Unison gen sec election

[One_Stop_Shop]

Of course the SP are building branches, I have no doubt about this (although as said even in left branches the rank and file is still very weak, as the recent response to the branch shut downs has shown). But the network we are building in our branch is about more than that. We have worked with UUL where we can and also put suggestions to them about how they can turn themselves into a proper network/rank and file, and they have taken some of these suggestions on board, even if there are still many problems. We are also trying to make links with other branches in our region. But we don’t have the resources or networks of a national organization, so UUL is all there has been to link into, other than informal approaches to other branches and union officers/stewards/members in other branches.

I have seen the programme that the SP builds on and personally I think the programme that we have stood on in our branch is at least as good, it’s definitely overtly socialist and around practical issues.

Of course the SP don’t just say join the SP, I meant that that is all they offer in relation to the issue of building a rank and file, not in all areas of work. Apologies if that wasn’t clear.

I don’t believe what we’ve done in our branch can’t be done elsewhere, it involves members of various groups, who work well together, and the majority of stewards/members are in none but are socialists or left leaning. We have also involved community groups and TRAs. In most branches and in most areas there simply aren’t any or are a very minimal amount of people in far left groups, they couldn’t act as a block even if they wanted to. We have faced a lot of opposition from so called “lefts” in our branch but you can still build something, and we have done.

No it’s not about Holmes. I think an organized rank and file network could be build here and now, with or without groups who want to be obstructive. I don’t understand why it’s not being done by more than the UUL.

 

[belboid]

can't be arsed to start a new thread, so here's this one back for this years election

Nominations closed on friday. There would appear to be four candidates, after Karen Reissmann pulled out. Current GS Dave Prentis, current Deputy (& local government head) Heather Wakefield, perennial challenger Roger Bannister, and Barnet (Labour) lefty John Burgess.

Bannister has offered to withdraw if the others can agree to fielding just one anti-Prentis candidate - tho as RB got a mere 25 branch nominations, he is in an incredibly weak position anyway. Burgess got 69, & I haven't seen the figures for the other two. Given that Wakefield is barely to Prentis' left, I can't really see much point in standing down in favour of her, nor could I see it as likely that she would stand down in favour of Burgess.

So, we'll have four candidates again, and Prentis will win. Bugger.

 

[Sprocket.]

Seems like Brother Prentis is going for the longevity of Brother Bickerstaffe!

 

[emanymton]

can't be arsed to start a new thread, so here's this one back for this years election

Nominations closed on friday. There would appear to be four candidates, after Karen Reissmann pulled out. Current GS Dave Prentis, current Deputy (& local government head) Heather Wakefield, perennial challenger Roger Bannister, and Barnet (Labour) lefty John Burgess.

Bannister has offered to withdraw if the others can agree to fielding just one anti-Prentis candidate - tho as RB got a mere 25 branch nominations, he is in an incredibly weak position anyway. Burgess got 69, & I haven't seen the figures for the other two. Given that Wakefield is barely to Prentis' left, I can't really see much point in standing down in favour of her, nor could I see it as likely that she would stand down in favour of Burgess.

So, we'll have four candidates again, and Prentis will win. Bugger.

Any idea why Reissmann withdrew?

 

[belboid]

Any idea why Reissmann withdrew?

threw her weight behind Burgess as the main left challenger.

Arguably, because it was pointed out to her that the whole Comrade Delta affair would be thrown in her face repeatedly

 

[emanymton]

threw her weight behind Burgess as the main left challenger.

Arguably, because it was pointed out to her that the whole Comrade Delta affair would be thrown in her face repeatedly

That's what I was wondering, especially considering her role within it.

 

[belboid]

Dave Prentis re-elected as UNISON general secretary | Press release | News | UNISON

Prentis wins, much reduced majority, tiny turnout

Of course, the result may well not be allowed to stand

 

[Smokeandsteam]

The Prentis continuity candidate has won the GS election. Interestingly had the opposition run one candidate it seems like they might have won (I don’t pretend to understand the factional differences on the broad left of Unison). I’d imagine this is excellent news for Kieth but also a setback for rank and file socialists within a union organising some of the most explored workers in the UK:

Christina McAnea succeeds Dave Prentis as UNISON general secretary - LabourList

Christina McAnea has won the contest within UNISON to succeed retired Dave Prentis as general secretary of the…

labourlist.org

 

[hitmouse]

For a bit more context, here's what I understand about the other candidates:
Holmes - backed by the majority of the broad left/I think every left group except the SP from what I remember. A rank-and-file candidate, branch secretary of what seems to be a strong and effective branch. Was suspended by both Unison and his employer, I have no idea of the context so can't really comment any further on that bit.
Pierre - seems like a pure vanity candidate on the SP's part.
McKenzie - I don't really get, presumably to the left of McAnea but still an Assistant General Secretary and so very much a candidate from the existing leadership not the rank-and-file. But Corbyn endorsed him and iirc my mum voted for him so must have something going for him?

So as far as the opposition running one candidate goes, I can't see any good reason why Pierre shouldn't have stepped down in favour of a unity slate with Holmes, I dunno if it would have been realistic to expect an AGS to stand down for a candidate from outside the existing leadership though?

 

[Smokeandsteam]

For a bit more context, here's what I understand about the other candidates:
Holmes - backed by the majority of the broad left/I think every left group except the SP from what I remember. A rank-and-file candidate, branch secretary of what seems to be a strong and effective branch. Was suspended by both Unison and his employer, I have no idea of the context so can't really comment any further on that bit.
Pierre - seems like a pure vanity candidate on the SP's part.
McKenzie - I don't really get, presumably to the left of McAnea but still an Assistant General Secretary and so very much a candidate from the existing leadership not the rank-and-file. But Corbyn endorsed him and iirc my mum voted for him so must have something going for him?

Thanks for that hitmouse. The CP were backing McKenzie here and given he is AGS I assume he was the left bureaucracy candidate.

I know it’s not as simple as assuming all of the votes he and Pierre got would have gone to Holmes but this looks like a significant own goal by those who wanted a change from Prentis.

 

[hitmouse]

Ah yeah, I must admit to not checking what the CP were saying before making that claim about "every left group". Endorsed by CP and Corbyn does sound about right for a left bureaucracy candidate. Does seem like a bit of a crap choice though, I don't think there's much of a principled left argument for why you'd prefer his politics over Holmes, and I can understand why you'd support the left bureaucracy candidate out of pragmatism if the alternative was an unpopular no-hoper, but that argument doesn't really stand up when the rank-and-file candidate gets three times as many votes.

 

[hitmouse]

Kind of funny that the first four or five pages of this thread are about why the SP was splitting the left vote instead of getting behind Paul Holmes in 2010, change the name of the SP candidate and half those posts could be from last year.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Kind of funny that the first four or five pages of this thread are about why the SP was splitting the left vote instead of getting behind Paul Holmes in 2010, change the name of the SP candidate and half those posts could be from last year.

Indeed. I also noticed that the last post before I bumped it was from Belboid giving the 2015 result. I think both tell us something about the state of affairs in Unison.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Update: Apparently Corbyn and McDonnell backed different candidates. One going for Holmes and the other McKenzie. Hilariously, here’s the SP bemoaning the split left vote:

Unison get sec election shows left can win NEC - Socialist Party

The result of the Unison GS election shows the mood for change in the biggest public sector union

www.socialistparty.org.uk

 

[belboid]

Indeed. I also noticed that the last post before I bumped it was from Belboid giving the 2015 result. I think both tell us something about the state of affairs in Unison.

Lack of updates on the unite and gmb threads too. All a bit too depressing. Unison actually look fairly good compared to unite - four candidates all with support from different supposedly united left factions.

 

[mauvais]

Where even is the Unite thread? Coyne is probably going to win isn't he, and is now being painted in various circles as something, let's say, quite different to how I remember him from the last time.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Lack of updates on the unite and gmb threads too. All a bit too depressing. Unison actually look fairly good compared to unite - four candidates all with support from different supposedly united left factions.

Its only when you search for the threads to post an update that how decomposed things are.

Just on Unite, Coyle is also running for GS. No doubt precisely because he’s worked out that his chances of winning as the left vote divides itself

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Where even is the Unite thread? Coyne is probably going to win isn't he, and is now being painted in various circles as something, let's say, quite different to how I remember him from the last time.

In my view it depends on who else is standing. But a look at the LM/GC run off a few years ago should be setting alarms ringing loudly

 

[belboid]

See other thread for unite stuff (or, to save yourself sometime, just assume it’s really shit and will accidentally let coyne win)

turnout in unison - a mahoosive 9.8%

 

[Smokeandsteam]

See other thread for unite stuff (or, to save yourself sometime, just assume it’s really shit and will accidentally let coyne win)

turnout in unison - a mahoosive 9.8%

9.8% is much better than the GMB where it was less than 5% iirc. Unite managed 12% last time.

 

[Dom Traynor]

I know two of the candidates very well and a third reasonably well.

The reason why some on the left would've supported Roger is because he actually has a strategy and some proven success that activists would've been aware of in terms of delivering strike action, effective organising, and training and development for activists. Certainly a proper strategy and experience compared to Paul or worse the splitter. Although his failure to win shows it wasn't enough.

The sad thing about UNISON is that there wasn't a working class woman candidate fighting for a progressive organising union that's prepared to be oppositional and robust. So instead the first woman leader of a union that is 77% women is a Prentisite continuity candidate.

 

[hitmouse]

Got around to reading the Novara analysis: Christina McAnea’s Unison Victory is a Lesson for the Left | Novara Media
This stood out as a really noticeable bit of revisionism:

In 2014, care workers in Doncaster faced a 35% pay cut after they were outsourced to private-provider Care UK, but saw this threat off after a 90-day strike, and went back into work with a pay rise. Unison, however, made no attempt to use the momentum generated in Doncaster to develop a national campaign to take on big care providers nationwide in order to transform the industry.

