On
Monday, May 17th, 1.3 million ballot papers will go out for an election
that has the potential to worry the ruling class even more than the
general election, which we were told had world financial markets in
jitters. The period of relative class peace is inevitably coming to an
end, and the global crisis of sovereign debt and the financial markets
rules out any compromise between the public sector workers and the
‘banker’s government’ that we now face. Whether, in the public sector, we
have a fighting, member led union or one attuned to ‘holding the line’
for the government and policing its own members, is of immense interest
to both the British working class and the capitalist class.
As
Paul Holmes, the UNISON United Left candidate, pointed out at a recent
public campaign meeting, ‘The working classes are busing working –
that’s what they do. Unfortunately the chattering classes are busy not
working. So the chattering classes tend to dominate the worker’s
movement in times of quietness. But the working class is going to move
onto the stage now.Thatcher was right – there is no alternative.’ Paul
stressed that the only debate in Britain now is between having a
country run by and for bankers and capitalists, and one by and for the
workers.
The
immense pressure building from both sides of the class divide is
reflected in the fact that we have had an agenda of massive austerity
imposed onto us. But it is also shown in that the leading candidates
from both parties in the new coalition were compelled to try to
downplay their coming cuts, and to pretend to be somehow in opposition
to finance capital. But as Paul stressed this is only a pretence – the
so-called progressive Nick Clegg is the grandson of an ABN Amro
president and the son of a wealthy stockbroker, and started out in the
Tories. Cameron is also the son of a leading stockbroker. This is a
government for the rich intent on attacking the working class.
immense pressure building from both sides of the class divide is
reflected in the fact that we have had an agenda of massive austerity
imposed onto us. But it is also shown in that the leading candidates
from both parties in the new coalition were compelled to try to
downplay their coming cuts, and to pretend to be somehow in opposition
to finance capital. But as Paul stressed this is only a pretence – the
so-called progressive Nick Clegg is the grandson of an ABN Amro
president and the son of a wealthy stockbroker, and started out in the
Tories. Cameron is also the son of a leading stockbroker. This is a
government for the rich intent on attacking the working class.
Indeed,
the working class has no interest in the argument that ‘we’re all in
this together’ and that we have to mutually ‘belt tighten’. Paul said
that the ruling class has to explain to the workers why for 30 years,
and now more so than ever, their conditions have been under attack, not
because ‘something rusted’ or ‘it rained’, as he put it, but for some
other reason. Since there has been no natural calamity, no crop
failure, what is the need for the working class to pay so dearly? Paul
said the public sector unions need to take a lead and explain that ‘it
doesn’t have to rain – we don’t have to suffer cuts.’ The present
government wants to make cuts to working class living standards and
public services because they can’t see any other way to make their
money. He pointed out that if there is a deficit, somewhere else there
is a surplus! According to Paul ‘they made their money in the 80s from
privatisation, in the 90s from deregulation, in the 00s from PFI’,
predicting that the next big target is to be education and schools
(where UNISON organises a lot of support staff), one of the few
remaining large government landholders.
the working class has no interest in the argument that ‘we’re all in
this together’ and that we have to mutually ‘belt tighten’. Paul said
that the ruling class has to explain to the workers why for 30 years,
and now more so than ever, their conditions have been under attack, not
because ‘something rusted’ or ‘it rained’, as he put it, but for some
other reason. Since there has been no natural calamity, no crop
failure, what is the need for the working class to pay so dearly? Paul
said the public sector unions need to take a lead and explain that ‘it
doesn’t have to rain – we don’t have to suffer cuts.’ The present
government wants to make cuts to working class living standards and
public services because they can’t see any other way to make their
money. He pointed out that if there is a deficit, somewhere else there
is a surplus! According to Paul ‘they made their money in the 80s from
privatisation, in the 90s from deregulation, in the 00s from PFI’,
predicting that the next big target is to be education and schools
(where UNISON organises a lot of support staff), one of the few
remaining large government landholders.
Such a situation
imposes the severest imaginable strain on the trade unions, charged
with defending the working class, and in this case UNISON in
particular. As quoted above, Paul points out that the structure of the
union has been continually removed in recent ‘times of quietness’ from
its members. When asked how he would overcome this obstacle to fighting
against cuts if elected, he argued it was not so much the individual
personalities on the National Executive Committee that are the problem.
Instead the structure prevents them from winning struggles as it is a
jaded structure not used to the daily struggles and sacrifices of the
rank and file that are necessary to win any fight.
This
is why Paul’s main campaign pledge, along with being a general
secretary on a worker’s wage (as opposed to the £127,000 per year of
the incumbent, Dave Prentis), is for regular elections of all union
officials, as opposed to the current system of appointments, so that
the leaders of the union reflect the demands of the movement.
is why Paul’s main campaign pledge, along with being a general
secretary on a worker’s wage (as opposed to the £127,000 per year of
the incumbent, Dave Prentis), is for regular elections of all union
officials, as opposed to the current system of appointments, so that
the leaders of the union reflect the demands of the movement.
"Every
union official will tell you, they would rather win a dispute by
writing a letter. No one likes doing the hard work. It is extremely
stressful, and it puts tremendous stress on families. But the people
who run our unions haven’t done it. They don’t know about doing it.
