The public sector strike: What next?
Of the many, many interviews done by those on both sides of the pension strikes dispute, the comments made by Michael Gove, the education secretary, on Five Live's Drive show stood out for me.
He urged listeners - and union members - to question the motives of union leaders for pushing for strikes so very quickly. He singled out Len McCluskey, the top dog at Unite and the main agitator behind the British Airways cabin crew strike last year, Mark Serwotka of the PCS union and Dave Prentis, boss of Unison and arguably the wettest, dullest, most unconvincing, non-rabble rousing union leader ever to exist.
Gove's basic argument was that the motives behind the strike for the likes of those listed above was more political than it was for the best interests of members. Union leaders will be quick to point that this could be construed as a classic divide-and-conquer tactic on the part of Gove. United we stand, divided we fall and all that.
And yet, and yet - Does he have a point? In fact, he may even have hit upon two points - whether unions are doing their members a dis-service by going one in, all in, and also whether ideological differences between the unions and the government are clouding the unions' collective judgement.
Dealing with the 'all together' point first - do union members win when all bundled together for a 'public sector' strike? I suppose it depends on which union you are in, and how the public views your profession. It's well documented that headteachers are on strike for the first time in a long time - but given the perception of the public sector as a whole, does this generally well-respected profession miss out on speaking to a receptive audience because it had joined a wider strike?
It is, of course, unfair to paint the public sector as a cosier, cushier life than working in the private sector. Yet that is the picture being painted by some in government, and it is an image not helped by some of the more profligate spending under the New Labour years. As a result, I can't help but think that some of the more moderate, well-respected professions are losing out by being lumped with the 'public sector.'
When you add into the mix the fact that we're not just talking about one big public sector pension, but a handful of different schemes. The health scheme, according to health workers, has been self-financing for several years. So do health workers miss out by going out on strike with everyone else?
The obvious advantage of everyone going out on strike is that it is more likely that the country grinds to a standstill and pressure grows on the government to resolve the dispute. But did that happen? What's the worst that happened to you? Mersey Tunnel closed? Bins not emptied until Saturday? School shut? A day's pay lost is probably the most irksome aspect for people who had to look after their children - but would striking teachers be better off going off on their own to make their point, explaining the motivation behind their action rather than being vocally drowned out?
Among some union activists today - most notably Unison, a union which is so big and covers so many jobs that it seems incapable to getting beyond political statements to explain the pensions strike properly - there is talk of 'longer-term strikes' and rounding on 'scabs' - those folk who choose to work. The problem with longer-term strikes is that I suspect, in these economically challenged times, people won't want to forfeit income for days on end. For a strike to succeed, it needs to be plausible that it will go on and on. The public mood doesn't appear to be behind the strikers enough to make it plausible. But if individual unions could get their messages across about their members, would the public mood change? Towards some unions - the headteachers again, for example - I suspect it would. Ditto the Fire Brigades Union.
Gove's second point - about the political motivation of some of the union leaders - is more than just political rhetoric on his part. Many of the union leaders - Tony Woodley is an example - resort to the 'why should public sector workers pay for the errors of the bankers' argument rather than explaining the impact on members. Any press officer with an ounce of credibility within the union movement should know that no-one likes bankers, but we've all suffered as a result. In the haste to present the strike as 'unions v the bankers friends' the unions have lost the chance to put across the reasons why the public sector pension deal is so bad. Why miss that golden opportunity?
Simple - the union bigwigs are political animals. Their unions work do a lot of good work for many members, but at the top, it's easier for them to play politics and push a simple message rather than work harder to win over the public.
Gove, of course, is also a political animal, but one which can be voted out. In many ways he's right - after 24 hours of strike action, union members need to ask if their union is really getting it right for their cause, or just for the political ideals of the union elite at the top of the tree.
Older/Newer
« The dangers of living in the bubble at the Lib Dem party conference | »
Profile
David Higgerson - David Higgerson has covered local and national politics for much of his career as a journalist. This blog aims to look at Westminister from the outside in, at a time when it appears very few are looking out from the inside.
