Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Split within the IWW?

Other people have. If I am wrong, I apologise. From my own personal experience I know that a teaching assistant can't join the NUT if they are not a qualified teacher-qts.

I've given you the legislation, and explained that the union/s have the right to exclude but don't necessarily do so particularly if they want to either up their membership numbers, or start to represent a group not previously represented en masse. I really don't see why you have a problem with that, especially as you're not prepared to back up what you're saying.
 
But NUT are opposed to recruitment of classroom staff without full teaching quals. So what they are legally entitled to do makes no odds here.
 
In which case someone will be able to dispute both the legislation and the practices of poaching that arise between unions since the days of the closed shop being outlawed.
I don't know fuck all which legisation it falls under but although it would be good if you could join any union you wanted. If I am working in a tesco I can't join the RMT. I would have to join Usdaw.
 
I don't know fuck all which legisation it falls under but although it would be good if you could join any union you wanted. If I am working in a tesco I can't join the RMT. I would have to join Usdaw.

No, you wouldn't. You could join the RMT ( if they accepted you). It wouldn't do you much good, because the RMT don't have a recognition agreement with Tesco ( afaik, although maybe they do in distribution ) but that doesn't prevent you joining them anyway.

You could also join Unite which would be a darn sight better than USDAW which are basically a management works committee nowadays, although they were never much good in the past, tbf.
 
Can't even join Gmb if you work for Tesco. Sweetheart deal with usdaw. Edit - ok you could join as an individual but to no effect whatever without recognition
 
But NUT are opposed to recruitment of classroom staff without full teaching quals. So what they are legally entitled to do makes no odds here.

That's up to the NUT, innit. But they could change their minds at any point, which is the point.
 
If you are a teaching assistant why would you join the RMT?

There'd be precious little point, granted. But there'd be a very good reason for cleaners to join the RMT because (a) it's arguably the most effective TU; and (b) no other certified union represents them specifically as a body apart from the IWW and now they've split from that.
 
There'd be precious little point, granted. But there'd be a very good reason for cleaners to join the RMT because (a) it's arguably the most effective TU; and (b) no other certified union represents them specifically as a body apart from the IWW and now they've spilt from that.
So cleaners should join an effective TU but not teaching assistants? I agree with you that you should be able to join any union. One reason I agree with the IWW and the one big union is because I agree with that concept, that instead of dividing the workers through individual craft unions who each negotiate.

However all of the trade unions are in cahoots with each other and have split up workers as a type of pie. They all have agreements with each other and are all business's essentially.
 
So cleaners should join an effective TU but not teaching assistants? I agree with you that you should be able to join any union. One reason I agree with the IWW and the one big union is because I agree with that concept, that instead of dividing the workers through individual craft unions who each negotiate.

However all of the trade unions are in cahoots with each other and have split up workers as a type of pie. They all have agreements with each other and are all business's essentially.

I didn't say that teaching assistants shouldn't join an effective TU, or at least I didn't mean to - so if I somehow implied that, I apologise. Of course they should join an effective TU.

If teaching assistants aren't currently represented then they should join whichever TU would be most effective for them, and if enough of them join they can force recognition.

I agree with most of the rest of what you said. However, you should bear in mind that I see trade unions as only a *part* of effective workplace organisation. So whilst I'm generally supportive of trade unions, I'm also critical as well.
 
you cannot join a union non specific to your trade this is why they are called trades unions.
The unions themselves have clear rules about this which are enforced by the requirement of all new potential members have to be accepted by the relevant branch.
 
you cannot join a union non specific to your trade this is why they are called trades unions.
The unions themselves have clear rules about this which are enforced by the requirement of all new potential members have to be accepted by the relevant branch.

Thatcher anti-union legislation in the 80s actually started the slippery slope of this not always applying anymore. Don't you remember that thread in MATB where jinxy was getting pissed off by Unite muscling in on the tube cleaners? I see that the RMT have got them back but Unite's revenge has been to grab the Boris bikes workers :D
 
Oh, and I've just been informed that anyone that applies to Join Unite has their branch decided at national level so it seems that the branches don't always get the power of veto either.
 