They think it’s some sort of discussion. Shop stewards talk to working
people every day of their life. That is the issue. The rank and file
have to come because only they are capable of representing people. At
the moment officials hate elections. Stewards don’t hate them – that’s
the world they live in. As a steward you can be gone the next day if
you have an argument with your members. But at the moment most
officials do not want to live in that world." The pledge of a fighting
general secretary on a workers wage also reflects this need, "It’s not
a question of getting a nice job on nice money. Most stewards lose
money. They lose their career, they lose their family life, they lose
opportunity. And that’s the choice are members have – they get somebody
of themselves to represent them, or the political class tries to
prevent that from happening."
union official will tell you, they would rather win a dispute by
writing a letter. No one likes doing the hard work. It is extremely
stressful, and it puts tremendous stress on families. But the people
who run our unions haven’t done it. They don’t know about doing it.
They think it’s some sort of discussion. Shop stewards talk to working
people every day of their life. That is the issue. The rank and file
have to come because only they are capable of representing people. At
the moment officials hate elections. Stewards don’t hate them – that’s
the world they live in. As a steward you can be gone the next day if
you have an argument with your members. But at the moment most
officials do not want to live in that world." The pledge of a fighting
general secretary on a workers wage also reflects this need, "It’s not
a question of getting a nice job on nice money. Most stewards lose
money. They lose their career, they lose their family life, they lose
opportunity. And that’s the choice are members have – they get somebody
of themselves to represent them, or the political class tries to
prevent that from happening."
Paul’s
campaign is not about Paul, but the need for the working class to
reclaim their unions as the only way to defend their living standards.
And this is reflected in the current campaign. The nature of the
campaign of the incumbent, Dave Prentis, reflects the fact it is based
on yesterday’s structure of compromise where the ‘chattering classes’
take leadership, and Paul’s is based on the movement of the rank and
file. For instance, although Dave Prentis has received seven times as
many branch nominations as the next closest, Paul Holmes, those
branches represent only just under 1/3 of the membership, and Paul’s
represent 1/8. Therefore on average, branches nominating Paul represent
2.6 times as many workers as Dave. Over the nomination period, Dave
Prentis attended only one branch hustings, but Paul attended 11! Over a
period of a few days, Paul attended 3 separate branch nomination
meetings, and 260 members attended in total. And none of them voted for
Dave Prentis.
campaign is not about Paul, but the need for the working class to
reclaim their unions as the only way to defend their living standards.
And this is reflected in the current campaign. The nature of the
campaign of the incumbent, Dave Prentis, reflects the fact it is based
on yesterday’s structure of compromise where the ‘chattering classes’
take leadership, and Paul’s is based on the movement of the rank and
file. For instance, although Dave Prentis has received seven times as
many branch nominations as the next closest, Paul Holmes, those
branches represent only just under 1/3 of the membership, and Paul’s
represent 1/8. Therefore on average, branches nominating Paul represent
2.6 times as many workers as Dave. Over the nomination period, Dave
Prentis attended only one branch hustings, but Paul attended 11! Over a
period of a few days, Paul attended 3 separate branch nomination
meetings, and 260 members attended in total. And none of them voted for
Dave Prentis.
It
is hardly surprising that more have nominated Dave Prentis, considering
he is the incumbent and all unison circulars contain his photo and
signature. Prentis enjoys the support of almost all national committees
and regional councils. But what is clear from the above is that this
support for Dave overwhelmingly comes from the existing structures. It
is very top heavy. His incumbency relies upon moribund branches and an
inactive membership. This is borne out by the number of internal
witch-hunts against left activists in the union, which result in
effectively shutting down whole branches and serves only to materially
weaken the union’s ability to defend and represent its own members. It
is also displayed by the fact that those branches who have nominated
anyone only represent a minority of the membership, and it is normally
only a small minority that actually votes in the election. What do all
those other unison members think?
is hardly surprising that more have nominated Dave Prentis, considering
he is the incumbent and all unison circulars contain his photo and
signature. Prentis enjoys the support of almost all national committees
and regional councils. But what is clear from the above is that this
support for Dave overwhelmingly comes from the existing structures. It
is very top heavy. His incumbency relies upon moribund branches and an
inactive membership. This is borne out by the number of internal
witch-hunts against left activists in the union, which result in
effectively shutting down whole branches and serves only to materially
weaken the union’s ability to defend and represent its own members. It
is also displayed by the fact that those branches who have nominated
anyone only represent a minority of the membership, and it is normally
only a small minority that actually votes in the election. What do all
those other unison members think?
What
we need is a union built on the participation of the whole membership.
Ultimately this can only be done by the movement of the class itself,
and it will be compelled to move under the coming conditions. But we
also need a bold leadership based on this rather than discouraging it.
Paul Holmes, branch secretary of Kirklees Unison, with amongst the
highest membership density (84%, way above average), standing on a
worker’s wage and for election of all officials by the rank and file,
is the best placed candidate to fulfil this role. His victory depends
on engaging with the swathes of members alienated by the union hierarchy.
So tell your colleagues, leaflet schools, hospitals, and council
workplaces. For a fighting general secretary on a worker’s wage.
we need is a union built on the participation of the whole membership.
Ultimately this can only be done by the movement of the class itself,
and it will be compelled to move under the coming conditions. But we
also need a bold leadership based on this rather than discouraging it.
Paul Holmes, branch secretary of Kirklees Unison, with amongst the
highest membership density (84%, way above average), standing on a
worker’s wage and for election of all officials by the rank and file,
is the best placed candidate to fulfil this role. His victory depends
on engaging with the swathes of members alienated by the union hierarchy.
So tell your colleagues, leaflet schools, hospitals, and council
workplaces. For a fighting general secretary on a worker’s wage.