I thought "that looks wrong, either I'm misremembering stuff really badly or this person is bullshitting" and looked it up, and indeed: Care UK workers celebrate pay offer to end 90 days of strikes
It was a 2% pay rise after the 35% pay cut had already been implemented, or in other words a pay cut slightly smaller than the original one. Not quite a historic victory there.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Got around to reading the Novara analysis: Christina McAnea’s Unison Victory is a Lesson for the Left | Novara Media
This stood out as a really noticeable bit of revisionism:

I thought "that looks wrong, either I'm misremembering stuff really badly or this person is bullshitting" and looked it up, and indeed: Care UK workers celebrate pay offer to end 90 days of strikes
It was a 2% pay rise after the 35% pay cut had already been implemented, or in other words a pay cut slightly smaller than the original one. Not quite a historic victory there.

Not a very good article generally is it?

The decision to highlight the SEIU organising model is particularly baffling given both its lack of applicability to the UK and the partnership with employers interests which fatally limit its ability to deliver for the workers.

No mention of the Unison ‘Labour Link’ which ensures that the union remains largely mute wjen Labour councils vote through cuts packages.

The article is right to highlight the need for better rank and file organisation, and the need such an organisation to develop networks of new activists who are properly supported and can organise at every level of the union - but is abstract and vague on how that might be achieved mentioning the Chicago teachers union uncritically and without explaining how it might be applied in the UK where bargaining structures are completely different.

 

[hitmouse]

Yeah, and no discussion of the Durham TAs, who are in some ways one of the most inspiring stories of the past five years or so in the UK. Although again, the ending of that dispute was a bit less than uplifting, and Unison's role in the whole thing was not particularly heroic.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Yeah, and no discussion of the Durham TAs, who are in some ways one of the most inspiring stories of the past five years or so in the UK. Although again, the ending of that dispute was a bit less than uplifting, and Unison's role in the whole thing was not particularly heroic.

It was the same in Birmingham with the home carers dispute. Unison found themselves in a dispute rather than organising for one. The piece feels very superficial rather than a penetrating analysis of the tasks facing activists in their union

 

[Dom Traynor]

The important thing to remember about Durham and Birmingham is that the organisation is not a monolithic one, and that different elements seek to influence and push opportunities in different ways. Of all the candidates Roger would probably have created a space for genuinely innovative and potentially militant organising in a pragmatic way - but really as the least bad of a bad bunch and problematic in other ways.

I could write a book on it if I was that sort of person. Especially Durham.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

The important thing to remember about Durham and Birmingham is that the organisation is not a monolithic one, and that different elements seek to influence and push opportunities in different ways. Of all the candidates Roger would probably have created a space for genuinely innovative and potentially militant organising in a pragmatic way - but really as the least bad of a bad bunch and problematic in other ways.

I could write a book on it if I was that sort of person. Especially Durham.

I agree that big unions are complex, uneven, diffuse and require careful analysis. The article posted from Novara doesn’t seem to engage with any of that. It’s very superficial, ‘we need a left union’ by numbers stuff. It would be good to read a better piece where the various complexities and challenges are properly set out and discussed.

I don’t know anything about the respective candidates bar that RP was the SP candidate. The CPB members of my acquaintance were backing RM which, given he’s already AGS, led me to conclude he was a left bureaucrat candidate. But I think the left in unison, like the Unite BL, is hard to decipher for those outside of it. As for the GMB if it’s got a broad left I’ve never met anyone in it or heard anything about it.

The one thing in the article I do strongly agree with is whatever the left is in unison it’s not organised and dynamic. The turnout in the election - less than 50,000 votes required to lead a mass public sector union of 1.5 million - tells us that. The same is the case in Unite. The Unite BL is a network of, mainly, middle aged white men. It’s leadership is essentially a gang of privileged lay bureaucrats and FTOs. Genuine rank and file organisation is treated as hostile to their interests and modus operandi. Anyone remotely interested in building power from the bottom up is labelled ‘anarchist’ or ultra left. Like Unison their remoteness from the shopfloor is revealed at election time: a weakness about to come home to roost if 3 ‘left’ candidates go up against Coyne.

 

[Dom Traynor]

Don't disagree with any of that.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Here’s the new GS interviewed. Despite her wealth of experience she’s never heard of leverage it seems. Of course there is plenty of blustery piss from the union tops (I remember Lenny claiming he’s go to jail for civil disobedience over austerity but I’m still waiting) but McAnea's point here seems to be that other unions should adopt the massively successful approach of her own union - which is to sit back and allow mass lay offs, outsourcing, casualisation and a constant erosion of terms and confirms and say and do nothing:

 

[teqniq]

It may be time for me to join another union:

There's also this (from 2019)

How Britain's Biggest Union Undermined the Struggles of Migrant Workers

Some of Britain's most marginalised workers have found that they need to fight for their rights without the help of mainstream trade unions.

www.vice.com