair, Jackie Walker, because she is being attacked by Zionists reinforces my view that I have been right not to join this questionable outfit. It is run by those without principle or courage.

I have been a Labour leftwinger all my adult life and was a founding member of the Labour Representation Committee. I support Jeremy Corbyn as I have for thirty years. I will not stand with or defend Momentum as an organisation. It offers nothing positive to the left. We need those who will stand firm.

If you cannot see that the “anti-semitism” furore is something confected to attack the left (which is not to say that there is no anti-semitism in society, just that Progress never gave a damn about it until they thought they could find a way to bash Corbyn) then you cannot see the world around you. (If you think I exaggerate go to their website and search “anti-semitism” – Progress are not consistent or principled in any way).

If you cannot see the racism which shines out of the particular vilification of a black woman expressing anti-Zionist views then you are not paying attention to the truth of a genuinely racist society in which black people are on the receiving end of the daily reality of racism.

Anti-Zionism is not racist. Zionism is.

More to the point, everyday racism in our society is what determines that black people are less likely to be employed, and earn less when they are employed, than white people.

If the people who have backed Jeremy Corbyn had wanted to create a new organisation which would take on these real issues then that would have been worthwhile.

That hasn’t happened and I am not joining Momentum. I shall remain a proud supporter of the Labour Representation Committee and a committed anti-racist (and anti-Zionist) and a (third generation) Labour Party member.

Most of all, I am a trade unionist and a supporter of equality between workers.

Socialists should join the Labour Party and the Labour Representation Committee.

Racism

The Governing party are in Birmingham cementing their rightward shift with anti-immigration prejudice and reaction.

Labour's Leader is right to resist being drawn into the downward spiral of this racist narrative - and those on the Labour right who oversaw the loss of former "heartlands" are as stupid as they are shameless in advocating capitulation to bigotry.

It is all the more tragic therefore to see the supposedly left "Momentum" join in the political lynching of their (now former) Vice Chair for having raised the issue of the African holocaust in a debate which those framing it wanted to be about anti-semitism.

There is a massive and growing problem of racism in this country. If even the Labour Left cannot be part of the solution we are in trouble.

Think globally. Act locally.

I congratulate all those who made it to Birmingham today to protest against the Tories. News reports suggest 20,000 people were present.

Last year the BBC reported that 60,000 marched in Manchester - at a time when the (then) Trade Union Bill posed an existential threat to the institions of our movement.

Now that we know that our unions are safe from bankruptcy (and merely neutralised as effective forces to reverse the declining living standards of our members) we mobilise fewer.

We need to (re)build the fight against austerity from the bottom up (which is why solidarity with school staff in Durham and Derby is now very much the order of the day).

Union activists must look to ourselves and our members locally to mobilise resistance - our movement nationally is still some years away from recovering from the consequences of the capitulation over public service pensions in 2011/12 (which prevented us from reversing the pay freeze).

National mobilisations - of which the next must be for libraries on 5 November - will continue to be important in bringing together local struggles and spreading resistance.

For we have no choice but to resist. As rank and file trade unionists we have nowhere else to go - and as local representatives each redundancy has, for us, a name, face and family.

We cannot afford to waste an ounce of the energy we need for this resistance upon futile hope of effective national leadership. In the long term perhaps we can transform our movement but for now we are on our own locally with only such aid as can come from solidarity shown elsewhere on the frontline of resistance.

These times call for the determination shown by Barnet UNISON, the militancy of Lambeth's library workers and the imagination of Haringey branch's fight for social care workers.

If our movement can be saved then it is in those local struggles that its salvation shall be found.

Working with the far left in the trade unions

A senior official of UNISON once told me that I “could have gone places” in our union if only I had not been “a standard bearer for the Trots.” I took this as a (not very intelligent) criticism of my willingness to stand alongside and defend comrades in organisations such as the Socialist Party and Socialist Workers Party over a number of years.

