Joining UNISON: does the reform of a union organising strategy change how members perceive their recruitment?

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/irj.12098
• Author: Allan Kerr,Jeremy Waddington
• Published date: 01 May 2015
• Date: 01 May 2015

Joining UNISON: does the reform of a

union organising strategy change how

members perceive their recruitment?

Jeremy Waddington and Allan Kerr

ABSTRACT

Drawing on survey evidence collected between 2001 and 2012, this article examines

whether changes in the organising approach of UNISON were reflected in changes in

the routes of entry of new members into the union. The article shows that shifts in

UNISON policy were marginal to the pattern of entry into the union. The implica-

tions of these findings for the concept and implementation of organising are subse-

quently reviewed.

1 INTRODUCTION

A peak in British trade union density of 55.8 per cent in 1979 was followed by a

protracted and almost uninterrupted decline in membership of approaching six

million members in the period to 2014 (Certification Officer, various; Waddington,

1992). Although there is no consensus on the relative effects of the factors external to

unionism that promoted this decline, most commentators agree that changes in the

macroeconomic environment, the changing composition of the labour force, mana-

gerial resistance and the implementation of new workplace practices, and state poli-

cies, particularly legislation to restrict union activity, are all contributory factors to

decline (Dickens and Hall, 2006; Mason and Bain, 1993; Metcalf, 1991). Further-

more, the contraction in the coverage of collective bargaining has restricted the

opportunities for trade unionists to negotiate benefits for employees, thereby reducing

the attraction of unionism to potential members (Gall, 2003a). Issues internal to

unionism are also viewed as promoting membership decline. Such internal issues

include the inadequacy of resources allocated to reversing decline (Kelly, 1990), the

commitment of senior union officials to reform (Simms et al., 2013) and a failure to

recognise the interests of new groups of potential members (Dølvik and Waddington,

2005; Hyman, 1999).

❒Jeremy Waddington is Teacher in Industrial Relations at the University of Manchester and is the Project

Coordinator for the European Trade Union Institute, Brussels and Allan Kerr is now retired. Before

retiring, he was the Head of Organizing and Recruitment for UNISON. Correspondence should be

addressed to Jeremy Waddington, University of Manchester, MBS, Booth Street Weat, Manchester M15

6PB; email: Jeremy.Waddington@virgin.net

Industrial Relations Journal 46:3, 187–207

ISSN 0019-8692

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

The unremitting character of British membership decline prompted a search for

strategies for union renewal and the means to reverse the decline. Initially, the focus

was on the provision of packages of financial services intended to meet the demands

of a supposedly more individualised workforce (Bassett and Cave, 1993). A wide

range of survey data demonstrated that financial services were peripheral to union

joining and that the practices of unionists at the workplace were key to promoting

higher rates of union joining (Kerr, 1992; Sapper, 1991; Waddington and Whitston,

1997). In consequence, unionists turned to partnership, organising and community

unionism approaches as a means to renew unionism (Heery, 2002; Wills, 2002). Trade

union organising is contested as a concept and in the manner of its implementation.

Conceptually, debate focuses on the purpose of trade union organising; the nature of

relationships, if they exist at all, between organising and other trade union strategic

approaches such as servicing and partnership; and the impact of organising on forms

of union renewal (Danford et al., 2009). Similarly, there is a wide range of approaches

to organising implemented by trade unions in the UK and elsewhere (Simms et al.,

2013). This article assesses how members perceive their route of entry into UNISON,

the largest pubic sector union in the UK. This assessment is made as a strategy imbued

with the rubric of organising was implemented and subsequently amended in the light

of experience. In making this assessment, the article sheds light on the debates con-

cerning organising by reference to survey evidence of new members’ perceptions of

joining UNISON.

Proponents of organising would concur that organising is about promoting local

union activity, greater self-sufficiency within workplace unionism and a sense of

collective identity (Lopez, 2004; Russo and Banks, 1996). It is also acknowledged

that the choice of organising tactics should depend on the target workplaces

(Bronfenbrenner and Juravich, 1998; Heery et al., 2000) and that leadership com-

mitment is prerequisite for successful organising (Voss and Sherman, 2000). The

debate on organising embraces increasing membership/density as a means to exert

power over employers or to represent workers hitherto under-represented in trade

unions (Heery, 2004; Lerner, 2003); to secure recognition from employers, thereby

extending the coverage of collective bargaining (Gall, 2003b); or to foster forms of

union renewal (Turner and Hurd, 2001).

While these purposes are not mutually exclusive, the debate on relationships between

organising and other strategic approaches is more polarised. One position argues that

the self-sufficiency generated by workplace unionism through organising constitutes a

significant break with the bureaucratisation of the servicing model (Carter, 2000; 2006),

whereas others argue that organising and servicing are to some degree mutually reliant

as workplace activities require support from elsewhere in the union, for example, in the

form of training (de Turberville, 2004; 2007). Further muddying the water, some trade

union officers view organising as a means of dealing with ‘bad’ employers while

partnership should characterise relations with ‘good’ employers (Heery, 2002). Advo-

cates of these different positions accept that change within unions is required. It is the

nature of change that is debated. Those that view organising as necessarily independent

from other strategic approaches argue that union renewal will only arise from the

implementation of organising strategies, while those viewing the distinction between

organising and servicing as a false dichotomy argue that unionists should be ‘strategi-

cally adaptive’ in the process of renewal (de Turberville, 2007: 566).

The impact of organising on union renewal is also contested. One strand of argu-

ment views union organising as promoting a political transformation that might

188 Jeremy Waddington and Allan Kerr

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd