Unions and the Labour Party
Time for a challenge!
Many unions, particularly the larger ones outside of education and the civil service, are affiliated to the Labour Party. The current policies of the Labour government, together with the curtailing of Labour Party democracy, have provoked a debate about what the relationship of the unions to the Labour Party ought to be.
A few on the left have raised the question of disaffiliating from the Labour Party altogether. Outside of a few branches which have affiliated to the Socialist Labour Party, this has not found much support.
What has found more resonance, with majority support at some union conferences, is to question the sponsorship of MPs who do not take any notice of union policy, and to query whether the unions should continue to put unlimited funds at the disposal of the Labour Party, for elections and in general, when its policies are attacking union members.
While a majority might be found in a particular union branch, or even at an exceptional conference, to disaffiliate from the Labour Party, it is extremely unlikely that this would find the support of a majority of members of any union at the current time.
It would be more likely, if pushed to the wire, to lead to a split in the union, with a radical minority ending up isolated, hardly the best conditions for a fight back.
Currently the left in affiliated unions will get much more support by raising the need for the unions, and their leaderships, to fight for their policies against the Labour leadership.
The record of virtually every national union leader since Labour was elected (and before) has been to refuse to challenge policies which attack their members, but, at most, to make mildly critical, often ‘coded’ speeches. Their reaction when the union conference or section of the union is more critical is either to sit on the decisions, or to lash out at those making the criticism.
Thus the union leaders refused to mobilise their members while the government’s proposals on union rights were under discussion, instead wasting money on employing a lobbying firm, to no effect. When the awful ‘Fairness At Work’ proposals were published, the union leaders could do no more than say they were ‘disappointed’, and do nothing.
The minimum wage, set at a level well below the modest policy of the TUC and nearly every union, brought a similar response. The story can be repeated about public sector pay and many other policies.
No fight
Within Labour Party bodies the picture is the same. Union leaders refuse to advance union policy, whether at conference or on the NEC. A UNISON representative even sat on the commission discussing the level of the minimum wage, and put her name to the final report!
At the 1998 Labour Party conference, union leaders used their block votes to ensure that the only motions discussed and voted on avoided any direct criticism of government policy.
In fact, arguing for disaffiliation at the moment takes the heat off the union leaders, as shown by the fact that some SLP members of the RMT executive refuse to vote on issues regarding the Labour Party, thus allowing Jimmy Knapp to continually avoid any confrontation with the Party leadership.
The response of union leaderships to any threat to this cosy relationship with the Labour Party is indicative of how much they value it. London region UNISON convenor Geoff Martin is facing disciplinary charges for daring to say (in line with London UNISON policy) that the union would not support anti-union candidates for London mayor such as Robert Ayling, chief of British Airways.
The leadership of the London Region Council of MSF is under investigation and facing charges for the "crimes" of requiring candidates for local elections who sought union financial support to show some support for union policies, and of opposing the policy of a directly elected mayor for London.
Jimmy Knapp has fought against implementation of RMT conference policy of demanding that sponsored MPs support union policy, particularly over the privatisation of London Underground.
The only national union to seriously question the money it puts into the Labour Party has been the AEEU, but this has been primarily over the employment background of MPs, not their politics, and this at the same time as funding the Blairite slate in Labour’s NEC elections.
With union conferences beginning soon, this question will be discussed at many. Rather than disaffiliation, the Left needs to argue for:
* a fight for union policy at every level of the Party, from local GCs to conference and the NEC, with union representatives accountable to union policy;
* no sponsorship of MPs who support anti-union policies;
* no blank cheques for Labour Party funding, instead the money should be used to mobilise the membership for campaigns around union policy.