The Trials of The Union Rep

For anyone who thinks they do a thankless job, try being a union rep. Your mission, is to negotiate settlements that are nothing short of a miracle, fight the most unworthy of causes, patronage the most ludicrous demands, defend the incorrigible in the face of overwhelming odds and forget the reduced sentence, achieving a result that falls short of complete exoneration is dereliction of duty. If you achieve all these objectives, you win first prize in the nobody’s friend contest and are awarded a medal with the word “anarchist” engraved on it, which is permanently pinned to your forehead.

My interest in trade unionism developed during the eighties, when I would have described myself as an idealist. I believed it to be the obligation of every member of society, to protect the vulnerable, enhance the lives of the underprivileged, support the underdog, eradicate corruption, right every wrong and be charitable towards those less fortunate than themselves. My ideals, were building blocks in the framework of a society were fairness and justice prevailed and no one would be deprived of the opportunity to improve their lot in life, giving them and future generations a better standard of living. I was convinced my dream of making the world a better place would become a reality and often sang to myself, ‘If I Ruled the World’ and “To Dream the Impossible Dream”. Hope and enthusiasm did not make me blind to the fact that there may be a few obstacles in my path, but I loved a challenge.

The main one being that Democracy had thrown a spanner in the works. Thatcher had just been elected to power and I suspected that her perception of Utopia was a sharp contrast to my own. Her first act as Prime Minister which made an impact on me, was to abolish student loans thereby depriving the less fortunate of a university education along with school milk, and that was just for starters. I took this assault upon my plans to create Utopia very personally and concluded it was time for affirmative action. I pledged my allegiance to Labour, placed a poster of Che Guevara above my bed, never missed an episode of Citizen Smith and became a trade union activist. The revolution was born.

My entry into the trade union movement was greeted with open arms. When it came to selecting candidates for conferences, or electing reps onto committees my name was always to the fore. In time, I realised I was not receiving all this attention due to my skills of excellence, but because I was blonde, female and less than 30 as opposed to being middle aged male.

In addition, I had certain characteristics which made me incredibly PC and there were those who were disappointed that I wasn’t a lesbian. Putting aside my feelings of resentment at being groomed for what I felt were the wrong reasons, I threw myself body and soul into my new vocation, determined to prove I could not only do the job well but achieve my ideal of solving the world’s problems. I listened sympathetically to every complaint and grievance that came my way, offered advice to the best of my ability and treated every individual with tender, loving care.

It was during this time that I received an education in another small flaw in my plans for Utopia, human nature. It’s every employee’s prerogative to complain and no matter how good things are they could always be better. The common fault I found among trade union members, is that despite bitter feelings about their lot in life and the numerous suggestions on offer as to how it could be improved, nobody really wanted to do anything about it themselves. That was your job as their union rep. Sorry, but it doesn’t work that way. That’s like asking someone to become a surrogate parent because you would like to have a child, but don’t want to go through pregnancy or endure the less pleasurable aspects of child rearing. Your best efforts to explain that while you can advise them on protocol and will gladly represent them; there is a procedure involved which requires a degree of effort on their part.

Members could never really get to grips with this concept and their reaction to your well meaning advice was a sure indication that they would go back to their respective departments and bewail to their compatriots that the union did nothing. That’s another privilege you earn as a union rep. You get the blame of everything from the Holocaust to the atom bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but it’s preferable to the alternative. Taking affirmative action on behalf of someone else is a bit like leading the charge of the Light Brigade with one subtle difference. Ten thousand rode into the valley of death, when you shout charge and look over your shoulder your on your own. This brings me to my dossier of member profiles.

The first member profile we come to is the Martyr members, which are those members who insist on telling the truth despite being advised it’s not in their best interests to be quite so honest. When met with the, ‘I’m not going to lie about it’ response, I’ve often explained that I’m not asking them to tell downright lies, but there’s no need to offer your head on a platter and management can be a little economical with the truth themselves, particularly if they’re trying to get rid of you. I’ve attended many a meeting were management have stated quite categorically, that no one was aware of the situation when everyone in the room knows it’s been discussed from the managing director to the cleaner, never mind the numerous phone calls and letters which are now in an obscure filing cabinet under ‘C’ for crap. The commonly used phrase ‘keeping the workforce informed’ is often referred to as ‘the mushroom treatment’ (keep them in the dark and feed them with shite), and ‘I would have to refer to my notes before I could answer that’ means, ‘I didn’t think it was important enough to take notes at that meeting and I’m going to have to go and persuade someone else to back up my response’ and he knows, you know, he knows that you know, you know he knows you know and so on.

