Critically discuss organising and social partnership approaches in increasing trade union influence within the employment relationship.
Introduction
This work shall commence by outlining a little of the history of trade unionism and address the issue of its decline in recent years. The concepts of ‘social partnership’ and ‘organising’ must be adequately defined in order to understand the primary focus of this work and so a portion of the work shall review both types of union activity and outline the pros and cons of each approach. The question asks which one of these methods of utilising the resources of trade unions should be used to ensure a future increase in the influence of trade unions within the employment relationship and so the conclusion shall point to which approach the writer believes holds the greatest prospects of success in a time fraught by economic uncertainty. It does need to be conceded that there are a number of complex reasons to account for the decline in recent years of union influence: changes in the law which limit the powers of unions; great advances in worker friendly policies inspired from the EU and the general economic situation are but three. It is crucial to understand the reasons for decline and a little of the history of the union movement if influence is ever to increase and this shall be the first topic discussed.
History or unionism and its decline
Prior to 1824 there was a total ban on the activities of trade unions and it was not until 1871 that there status was guaranteed by statute. Since this date the number of workers who joined trade unions grew massively and this trend continued on until Margret Thatcher came to power in the late 70s. As explained by Gall, G. (2004) at page 37: “At its peak UK membership stood at 13 million in 1979 but haemorrhaged 5.5 million in the subsequent two decades. Presently 29% of employees belong to a union, 3- in-5 in the public sector but under 1- in-5 in the private sector. The sustained decline in membership in the 1980s and 1990s was a consequence of interactions among the composition of the workforce and jobs; the roles of the state, employers and individual workers; and of unions own structures and policies”. It is true to say that if there is to be a resurgence of union influence it will depend to a large extent on what new jobs are created over the next 20-years and in what sectors, support from the government and perhaps most importantly of all, the interaction between employers and the unions themselves. Interestingly, according to Bowers, J (2004) at page 2: “There has been much litigation surrounding strikes and other industrial action in the last 20 years and it is not difficult to trace the reason for this to the reforms made by the Employment Act 1982 and the Trade Union Act 1984, … The former rendered trade unions liable in tort, thus providing the employer with a claim-worthy defendant, … The 1984 statute required the unions to hold ballots.” These restrictions reduced the influence of unions and tied their hands in red tape, particularly since all ballots must be carried out under certain very narrow criteria and there are 34 different restriction and requirements in relation to strike ballots.
It should also be remembered that prior to the 1980s there was in effect a financial incentive to joining a trade union in the form of a ‘wage premium’. This was the result generally of unions organising better conditions for their members and the benefits not always being passed on to non-union members. Machin, S (2000) makes the important point that for men between 1991 and 1999 the wage premium fell from 9% to zero, whilst for women it also dropped by around the same proportions and at the time of writing there is no substantial demonstrable financial benefit which can be found from being a member of a trade union. Machin S (2000) summarises his work as follows on page 318: “For men it used to pay to be in a union [in the early 1990s] and it used to pay to join a union, but by the end of the 1990s it does not. For women the answer is: it does still pay to be in a union, but not by as much as it used to, and it does not pay to newly join”. As a consequence of this fact, in the future, union membership will depend upon unions becoming recognised new workplaces and in unions attracting younger employees into their membership; as Guest, D. E. and Peccei, R. (2001) at page 232 point out this is “a difficult task if they (or their parents) have never experienced membership and if the benefits of membership are demonstrably, or perceived to be, below those two decades ago”. At this stage a review of the methods which unions can employ to raise their profile and influence in the employment sphere shall be reviewed.
Organising
When most people think of trade unions and their techniques, they invariably think of union leaders like Bob Crow and his exploitation, to reasonable effect it must be conceded, of the organising model of union activity. This type of activity is a broad conception of the way such bodies should advance the interests of their members. According to Heery, E. (2002) at page 23-4 “It typically involves many full-time organisers, who work by building up confidence and strong networks and leaders within the workforce, and by confrontational campaigns involving large numbers of union members”. It has long been argued that organising offers a credible contribution to the wider discussion, in part mentioned above of how trade unions can attempt to reverse the noticeable trend of reduced membership. Heery, E. (2002) at page 25 argues, “community organising and organising model methods provided the means by which Californian Unionists put their ‘social movement unionism’ philosophies and strategies into practice, on a daily basis”. It does need to be stressed that there is much more to organising than striking as demonstrated by the recent campaign launched by the Transport and General Workers Union called ‘Justice for Cleaners’. This campaign has been organising London Underground workers and workers in the Houses of Parliament, and, this campaign has resulted in a number of improvements in wages of these workers. It can be said that the more militant version of ‘organising’ is unlikely to win unions the increase in membership they desire, however, the more campaign-focussed approach could wield substantial benefits.
