Industrial Democracy

[kyedudd007]

Please see the Blog I wrote for the youth website last month on Industrial Democracy

Your views are most welcome






Industrial Democracy, Think Again.


Kye Dudd
10 June 2011
The seeds of a debate began to emerge from conference around the issue of industrial democracy. The view from the platform being we need to change and improve our relationship with the employer and for the employer to do the same.

Whilst I think most of us recognise that the world would be a much better if we all got along a bit better, the leadership of the union must think very carefully before it enters into partnerships of this type.

It emerged during the debate that industrial democracy had been trialled in the Post Office during the 1970’s following the infamous “Bullock report” and could hardly be described as a success.

For me this quite a timely debate as only the week before annual conference I went to Hannover in Germany as part of a southwest TUC executive delegation. This was a meeting of regional trade union and employers bodies from across Europe to explore social partnership. This is where employers, unions and governments work together in the collective interest. Social partnership is something that we don’t really do in this country. This for many reasons is a real shame because in Italy, Germany, France and Spain trade unions have a real input into everything from public services, employment and development policy.

There was one part of my visit that did concern me. That was a visit to the Volkswagen factory on the outskirts of Hannover. This was the plant where they make all the commercial vehicles and camper vans. The trip was organised because VW are seen as a model when it comes to social partnership and co-determination within the workplace. I had the usual tour of the massive factory, where of course kiazen (the original version of world class mail) was in full operation.

After the tour I sat down and listened very carefully to a presentation from the production manager and the chair of the works council (senior elected union official). What they both described was a perfect picture and a very close and blissful relationship. However if you scratch away at the surface the mask began to slip. The chair of the works council had no adequate response to some fundamental questions that I put to her about my concerns.

In your view do you believe that because of your very close relationship with the employer that you gain more concessions from the company? Or do you believe that because of your relationship with the employer that they gain more concessions from the works council (Union)?

I went on to ask a question about the perception of the works council amongst the workforce. Does the workforce see the works council as a vehicle for representing them and achieving their aspirations? Or is there a sense of apathy towards the works council amongst the workforce?

The chair of the works council really struggled to answer these questions. What I wanted to hear was that the trade union gets a much better deal out of the employer from this relationship and the workforce has confidence in the body to work for their aspirations. I didn’t hear any of this in her answers and this concerned me. It also worried me throughout my questioning (and the chair of the works councils answers), that the production manager had a very big smug smile on his face. A picture is worth a thousand words as they say.

The atmosphere of apathy around the VW plant could be linked to major corruption that took place a few years ago on the works council. The former head of the works council was jailed for two years and nine months over a sex and bribery scandal. This involved a slush fund for managers and union reps to enjoy lavish meals and trips to overseas brothels. This was in return for accepting inferior collective agreements. This was probably only possible because of the very cosy relationship management had with the works council.

At conference I listened to the leadership talk of their vision for the future in having the trades union, customers and local bodies on joint boards of this type. This is missing the point. Do you really think that privateers driven solely by profit will care about the views of others? In any case they are bound to have a majority on these forums in order to marginalise the CWU as they drive through their plans.

We have already seen this type of relationship prove detrimental to us in the form of the CWU pensions trustees, where despite being on the board they always get outvoted.

I believe these plans are pie in the sky and even if implemented will only benefit the company and not members of the CWU. We must maintain our strength as an independent trade union and not a dependant trade union.

[Big Daz]

Pros and cons to this, would not want to go down this road without a through debate with the mbrs followed by a vote that required a 50% of ballot papers plus one returned as a yes vote.

[fishtank]

Pros and cons to this, would not want to go down this road without a through debate with the mbrs followed by a vote that required a 50% of ballot papers plus one returned as a yes vote.

Do you think the members want a Staff Association because that's the route this will take you?
Union board members ....isn't there enough accusations of collusion and the CWU being in RM's back pocket?