So if your opponent is being somewhat less than honest, I think it’s only in the interests of fairness to fight fire with fire in an attempt to help the member feel relieved of what they see as their moral obligation. Persuading those intent on martyring themselves to see their situation from another perspective is no easy task. Even if you do, they’re bound to crack under interrogation and spill not only the can of beans but end up confessing to every unsolved crime on police record files. The worst possible scenario is they are dismissed, and guess whose fault it is? Yes, good old union rep. Your attempts to explain why others were given a let off for similar or more serious crimes will be in vain, so you make your weary way to perform another miracle leaving the martyr to lick his wounds.

Not all members are prone to this attack of conscience which brings me to the next member profile; the Mitty member. Mitty members will quite happily invent the most elaborate and artfully contrived stories in an attempt to save their skin, however elaborating on the truth comes with a warning. You have to be good at it. It also has to be believable and in preparing a defence never break the eleventh commandment. Thou shalt not get caught. Fibbing to management is one thing but fibbing to your union rep is a definite no no. As your last line of defence, they have to be in a position to counter attack and overcome any allegations made by management and forewarned is forearmed. Take the case of Mr W Mitty. Facing disciplinary action for bad time keeping, he informed his rep that his aging Father had had a heart attack and was recovering in hospital after triple by-pass surgery. In the emotional upset, he had understandably been more concerned about his Father and neglected to inform his line manager of the situation.

Any union rep worth his salt would have such a case thrown out of court and true to his honour, the rep went in all guns blazing storm trooper style, before the cold hearted management panel which must be totally devoid of all human compassion to treat a fellowman in such a manner. But the rep overlooked what was to become a major loophole in his defence. He was representing Mr W Mitty. He had also underestimated the resourcefulness of the senior personnel officer who had telephoned Mr Mitty’s home, spoke to his exceptionally healthy Father and discovered that the hospital he was allegedly recuperating in had shut down two years previously. Mr Mitty is now seeking alternative employment and the rep has learned a valuable lesson; never take a Mitty member’s word for granted.

So is honesty the best policy? Before answering, consider the next member profile; the rose scented member, so named as if they fell into a pile of manure they would come up smelling of roses. Mr X was a member of this elite group and was the inspiration behind said nomenclature. Having received a final written warning for bad time keeping, Mr X had once again gone AWOL. Any rep will tell you there is no way to beat disciplinary action for time keeping as it’s more often than not been documented. With no form of defence the rep was of the opinion, that the disciplinary hearing was a mere formality and Mr X was being summoned purely to receive his marching orders. In order to follow disciplinary procedure, the management panel afforded him the opportunity to offer an explanation. During his last will and testament, Mr X related the story of how he had eaten what he believed to be a dodgy kebab the night before and his efforts to reach the men’s room the following day were in vain. Yes, he shit himself. He had left the premises in order to return home and change his clothing and had not informed his line manager because he was too embarrassed to ask for a pass out.

To this day, no one knows whether Mr X was telling the truth or not, but as there was a degree of difficulty in obtaining evidence to corroborate his story and no one really wanted to try, it saved his job. I don’t know if they gave him a reprieve for admitting to his misdemeanour, or whether they just had to hand it to him for coming up with the story. Mr X left the company soon after. Well, he was on a final warning for bad time keeping and he could hardly use the same line of defence twice. I think he may have gone into politics or become a defence lawyer.

No matter how hopeless a case appears to be, every paid up member of a trade union is entitled to representation and whether they like it or not, it’s the union reps job to represent them to the best of their ability should they request it, including the members that Our Lord himself couldn’t save, which brings me to the kamikaze member. A case of employment suicide was that of Company ‘Y’ v Mr Volatile, who was accused of sectarian harassment, which carries a penalty of instant dismissal if proven guilty. Under strict instructions to keep his gob shut and to give only well rehearsed answers when absolutely necessary, Mr Volatile and the shop steward faced the hanging judge; otherwise known as the senior personnel officer.

Defence council was impeccable, driving holes through the case for the prosecution and having beaten them down to a verbal warning saved his member from the sack. However, nothing short of employment suicide contents the kamikaze and true to form Mr Volatile disobeyed orders, opened his gob and made the concluding arguments to the jury himself. His closing speech made no mention of an apology, but he did offer to shoot the personnel officer due to his alternative religious persuasion and questioned his legitimacy. As Mr Volatile was being escorted from the premises by security and the personnel officer was on the phone to the police, his friend shouted to the shop steward, whose face was now dripping with egg, ‘you didn’t do much to help him, did you?’ ‘Half a league, half a league, into the valley of death rode the …… one!’