Another aspect of ‘organising’ is direct recruitment and this has been investigated by Metcalf, D. (ed) (2003) at page 22 of his report, he states: “These policies do seem to be delivering results, for example the successful recognition campaign fought by the AEEU at the Honda factory in Swindon mentioned above. But these successes are not being replicated on a large enough scale to increase the proportion of employees covered by collective bargaining”. There is an argument to be raised therefore that a greater effort should be made by the unions themselves to actively market their services to new workplaces and to younger workers and if successful such a campaign should result in a demonstrable increase in union membership.
According to Oxenbridge, S. and Brown, W. (2002) at page 341, the results of a survey of 130 university contract researchers who are being currently organised by a union make for interesting reading. “The key issues of concern among the contract researchers were employment security and pay. The union has achieved significant success in addressing these issues in some other universities including transfers to open-ended contracts. However, less than a fifth of respondents were aware of the union’s achievements. As a result, 50% said that they were unlikely to join the union because the ‘union does not achieve anything”. It therefore seems that organising is not enough, the results of the organisation need to be made aware to the workers who are the subject. At this stage the concept of social partnership shall be explored to see whether it holds the key to an increase in the influence of unions in the 21st century.
Social Partnership
Social partnership is a method of trade union mobilisation popular in Ireland and describes the method used for the tripartite, triennial national pay agreements which are reached. This type of union activity was started in the late 80s in response to a period of economic uncertainty, much like the problems faced at the present time as a result of the credit crunch. Machin S (2000) at page 320 stated that, “strike and wage moderation have been important outcomes of the agreements and this has been seen as a significant contributor to the Celtic Tiger. ‘Social partnership’ agreements are usually agreed between the Government, the main employer and the trade unions themselves and are designed to ensure that economic growth is not hampered by strikes and other non-useful union activities. Sustaining Progress is one example of a relatively successful Social Partnership arrangement, this set national wage increases, and provided for a number of policy agreements in relation to general welfare and employment issues. The participants of the agreement were: the Government, the main employers’ and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions which represents over half a million workers. However, the focus of this work is how to improve union influence and it is interesting to note that as a result of over twenty years of social partnership in Ireland, the percentage of the workforce who are members of trade unions dropped to 31% from a height of over 60% in the 1980’s. It does not therefore seem to follow that this type of union activity has the effect of increasing union membership; in fact it can be argued that in fact it has the reverse effect. The statistics of union membership in both Ireland, where social partnership has been the norm for 23-years and the UK which does not tend to rely substantially on this form of agreement strategy show an interesting correlation. Both countries show a decline of roughly the same proportion in membership and both show that the greatest proportion of union members are over 45 and working in semi professional occupations. There is perhaps something to be said given these damning results in looking at other countries and how their unions maintain high union memberships.
Work Councils
It has been strenuously argued that the way for unions to attract members and increase general awareness of their activities is to adopt concepts such as work councils, which work very well in countries such as Germany. Metcalf, D. (ed) (2003) at page 103 describes works councils as being, “shop-floor organizations which represent workers, which function as a local level complement to larger national labour negotiations”. Such organisations do exist to a degree in the UK, the Joint consultative being the most recent incarnation, however it is on the continent that there appeal seems to lie. The most successful implementation of this type of organisation is to be found in Germany. The German model can be broken down as follows: the majority of general labour agreements are usually made at national level by national trade unions and national associations of employers, once this is done the national agreements are adjusted after meeting with the works councils and local firms to ensure such agreements reflect the needs of local circumstances. Implementing such policies could prove to those workers contemplating joining a union that doing so could really make a difference to their specific circumstances and could result in an increased membership over time.
