Posts
Trade Unions: Should They Take On New Members Who Are Already Considering or in a Grievance?
I'd say a qualified yes. Just heard a story of someone being hugely discriminated against by management. Not following their own rules never mind civilized human behaviour.
Worker in a managerial grade where there is less unionisation. Being refused membership and help. Problems have escalated since. And this in a low-membership industry.
Is that the right way to go? Arguments on both sides. Comments please.
4 comments:
Yes, take them on. Is this retail? No industry with a greater need for protection. Taking on cases like this - where they are particularly heinous at least - could be a recruiting sergeant for other members. So it would not be ultra vires.
It is retail, yes. One of the bigger operators who are I think in bed with Usdaw though I'm not certain as some are with GMB.
Where they can.
Some problems are easy enough to solve without going to law, others are *very* expensive. This kind of situation gets tricky for unions in that they do have to balance the books. Members paying in pay for the level of cases that those members take out. Put in a lot of people who are bringing an up front cost of 100 times the annual subs rate and it's not hard to see that service to existing members could be compromised.
Unions need to help new people in order to grow, and they are founded on principles of working together to help everyone, but it's unfair to expect them to take a hit in every case where someone who has chosen not to join them suddenly finds a need for the services that millions of others have been quietly paying for for years. If your car has just crashed, you're not going to find many insurers that will cover you retrospectively, so it's some testament to many unions that they will at least listen and think if there's anything they can do before saying no.
This is also a big concern with vulnerable workers - people in low paid low conditions jobs with high turnover and a lot of problems. Unions are actively working to organise these people, even though a pure economic case would say they weren't the easiest market to go after.
Tell your friend to ask the recognised union if there is one, and USDAW or GMB if there isn't. The worst that can happen is that they say no, but please understand there might be genuine reasons if they do.
Thanks JohnInnit
These are exactly the arguments to balance. But believe me comrades this case is a spectacular miscarriage. The worker concerned was unlikely to be unionised - though there are plenty in similar status who might join if this worked, and they WILL WIN - and I would strongly recommend a rethink even if on a cost-limited basis.
Union support (and instant membership) but cash-limited or backing a contingency based fee from a friendly lawyer (which this comrade has on board). So the costs to membership are offical's time and the odd hint and assist. The accruals to membership are boosted numbers and (subject to agreement terms) tabloid hurrahs.
Post a Comment