Colleagues,
As I went to write this post on the severity of BT’s decision yesterday to shed 10,000 jobs I read the news that this morning RBS has also announced job looses of around 3,000 staff.
There is very little room for optimism currently in the UK economy as unemployment figures increase to levels not seen since prior to 1997 and where even the Bank of England’s interest rate cut appears to have made no significant dent in consumer confidence. Similarly, trade unions I work with appear to be approaching next year’s pay bargaining round in readiness for battle.
But, does the long-term impact of an emerging period of economic depression necessarily mean a bad thing for the UK trade union movement?
When I read the various responses from the range of trade union spokespeople responding to the announcements of job losses invariably they spoke in a traditionally reactive manner and arguably appeared to many workers listening as simply trying to ensure that the transition to unemployment went as smoothly as possible.
In this context it’s possible that trade unions appear as valueless but in truth we would know that because of union membership workers are assured, for example, fairness in the process of selection for redundancy and are potentially in receipt of an enhanced redundancy payment as a result of prior negotiation of a settlement at a higher rather than the statutory minimum.
Even in the current economic gloom I would argue therefore, that trade unions must raise their profile and argue that, regardless of sector or job, there is no better time to join a trade union and organise to defend your job.
I can hear some of you saying ‘easier said than done’. However, if trade union membership isn't seen as relevant or credible at a time of significant economic crisis and worry for mainstream members, and particularly non-members, why would it be seen as relevant and credible at any other time?
As usual, responses, comments or (constructive) criticism welcome.
Cheers
Ian
Colleagues,