Conclusion
It seems that the problem of the decline of union influence has many contributory reasons and consequently the answer cannot it is argued be found in a single location, such as an increase in social partnership, but must be found in an amalgamation of ideas ranging from work councils, through to organising. However, according to Heery, E. (2002) at page 35: “It remains to be seen how a commitment to the organising model of trade unionism, can be reconciled with the union’s traditional support for national ‘Social Partnership”. The problem is where to draw the line, as methods such as ‘organising’ do tend to polarise peoples’ support of unions in general and has lead in recent years to a decline in general support for unions with the UK. What is more ‘organising’ tactics do seem to be the opposite of the principle behind ‘social partnerships’. Whilst it is submitted that the more militant version of ‘organising’ should only be a last resort and on the whole unions should pursue a more conciliatory approach, it would be unwise to consider removing the right to strike from a union’s arsenal, as in a world of huge multination corporation this could lead to abuse by employers. A greater focus by the unions on high profile campaigning for workers’ rights could see ‘organising’ winning the battle for membership numbers.
Bibliography
Books
Bowers, J (2004) The Law of Industrial Action and Trade Union Recognition Oxford University Press: Oxford
�
Papers:
Reports
Metcalf, D. (ed) (2003), Future of Unions in Modern Britain (mid-term report 2000-2002) http://cep.lse.ac.uk/future_of_unions Articles
Oxenbridge �
http://courses.essex.ac.uk/ac/ac219/AC219%20Assignment%202%20Coursework%20Paper%20Titles.doc
� 38(4)
Metcalf, D. (ed) (2003), Future of Unions in Modern Britain (mid-term report 2000-2002) http://cep.lse.ac.uk/future_of_unions
Rainbird, H �
� Articles
�
Paper:
� future_of_unions Articles
Oxenbridge, S. and Brown, W. (2002) The Two Faces of Partnership-: An assessment of partnership and co-operative employer/trade union relationships Employee Relations vol.24 �
http://courses.essex.ac.uk/ac/ac219/AC219%20Assignment%202%20Coursework%20Paper%20Titles.doc
� Oxford, Blackwell.
Oxenbridge, S., Brown, W. (2002), `The two faces of partnership? An assessment of partnerships and co-operative employer/trade union relationships’, Employee Relations, 24(3 �
� vol.24 no.3 �
Paper:
� no.3 Machin, S., (2000). Union Decline in Britain’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol 38(4)
Gall, G. �
http://courses.essex.ac.uk/ac/ac219/AC219%20Assignment%202%20Coursework%20Paper%20Titles.doc
� 36-53
Machin, S., (2000). `Union Decline in Britain’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol 38(4)
Metcalf, D. �
� )
�
Paper:
� 38(4)
Gall, G. (2004), British employer resistance to trade union recognition’, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 14 (2) Guest, D. �
http://courses.essex.ac.uk/ac/ac219/AC219%20Assignment%202%20Coursework%20Paper%20Titles.doc
� 407-427
Gall, G. (2004), `British employer resistance to trade union recognition’, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 14 (2), 36-53 �
� ) Guest, D. E. �
Paper:
� D. E. and Peccei, R. (2001) Partnership at Work: mutuality and the balance of advantage British Journal of Industrial Relations, vol.39 �
http://courses.essex.ac.uk/ac/ac219/AC219%20Assignment%202%20Coursework%20Paper%20Titles.doc
� Guest, D., Peccei, R. (2001) `Partnership at work: Mutuality and the balance of advantage’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 39(2 �
� , vol.39 no.2 �
Paper:
� no.2 Heery, E. (2002) Partnership Versus Organising: alternative futures for British trade unionism Industrial Relations Journal, vol.33 no.1
Websites
http �
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/wes2007/Full%20Papers/Stream%20C/56.%20Melanie%20Simms.doc
� 339-360.
Heery, E. (2002) ”Partnership versus organising: alternative futures for British trade unionism.”. Industrial Relations Journal. Vol: 33. No.1. pp.20 �
� �
Paper:
� no.2 Heery, E. (2002) Partnership Versus Organising: alternative futures for British trade unionism Industrial Relations Journal, vol.33 �
http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/fms/LondonMet/Academic%20Admin/AIU/Cousework/2008/ReAssesments/HRP/HRP004NC%20Employment%20Relations%20Context%20and%20Practice.doc
� 513-521.
Heery, E. (2002). `Partnership versus organising: alternative futures for British trade unionism, Industrial Relations Journal, 33 (1 �
� , vol.33 no.1
Websites
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/future_of_unions