By Steve McKenzie, Unite Community member
The civil war in Unite, between the General Secretary, Sharon Graham and her supporters, and the so called ‘United Left’ faction, escalated last week. Sharon Graham, and the chair of the executive council, Andy Green, (allegedly a ‘United Left’ supporter), signed an explosive letter that was sent out to all staff.
The authors must have been aware that the letter would be leaked and that it would find its way into the public domain. It was their response to the pressure that had been brought to bear by some individuals, associated with a faction of the ‘United Left’, over alleged actions or inactions, and other accusations that are being directed at the General Secretary.
There are allegations and counter-allegations of fraud, financial mismanagement, membership losses, nepotism and victimisation of Unite employees. There are claims and counter-claims in relation to Unite’s inaction at a national level in relation to the genocide in Gaza.
The letter is a response to a post on Skwawkbox, accusing the current union leadership of being responsible for a decline in the membership. “We are taking the highly unusual step of writing to you”, the letter begins, “to alert and inform you about a number of extremely troubling actions being undertaken by a tiny minority of individuals, inside and outside of our Union”.
“Some of these individuals”, it goes on, “are linked to the past leadership and a small number are linked to groups who want us to make decisions detrimental to our membership and their jobs”. This is a very robust and, in recent times, an unprecedented defence of its record by a union leadership.
Article allegedly based on a fraudulent document
The circular letter claims that figures on Skwawkbox, showing that there had been a reduction in membership were based on fraudulent documentation. It alleges that a “fake Unite Financial Document – drawn up in the same style, font and layout of our usual reports – to try and fool people into thinking Unite has a declining financial situation”, which is a very serious charge indeed.
The letter also says that the General Secretary has been the victim of a smear campaign, as a result of her determination to expose fraud and misappropriation of union funds, when the union was under a different leadership. In a section entitled “cleaning up the union”, the letter says that the leadership “have had two high level inquiries looking at alleged financial irregularities during the period of the previous leadership – one on the Birmingham Hotel and Conference Centre led by an independent KC and one on examining misappropriation of funds relating to our Affiliated Services”.
There is no doubt that no honest union member, would be opposed to ‘cleaning up’ their union and the outcome of these inquiries – at least one of which has been referred to the police – will be eagerly awaited. It would give the members a lot more confidence in the process, however, if there were some means employed to allow elected representatives from within the membership in these inquiries, rather than have them conducted behind closed doors.
Union spent £19mn in strike pay in two years
When it comes to industrial issues, there is no doubt that the current leadership has a far superior approach compared to the previous leadership. Even if there were any pressure on the union’s strike funds – as Skwawkbox alleges – it might be understandable given the number of disputes the union has been engaged in. The national officials boast of spending £19mn in the last two years on strike pay.
However, being compared to the previous leadership is not setting the bar very high, and although some notable successes have been made in industrial disputes, more recently that is not always the case. The letter made exaggerated and self-congratulatory claims in relation to successes on the industrial front, but the leadership seem to be selling the outcome of some disputes as if they were victories, regardless of the reality. The dispute at the St Mungo’s charity is a good example (see interview with Unite worker here).
There is no doubt that the website Swawkbox and some of those behind it are conducting a vicious campaign against Sharon Graham and it has made some clearly false, misleading and exaggerated claims. But it has to be said, that in relation to the genocidal war in Gaza, the national leadership has left itself wide open to criticism.
The officers’ letter boasts that “Unite, through the General Secretary and the Chair of the Union and the Executive Council, was the first major union to publicly and unambiguously call for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza. We were very clear. We have watched on with horror the bombardment and destruction of Gaza…” This is, to say the least, rather disingenuous.
As the leadership well know, what has irked many active members is that there have been few, if any public declarations of support for Palestinian rights up to the last week – when the war on Gaza has gone on for five months. And to date, there has been no official participation of national banners or leadership figures on ceasefire rallies organised by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign. If the membership may get the impression that the leadership are dragging its feet on Gaza – and that invites those behind Skwawkbox to make their allegations – then the leadership only has itself to blame.
Unite members in the arms industry
Perhaps the most contentious issue is that of Unite members’ jobs in the arms industry. An article on Skwawkbox suggests, “Graham tells staff/organisers Unite will always put arms jobs before fighting Gaza genocide” and this needs to be answered. The General Secretary’s circular letter says, “we cannot and will not endorse any organisation which decides unilaterally and without any discussion (let alone agreement) with the workers themselves, to support the targeting of our members’ workplaces or their jobs”.
This is clearly a reference to the pickets and rallies outside UK arms production facilities but it is an issue that the leadership appears to have dealt with up to now, only by foot dragging.
We, too, would also opposed a threat to the livelihoods of workers – in any industry – and those who seek to campaign against arms shipments to Israel have first and foremost to find ways and means of approaching and discussing with the workers on those sites. In fact, it is not the ‘outside’ campaigners who should be approaching the Unite members inside, so much as the union leadership itself.
In the past, the trade union movement has always found a means of boycotting work for undemocratic regimes – like the Chilean junta, or the South African apartheid government – without it impacting on livelihoods. Arms shipments can be stopped at many points: at the point of production or anywhere in their transportation, and the union leadership should play a role in this, not stand aside as if it is not their business.
There is clearly a fierce struggle going on in Unite between the former leaders around the ‘United Left’ and the new leadership around Sharon Graham. Many of the United Left are full-time regional and national officers merely defending their posts and their salaries, irrespective of how effective or not they are. To many union members, it is like Second World War dogfight – only visible to them by the contrails in the sky, way above their heads.
Union election rules rigged against the best activists
What bothers members more is that the union rules are rigged so many of the best shop stewards and branch officers are ineligible to even stand for key positions. One of them recently wrote, “As I am the branch secretary of ASC approved branch covering over 3000 members and 700 different workplaces. But, as I am technically not a workplace rep, I cannot no longer stand to be elected to the regional committee, NISC or EC, or go to conferences from next year despite all the work I do, and I am elected by the members of my branch every 3 years”.
This is an intolerable situation, and if the current leadership around Sharon Graham seriously wished to hand the union to its members, it has to begin by opening up the election of key positions to its most active members – those who really hold the union together on the shop floor.
Left Horizons supporters in Unite do not nail our colours to the mast of either the ‘United Left’ faction, or the faction around the General Secretary, which is fragmented and inconsistent at best. The former may be beyond redemption, but the latter, if it wants to reflect the membership, must be opened up to become a genuinely broad and democratic left. If this faction, too, only seeks to guarantee the posts of a few individuals, it too, will go the way of the ‘United Left’ into oblivion.
A genuine broad left would seek to have as near a mass participation of activists as possible, with national and regional structures and meetings and democratic accountability. It is one thing that could guarantee that the union is genuinely member-led and member-accountable. One thing is for sure, the unseemly struggle at the top is going on over the heads of a largely bemused membership, and is not in the best long-term interests of our union and its members.
