Multi-Unionism and the Representation of Sectional Interests in British Workplaces**

Zusammenfassung

---

Britain has been regarded as traditionally having had a 'problem' in its industrial relations by virtue of the presence of sectionalism and multi-unionism. This article suggests that this analysis of sectionalism and multi-unionism being a 'problem' is very much bound up with employer perspectives and the specific context of the 1960s and 1970s. By contrast, in a period of retreat for labour unionism since 1979, sectionalism can be viewed in a different and more positive manner, whereby its resilience allows distinct, occupational interests to be more effectively represented. The case of journalists, when contrasted with that of finance workers, is used to highlight this. [PUB ABSTRACT]

Siehe den Gesamtinhalt dieses Dokumentes

Auszug

---

Multi-Unionism and the Representation of Sectional Interests in British Workplaces**

Introduction

One of the traditional and dominant hallmarks of labour unionism in Britain has been that of trade unionism, whereby different groups of workers - defined by their specific skills, jobs, occupations or professions - have established and maintained their own separate and distinctive forms of collective workplace unionisms which have, in turn, been aggregated into separate and distinctive national labour unions. The first labour unions formed were by craft or skilled workers in first half of the nineteenth century, with labour unionism for unskilled and semi-skilled workers not emerging until the end of fhe nineteenth century (Pelling 1992). These labour unions were first organised by sub-national spatial units like regions or cities reflecting the localised nature of the labour markets then. But at the same time 'trade' was the greater and more important division, underlying geographic and spatial dimensions. An example of how the two aspects evolved together can be found in the Scottish Union of Power Loom Overlookers, Northern Carpet Trades Union or the Sheffield Wool Shear Workers' Union which all existed until the early 2000s. Consequendy, the historical synthesis of trade and geography resulted in there being 1,323 unions in Britain in 1900 which reduced to 732 by 1960 and 438 by 1980. Part of the explanation for the reduction concerns the formation of conglomerate national unions, whether of single or multioccupational dimensions, for certain or allied trades resultant from the coming together of extant regional unions for specific trades. One example was the formation of the Transport and General Workers' Union in 1922 from fourteen different unions (Coates/Topham 1994). But, and despite union merging, labour unionism in Britain towards the end of the twentieth century was still marked by trade divisions and its manifestation in the workplace, namely, that of sectionalism. For the moment, sectionalism can be defined as competitive and highly differentiated workplace labour unionisms based on trade. It has conventionally been regarded seen as problematic for both employers and workers, albeit for different reasons. For employers, sectionalism was primarily viewed as inefficient in productivity terms, thus hindering profitability, and a challenge to the managerial prerogative. For workers, sectionalism was viewed in the medium- and long-terms as preventing the unity, and thus strength, required to collectively realise better terms and conditions of employment as well as the attainment of workers' power at societal level (see Hobsbawm 1981).

This article, through the examination of two case studies of different groups of workers, provides an alternative, and materialist, analysis of the issue of sectionalism and multi-unionism in British workplaces. It suggests that the analysis of sectionalism and multi-unionism being a 'problem' is very much bound up with employer perspectives and the specific context of the 1960s and 1970s. By contrast, in a period of retreat for labour ...

Siehe den Gesamtinhalt dieses Dokumentes

---