Cesere is correct here - as usual, the rest of you are talking bonkers bruno rubbish.

Any worker can join any union they like irrespective of industry or trade, or recognition agreements.

However - unions can and do refuse to accept them for a variety of reasons.

Also there are agreements policed by the TUC around spheres of influence among TUC affiliated unions so that companies and areas can be carved up between unions or allocated to individual unions - sometimes sections of workers will be "traded between unions" for various reasons.

Furthermore an employer only has to recognise one union per bargaining unit, but can represent more if they wish - in the public sector this gets more complicated with national bargaining being conducted sometimes by many unions with the employer side sometimes with just one or two. This is often illustrated by the different colour books of T&Cs.

The fire service is an interesting microcosm of how this works

Operational staff - firefighters and control room staff are on 'Gray Book' which is negotiated nationally and for which only the FBU has recognition. Back room and facilities and maintenance staff are all on 'Green Book' and are part of national local government T&Cs and recognition exists locally with the individiul fire authority. UNISON is the only union in 99% of brigades, however some brigades do recognise GMB for historical reasons alongside UNISON, and in at least one brigade GMB members are "looked after" by UNISON despite being GMB members in a strange little local agreement between the two unions.

Now within the Firebrigade you also get the Fire Officers Association who don't have recognition and will recruit among Gray and Green book staff and can provide representation at an indidividual level - no one can stop them doing that, but they have no input into negotiations or consultation for either group of staff.

So broadly speaking you can have recognised unions for an entire service or employer, or recognised unions for local bargaining units, you can also have unions which are not recognised but are active within a sector, and unions which are not recognised within a sector.

Again in the public sector in particular (but also private - the maritime industry is fascinating) this is complicated by TUPE where generally workers will carry their union recognition across from their old employer to the new one as long as they remain a discrete group.

ETA: generally a union will turn people down for two reasons. 1 becasue they don't believe they would be able to service that person so for example if a worker in a little corner shop applied to join UNISON they should be sent a letter advising them to join Usdaw, because Unison doesn't have the capacity to provide adequate representation (this won't often happen because if they join online it won't often be picked up. 2. Sphere's of influence - Usdaw wouldn't be happy if UNISON started recruiting shop workers. Having said that Usdaw does compete with Unite, Community, and the GMB in the retail sector especially among distribution workers.

So to sum up Ceseare is correct, despite any examples you can come up with where you think she is wrong.
 
Thanks Spanky. I'd contribute examples drawn from my own experience in retail/logistics, manufacturing and maritime but you've already illustrated just how complicated this can all get together with shooting down some myths, and providing explanation.
 
If enough individuals join, they could end up with a recognition agreement. You should know all this.

He should, especially now he's working where he is. Kind of worrying that he doesn't. Then again, given that a union pays his wages, he's not going to trumpet the fact that introducing a new union into an already-unionised workplace is that simple. is he? ;)
 
He should, especially now he's working where he is. Kind of worrying that he doesn't. Then again, given that a union pays his wages, he's not going to trumpet the fact that introducing a new union into an already-unionised workplace is that simple. is he? ;)

I guess so. I suppose that whilst I'm critical of this "change it from the inside out" reasoning, I 'd like to think that his comments stem from ignorance and therefore something that he can change by way of educating himself on the realities of workplace organising rather than researching esoteric dusty tracts. Hopefully ...
 
I've never argued that it was impossible to introduce a new union into an already-unionised workplace. But it's often difficult, and can be counter-productive if unions start getting bogged down in a turf war with each other. I don't think, in general, that there is a syndicalist short-circuit to the hard slog of fighting to democratise existing unions.

What is the point of talking in the abstract about individual freedoms rather than looking at the concrete relations between different unions?
 
Back
Top Bottom