If this is the new militancy, the unions are in trouble

Sunday 08 September 2002 19:00 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

If the Private Finance Initiative is the issue on which the militants hope the trade unions will regain their political muscle, they have miscalculated badly; the unions should stick to issues such as pensions.

Much talk in the trade union world of a new wave of militant leaders taking over from the compromised old guard. Some of it is shiny-eyed nostalgia for the days when debates at the Trades Union Congress would shake the nation. Some of it is wishful thinking indulged in by the Labour left, which has not had much to be wishful about for a good 10 years.

Most of the evidence for this radicalisation of union leaderships consists of the ousting earlier this year of Sir Ken Jackson by Derek Simpson as the head of what used to be the Amalgamated Engineering Union. This week, however, we are promised an assembly in Blackpool that is more assertive than ever, not just on foreign policy, but on the subject of private-sector involvement in the public services.

We shall see. It has always been the case that union leaders who become too closely identified with employers or governments risk replacement in union elections by fire-breathing militants. Political activists work hard to get them elected, and political inactivists vote for them because they think they will strike a harder bargain for their interests. Once elected, however, they often temper rhetoric with pragmatism.

We also wonder whether the unions really have the moral or political leverage to force the Government to retreat on the Private Finance Initiative and public-private partnerships. This is complicated territory, in which the interests of trade unionists, public-sector workers and public-sector union leaders are not the same. As consumers of public services, trade unionists have an interest in seeing them provided efficiently and effectively and – as consumers – usually recognise that a state monopoly is a bad idea.

Nor will any posturing on this subject pass the inversion test. If the CBI demanded policy changes of a Conservative government on the basis of corporate donations to party funds, it would be roundly condemned by fair-minded observers.

If this is the issue on which the militants hope the trade unions will regain their political muscle, they have miscalculated badly. The unions should stick to issues such as pensions, on which they yesterday fairly represented their members.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in