Is there still a place for politicised trade unions?
TRADE unions are a relatively new phenomenon. Love them or hate them, they are here to stay, and a jolly good thing they are, generally. They began to appear after the end of the Napoleonic wars in 1815 and the industrial boom years of 19th century Europe. Most have since shed their Luddite tendencies.
However, some trade unions retain a visceral hatred of free enterprise that sullies their positive sides. It has led to politicised unions who see their prime purpose in fighting free enterprise rather than serving their members. Others have become embedded in political parties and in some cases in governments.
Benefits
It is a shame, for there are many benefits of a well-run, non-political trade union. Enlightened employers acknowledge them. And it is easy to see why. For one thing, it is better to “jaw, jaw” than to “war, war”, as Winston Churchill once observed.
There are more tangible benefits. Unions protect their members from unsafe working conditions, long hours and arbitrary firing, as well as other poor manage- ment practices. They give workers more strength in negotiations. There are often other benefits, too, such as social clubs, medical aid, life insurance, to name a few.
In a growing economy unions can to some extent protect job security and develop a mutually beneficial long-term relationship between company and employee.
Unfortunately, there are downsides for both consumers and workers, and even for countries in extreme cases, (Australia comes to mind). It is also unfortunate that negative aspects of unions sometimes outnumber their positives.
High wage awards are passed on to consumers (who include union members). Lazy or incompetent members can get union protection. Essential service unions of teachers, police, and fire fighters can hold society to ransom. Wage negotiations can become tantamount to extortion.
Strong unions destroy motivation by linking pay levels to seniority rather than performance. Worse, bad unions bully or persecute non-union members.
Unions can scare off investors interested in building new factories or opening new mines because of the risks – expropriation or nationalisation are the worst. Less scary but off-putting are sudden work stoppages and regulations that restrict management too much. Add politics to this toxic stew and existing businesses will follow fleeing new investors, and close mines and factories.
When unions promise to deliver voters, politicians rush to suck up to them. Corruption follows when union leaders spend more time on politics than shop floor matters.
When they insist that union membership (with its dues) is tied to a job, it infringes on a basic human right to choose. When frivolous strikes are called on political matters, it becomes more serious still.
Negatives
This is a broad description of the state of play in South Africa. The negatives of trade unions outnumber the positives. But it need not be. There is a solution – a compulsory strike ballot.
In Britain today, workers have a right not to join a trade union. Employers cannot make them do so. Unions cannot force them.
British workers can leave a trade union at any time and can join more than one. Union membership cannot be a requirement for a job. Closed shops are illegal.
Workers cannot be sacked because they are, or they are not, union members. No one can deduct workers’ wages for union dues without their permission. Union membership cannot be a reason for dismissal or redundancy. Workers cannot be fired for attending union meeting out of working hours. Promotion, training, or a pay increase cannot be withheld because of
In Britain today workers have a right not to join a trade union. Employers cannot make them do so. Unions cannot force them.
union membership, or the lack of it.
UK labour law thus protects workers, ensures freedom of individual choice, and bans excesses by either trade unions or managers. It does not prevent all strikes, just those that break the rules.
Our rules are similar, of course, but with wildcat strikes a common unpunished occurrence thanks to lawless unions and a largely supine private sector, not to mention close political ties between unions and political parties, our labour relations will remain subject to those who (despite their rhetoric) do not put workers to the top of their priorities.
When “us” versus “them” attitudes prevail on both sides, politics wins every time. The country, the economy, and the consumers are the losers.
To repeat, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with trade unions. In a democracy, nothing is wrong with profit, private ownership of factories and shareholding. As Germany has proved for more than 60 years, partnerships between trade unions and managements makes successful, expanding, and job-creating economies.
Why this simple fact is beyond so many in our union leaderships can only be because of out-of-date Marxist economic thinking promoted by people who have never had to earn a living like the rest of us, and whose economic knowledge is rooted firmly in 1848.
Marxism is an antique utopian belief system masquerading as a science. It is often promoted most strongly by academics in protected employment largely paid for by other people’s taxes.
Perhaps, one day the workers will wake up to the confidence trick being played on them. Keith Bryer is a retired communications consultant.