I am proud to have defended friends and comrades in both those organisations over many years. Indeed (although I am less proud of this) I stood for election as General Secretary of UNISON in 2004 at the personal request of a friend who was then a member of the SWP (and is now an official exactly as senior as my previous interlocutor).

I have been – and am – proud to have supported Tony Staunton, Yunus Bakhsh,  and Glenn Kelly (and others) in the face of unreasonable conduct from union officials. I have never agreed with the politics of these comrades but I did not and do not support the use of administrative means to silence them. I recognise that diverse socialists can and will contribute to the future of our movement.

In 2016 I find myself having though to be very clear about my violent opposition to the absurd support for the “Vote Leave” campaign from those socialist comrades who have also chosen to abstain from the political fight within the Labour Party to support the socialist leadership of Jeremy Corbyn.

The referendum result was a victory for racism (which is not to say that every “leave” voter was racist – just that every racist was a “leave” voter). Those who believe themselves to be on the left and who contributed (however inconsequentially) to the victory for racism have been very very wrong – they can and will offer no useful leadership to our class in the coming period having misjudged the most important question of our generation.

Every good socialist who is a member of the Socialist Party or the Socialist Workers Party would do best to shed themselves of that carapace and join the Labour Party and the real struggle (I do not say that they should join Momentum – of which I am not a member – since I do not know that an unappealing gaggle of ambitious people who appear to be the antithesis of Corbyn are worth such support).

Union activists need to develop our socialist politics and organise ourselves to become more effective in defending the interests of our members.

Succession planning in the labour movement

Having told the Lambeth UNISON Branch Committee five months ago that I will not seek to continue to be Branch Secretary beyond next January I am very mindful of the difficulty of succession planning.

Bearing in mind of course that I make no criticism of UNISON’s General Secretary, I cannot help but observe that succession planning is clearly as tricky nationally as it is locally.

When I was young(er) we used to have Deputy General Secretaries in some of our trade unions. I recollect trying to propose that the position of Deputy General Secretary (DGS) in UNISON should be elected (rather than appointed).

This proposition (which had been debated at UNISON Conference in 1995) was subsequently ruled out of order for debate at Conference by the Standing Orders Committee (SOC).

Initially this was because the proposal could have breached the contract of an incumbent DGS.

When the proposal was put on the basis that it would only apply once there was a vacancy it was held to breach the contracts of staff who might aspire to appointment to that post.

No.

Really.

It was.

And then, once the post was vacant the National Executive Council (NEC) proposed its deletion.

Which required a rule amendment.

Which was not ruled out of order.

Because.

(I don’t know).

But anyway – for UNISON – it didn’t matter because we had five Assistant General Secretaries and it was going to be easy for UNISON to plan the succession for General Secretary.

Really easy.

Idiocy in Liverpool

In three decades of labour movement activism I have witnessed some truly monumental stupidity.

Last week’s Labour Party rule amendment to prohibit Labour Councillors from supporting unlawful budgets is up there in the top ten. For an opposition Party to commit its representatives irrevocably to obeying laws set by its opponents is the craven act of an eternally subaltern opposition.

Today we refuse to countenance the setting of a budget which doesn’t balance – because that would be “unlawful” – and when tomorrow a racist Government decrees that local authorities must police immigration status what then shall we do?

This is the pitiable inadequacy of a labour movement in decline. UNISON members will recognise this idiocy in the repeated refusal of the Standing Orders Committee (SOC) for our National Delegate Conference (NDC) to permit even debate of motions about how our trade union might break the law.

Now that we have failed to prevent legislation which requires unachievable ballot turnouts before we can take the national strike action which is the only way to reverse our falling living standards, our obsequious refusal to countenance illegality decrees that we shall continue to decline.

Any genuine trade unionist, any genuine socialist, knows that our job is to fight for justice and that the question of whether or not how we fight complies with laws made by our opponents is a purely tactical question.

Haringey UNISON shows the way in the fight against super-exploitation

If there has been one topic which has cropped up at every regional and national meeting of UNISON which I have attended in the past couple of weeks it has been the fight being waged by our Haringey Branch for fair pay for home care workers who have been ripped off in the private sector.

Whilst the majority of our members, working in the public sector are justifiably angry that the pay freeze has reduced our standard of living dramatically over the past six and a half years – many of the increasing proportion of our members who work in the private sector are being paid wages that are unlawfully low.

These are workers, often employed on zero-hours contracts by employers who do not recognise trade unions, who most need union organisation and representation. Haringey branch have shown what many branches could do given sufficient resources by employing a worker to help them represent and organise social care workers in the private sector.

An effective working partnership between a democratic lay-led UNISON branch in Haringey and the professionals at the UNISON Centre offers hope to some of the most exploited and marginalised workers – and demonstrates why we need a trade union which fights for our members.

Perils of social media. Chapter Forty Seven

Can I just point out that someone is reading this blog and then reporting what I post to UNISON, thereby getting me into further trouble?

Honestly, I thought I could rely upon the regular readers of this blog (Sid and Doris anarcho-Trotskyist) not to go blabbing.

Please keep this to yourself now!

What trade unionists need from Corbyn's Labour

It is good – if predictable – news that the socialist leader of the Labour Party has been re-elected with increased support in spite of the best efforts of much of the Parliamentary Labour Party, the media and the establishment to undermine him.

He is even more fortunate in having been offered the advice of our General Secretary about what to do next. It seems the key is to unite “using the talents of the best MPs from across the party in the shadow cabinet” (although the calibre of the shadow cabinet does seem to have improved in the past three months).

What UNISON members – and all trade unionists – need right now is a Labour opposition that really opposes the Tories, not just in the Palace of Westminster (although that is not unimportant) but also using every elected position we can gain and also in the streets of every community.

We need this because our power in the workplace is at its least in a long time. Strike action is at its lowest level since records began and we have failed to prevent the passage into law of those elements of the Trade Union Act which are most damaging to our ability to reverse this decline in our power. This lack of workplace power accounts for our failure to defend our living standards.

Therefore we are reduced to organising a campaign to get the public to congratulate our members on their good work, whilst the living standards of workers in local government and the health service are in free fall. Our members can feel good about being appreciated as they shop carefully in Lidl and Aldi since we failed to smash the pay freeze.

Workers having been disarmed in the workplace, thanks in large part to a trade union movement the leadership of which clearly has no intention of contesting the anti-union laws, we desperately need the political wing of our movement to find a way to pursue our interests. We can ourselves help.

Digital activity at the UNISON Centre

I will blog further in due course about today’s meeting of the Development and Organisation (D&O) Committee of the UNISON National Executive Council (NEC) but will mention now briefly the excellent presentation which the Committee received upon UNISON’s development of our digital/online presence.

I particularly commend the advice from the Union on how to ensure more members read your bulk emails. Apparently you have about three seconds to capture the attention of a reader online if you want to communicate anything effectively.

I shall not follow that advice on this blog however, since I am not writing this for you but primarily for my own amusement (which is the most important objective for anyone with the slightest modicum of self-regard). If you don’t want to read what I have to say then you have an entire internet to amuse yourself with.

Today’s Committee meeting contributed significantly to my amusement for the number of occasions on which colleagues made jokes about the dangers of “unofficial blogs” or social media generally. It wasn’t until I lunched (not wisely but too well) with a couple of comrades that it was pointed out to me that these comments may have been intended to have been directed at my good self.

Given that the third of three disciplinary investigations which UNISON has initiated against me concerns my failure to keep confidential the previous two disciplinary investigations (so please don’t mention this to anyone) I was tickled that colleagues felt no need to observe any such injunction themselves.

Which is fine by me, since the risible allegations which have led to the unnecessary investigations into your humble blogger are indeed a source of amusement. For those who may fear that I am under attack by the “UNISON bureaucracy” (and/or their lay hangers-on) I can assure you that I am fully prepared to be savaged by a dead sheep.

I shall leave it to any intelligent readers to work out for themselves the motivation for attacks upon a trade unionist compelled to complain to the Certification Officer (and to contemplate the risks).