Empowering people
By Emma.
Apart from the much disputed facts about the goings on in Falkirk, the debate over the last week about the relationship between Labour and the affiliated unions has produced much heat and little light. Positions have become so polarised as to become untenable for all sides, but also so calcified that the space in between where compromise can and should be possible has become a very empty and lonely space.
Objectively, of course, both the Labour Party and the unions could be improved. This shouldn’t be a controversial statement – few if any organisations are perfect, and none that refuse to change, self-examine and grow are able to be. But in the current febrile atmosphere, it seems to be just that. Sides are being chosen, and any criticism of one allies you with the other. So if, like me, you are seeing good and bad in both, both will view you with suspicion.
I think the Labour link with the unions is essential. I believe that the ties that bind us to the ordinary workplaces experiences of workers up and down the country – the nurses, engineers, refuse workers and administrators – makes our party unique. I am extremely proud of that.
I am also proud of the work that has been done by Iain MaNicol and Ed Miliband among others to reinvigorate the meaning of Labour Party membership. To try to further empower members and given them a greater say over the path the Party is taking. The Refounding Labour changes were small but important steps along this journey of democratisation.
As unions have responded to the changing nature of their role in the world, several have merged to become much larger corporate bodies. As this happened, naturally their nature changed too. Union officers become less likely to have come up through the voluntary ranks – to come from workplaces into unions – and more likely to be professional organisers and campaigners, policy officers and officials. This is not to – in any way – belittle the work done by such officers. They work long and heard under difficult conditions, dedicated to improving conditions for members. My experience of working with unions on apprenticeships and adult learning over the last year showed me many people determinedly changing lives for the better all around the country.
But with such changes has come at least the feeling of a disconnect between the members and the officers. For example, in Unite’s recent election for General Secretary just 15.2% of the membership voted. But this is not a Unite problem. For example, in the recent Labour Leadership contest, only 9% of union members entitled to vote did so, compared with 71.7% among Labour Party members. Clearly the people we count on to ground us through the link don’t feel a reciprocal connection to us.
I suggest that it is the empowerment of these ordinary union members that could square the vexatious circle that Labour and union leaders currently find themselves looping. It seems the Labour leadership are thinking something similar with some of the proposals that were shown to the Guardian yesterday.
Now the devil will be both in the detail and the presentation. The headline on the Wintour story is “Ed Miliband looks at reducing power of union leaders in Labour affairs”. This may be simply mischievous reporting but for me that’s completely the backwards way of looking at the proposals. It’s not about the reduction of the power of the leaders, but the increase of the power of members than can and should be important. Giving more voice to the voiceless.
By allowing direct communication between the Labour Party and union members – with a reciprocal devolving power relationship for those members, that will be a way of strengthening Labour’s link to the unions and to the reality of their lives, not weakening it. This measure – alongside reducing the cost barrier to standing as a candidate – should, managed properly and enacted honestly, be a way to ensure a new, more democratic conversation between Labour and the unions who would remain an essential part of the Party.
Tags: Labour, Trade Unions
