Decent pay and conditions for working people didn't simply fall out of the sky.
Decent pay and conditions for working people didn’t simply drop out of the sky
Reading some of the reporting on today’s strike action by public sector workers, you could easily believe that it was trade unionists who caused the worst financial crash since the Great Depression.
It wasn’t of course, but that’s not stopped the right making use of a good crisis to demonise trade unionists and paint unions as outdated and led by ‘dinosaurs’.
Conservative MPs often make the charge that the Labour Party is ‘bankrolled’ by the unions:
“More than half of Labour MPs have had their campaigns bankrolled (that word again) by the trade union threatening to disrupt the lives of millions and bring our economy to its knees,” was how Baroness Warsi scornfully phrased it earlier in this parliament.
Yet when people describe the Labour Party as ‘bankrolled’ by the unions they are actually saying that working people pay for the party – which is surely how you’d want politics to work under any system.
No, what the right are really doing when they attempt to play off the public against trade unionists is trying to turn the public on itself. After all, the ‘millions’ whose ‘lives are disrupted’ by strikes also presumably have jobs themselves – jobs with pay and conditions which have at some point been boosted by the existence of unions.
And that’s the nub of it: however fashionable it may be to decry the trade unions as relics and ‘dinosaurs’ of a bygone era, in reality a renaissance in trade unionism is long overdue. Economic growth may have returned but average wages have been falling for years now compared to inflation.
A common myth about trade unionism is that decent pay and conditions are won by bosses being kind rather than workers being rebellious. But history as well as extensive research contradicts this assumption. A recent study from Manchester University shows that countries with a stronger culture of collective bargaining tend on average to have higher minimum wages.
The widening gap between rich and poor in the past 30 years also reflects the loss of democratic restraint on those at the top. According to a YouGov poll from April, 56 per cent of people would like to see a more equal sharing of income – even if it reduced the total amount of Britain’s GDP.
In other words, millions of people – even many of those inconvenienced by today’s strike – want to see reduced inequality – and trade unions are one of the best ways of achieving that. As the graph demonstrates, countries with strong trade union movements tend to be more equal:
As for the government’s argument that we need a 50 per cent ballot threshold in order for any strike action to be legal: what’s telling is that the people most keen on this have nothing to say on increasing the methods available to unions to ballot members. In other words, they have no interest in making it easier for members to vote in strike ballots, they simply want to make it more difficult to take any kind of industrial action.
No one on the left should gloss over some of the trade unionism extremism of the 1970s. But we’re a long way away from that era now, and the pendulum has swung much too far the other way. Trade unionism today is almost a dirty word, with politicians of all stripes practiced in a sort of collective amnesia whereby decent pay and conditions for working people simply fell out of the sky or came as a result of kind-hearted rich men.
It is a fantasy, and those who decry today’s strike action as ‘politically motivated’ know very well what the real political motivation is in all the talk about ballot thresholds: to take yet more leverage away from working people.
James Bloodworth is the editor of Left Foot Forward. Follow James Bloodworth on Twitter
125 Responses to “Strong unions won you your rights, not kind-hearted rich men”
crizz1066
The reason why the German system works so well, is that at the end of the 2nd world war it was destroyed, factories destroyed, industry destroyed and government destroyed. So they got to rebuild from scratch. From the way you speak I guess you’d love to bring the whole system down and start from stretch, to hell with the consequences. But not possible. But while business has changes drastically since the 70’s There one element that has fourght change very step of the way. UNIONS!!!!!
crizz1066
What are you on about, that was a company I was working for. You obviously arnt reading or understanding what I wrote, so I cant be bothered to answer you.
blarg1987
So basically you did have assets as a bank would not lend you 100% without you putting up money.
You would still lose people / cut hours etc if you had to cut prices by 20%, they may not use you again, again on the flip side they may actually still use your company and services you provide and treat you with more respect and other companies may be more straight forward with you knowing not to try and shaft you, so you are not wasting time.
So you are saying in your 3 hour meetings it are you saying that your heads of department can’t communicate things down to staff, or you can have a bulletin board or do a weekly email to all staff?
Alternatively you can have a nominated member of staff to represent them at your department team meetings something similar to what they have in Germany.
crizz1066
You really have no idea of what you are talking about. If I make 40% profit and lose 20% I would still be able to function. If I lose the job I lose all the money. Something is better than nothing!!I am talking about situationist I deal with everyday. I am bored of talking to you as you have no grasp of what you are talking about. You keep making statement which you have no direct knowledge off. You are saying how you would like things to be in a perfect world. But its not a perfect world. If it was Socialism would work, but its failed in every country that’s ever tried it!
blarg1987
Hasn’t failed over here and in most of europe which has mainly socilist policies :P.
But we will have to agree to disagree.