As the years progressed my idealism and faith in human nature waned. I lamented in jest to my old boss that the revolution had been postponed due to lack of interest, and did he have any ideas on how to encourage others to commit to the common good of mankind. He recounted the story of a revolutionary group who were trying to overthrow a military type dictatorship in a South American Banana Republic. Among their ranks was an explosives expert, whose job it was to blow up all the bridges in the country. In time, the revolutionaries overthrew the Government and were elected to power. The guy who had been the explosives expert then became Minister of the Environment and his first job of office was to rebuild all the bridges he had previously blown up.

He finished by saying that having a revolution is one thing, but if you get elected to power you have to have to do something about all the problems that sparked the revolution in the first place and he wasn’t convinced that my plan to resolve the crises within NHS, by storming the Post Office Tower in a friends “A” team van, seizing the Crown Jewels and selling them in a car boot sale in order to raise funds, was one that would gain public support. Not allowing my enthusiasm to be dampened, I challenged his argument by saying that I had already recruited the owner of the van as a driver and as three other individuals had vowed allegiance to the revolution others would follow. He then poured cold water on the whole debate, by pointing out that as my three brothers in arms couldn’t be relied upon to turn up for work in the mornings, what were the chances of them confiscating the Crown Jewels? My original draft for Utopia by now not only contained a few minor flaws but had gaping great holes in it.

Going back to the charge of the Light Brigade would they have won the battle had they not been outnumbered? In any kind of conflict strength in numbers is often the deciding factor as to who comes out on top. You will notice I used the term come out on top and not win. Once we engage in conflict, both sides have already lost and it becomes a question of who will, in the long term, incur less damage limitation rather than win. As reputedly the only creatures on earth with the ability to reason, we have the capacity to resolve our differences in what are called negotiations. Negotiating means that neither side gets entirely what they want, but reach a settlement that everyone can live with, but both parties must be open to this process and human nature can once again muddy the waters by displaying it’s stubborn streak, refusing to budge on even the most minor of issues just to show that they can and why negotiate if you can bully the opposition into submission? When negotiations break down between management and unions to the point of stalemate the result is conflict, which in trade union terms is Industrial Action.

As any good rep will know, all out strike action damages the workforce as much if not more than the company and should only be used as a last resort, when all other options of reaching a settlement have been exhausted and there’s nothing left to loose. The famous and much revered Mahatma Ghandi taught us a very valuable lesson in what came to be called Passive Resistance and those who engaged in this form of combat, were very successful. Passive resistance involves neither conflict nor violence, but it requires sufficient numbers of like minded people who are prepared to stand up for their principles and take action for the good of society as a whole. Passive resistance in Industrial terms is called working to rule. Working to rule was never a form of Industrial Action myself or my Brothers in Arms would have considered in our particular establishment of employment, as a lot of people would have become very disgruntled due to the fact that they would actually have to start doing their job, but it can work in conditions that lend itself to the practice. Take the situation in a certain well known establishment in Belfast were negotiations broke down. In an official strike situation, workers do not get paid and the Company is not obliged to pay royalties if the get behind with their orders.

If a work to rule is imposed, the opposite is true, so how does the workforce persuade management to come back to the negotiating table? When a manager asked the team of fitters to assemble certain components, they said they couldn’t due to the fact that there was no staging. When he asked for staging to be erected, the stagers couldn’t carry out the task due to bad light. He then asked the electricians to repair the lighting, which they couldn’t because there was no staging. That’s people power.

People power was how the trade union movement was born. People, with a common objective, that used strength of numbers for the benefit of all. It was an ideal, but an ideal that often proved to be very effective and not just in the trade union movement. The pages of history are littered with those who shared that ideal and they weren’t all trade unionists. Today, the majority of people at least appear to want the same things and share similar ideals, so why do we find it so difficult to achieve results? Is it because we live in a society that believes it’s only when our little corner of the world is affected we should be moved to action. Even passive resistance can have repercussions so why take the risk? This way of thinking is understandable but flawed. Sooner or later, what happens in someone else’s little corner of the world, will have an affect not only on ours, but on society as a whole and no one is invulnerable. Taking affirmative action is not without risk, but a calculated risk can be worth taking if the benefits outweigh the disadvantages and as they say in the trade union movement “they can”t punish the majority’. During my time as a union rep, some members complained that the union wasn’t strong enough.

My reply was that the union is only as strong as it’s members and if the quality or integrity of its leadership, is believed to be weak or wanting in some way, it is within their power to change that. Applying this to today’s society, do we lack leadership, or do the leaders lack followers? Great leaders of the past differed in their methods and intentions, but they shared a common denominator. People who believed in them and their ideals and they had the capacity to promote unity into action. Without those who possess desirable leadership qualities to take up the challenges that leadership brings and substantial support from all who profess to believe in the common good of mankind, the blueprint for Utopia will remain a dream. Being more realistic now than in my teens, my plans for Utopia have long since been shelved. We will never create Utopia, but making the world a better place, is an ideal which will always be close to my heart.