 | |
The New Unionism and the Bargaining Agenda: UNISON - Employer Partnerships on Workplace Learning in Britain
Munro, A. & Rainbird H.,
in British Journal of Industrial Relations
38:2 June 2000
The Development of Partnerships with Employers on Education and Development
There has been considerable discussion on the extent to which a joint approach between unions and employers on issues such as training and development can contribute to the generation of a less conflictual approach to industrial relations. The "new bargaining agenda", incorporating issues concerning equal rights, health promotion, flexible working and training entitlements, was adopted by the GMB in 1990 largely as a response to its market research on what employees wanted from a trade union1. The latter was linked to the identification of target groups for recruitment and the development of new services offered to individual members. The "new bargaining agenda" was seen as establishing areas of joint work that could contribute to a less conflictual approach to industrial relations, which was seen as particularly attractive to women and professional workers2. The development of this joint problem-solving approach is most evident in examples such as the Ford EDAP scheme, which is a jointly managed employee development programme3 (although it is worth noting that this joint approach does not extend to vocational training nor to the strategic aspects of Ford's training provision).
Nevertheless, there are several ways in which UNISON's approach differs from the new "new unionism" and the "new bargaining agenda" as espoused by the GMB. The UNISON-employer partnerships on employee development did not develop as a result of a centrally developed strategy which was formulated through market research on employees' perceptions of unions. Rather, they developed as a pragmatic response to the success of the union's internally provided "Return to Learn" programme. It is useful, briefly, to recount its history here.
The Return to Learn programme was initiated by NUPE in association with the WEA in the West Midlands in 1989 and delivered by WEA tutors. It was aimed at members who had been disadvantaged in the formal education system and was designed around a combination of distance learning and small study groups. After the formation of UNISON the geographical scope of the programme was extended, and by 1998 some 6,000 students had completed it. The programme is regarded within the union as having been a significant success, because not only was it reaching its target groups - the low-paid, part-time, low-skilled manual workers who constituted a significant group of non-traditional learners within the union - but it was achieving a dramatic impact on students' lives. Helen Kennedy's report Return to Learn: UNISON's fresh approach to trade union education 2 showed that 80 per cent of students were women; 42 per cent were part-time; 76 per cent earned below £10,000 per year; 78 per cent were over 35 years of age; 91 per cent had left school at the age of 16 or earlier; and 60 per cent had no qualifications4. The programme was therefore successful in enrolling the target group of low-paid, part-time women members, though success in recruiting black and Asian members varied from one region to another. Students reported becoming more self-confident, frequently continuing in education and progressing in their jobs. More importantly for this discussion, 23 per cent of respondents reported that they had become involved or more involved in UNISON after completing Return to Learn. Among those who had become more involved in the union, 25 per cent had taken positions within branches, 14 per cent had become workplace representatives; and 9 per cent had taken positions beyond the branch5. For many of them it was a life-changing experience, encapsulated in one student's statement: "The course I attended, a second chance to learn, I personally consider it to have been a second chance to live"6.
The provision of learning and development opportunities in partnership with employers began in 1995 with the running of a communications course for a north London local authority at Phase 1 of the Open College, which was delivered by Workbase. Following this, a number of partnerships were set up to provide the Return to Learn programme, starting in health trusts and universities, followed by local authorities7. By the summer of 1998 there were over 120 in existence. Under these arrangements, the student has the equivalent of 10 days' paid release from work and the employer pays a per capita fee for tuition. UNISON officials see the union's role as central to building workplace learning partnerships because they enable it to extend its influence within the industrial relations context. On a practical level, the union facilitates contacts between the employer and the WEA as the education provider and subsidizes development and training costs and course materials. Because students obtain credits that are recognized for access purposes through the Open College Network, the WEA is able to access funding from the Further Education Funding Council. In some instances Training and Enterprise Councils have also contributed to the programme, allowing a greater number of students to participate. Unlike the internally provided Return to Learn programmes, which are restricted to UNISON members, those provided through the employer-union partnerships are open to non-members.
Although the partnerships have been successful in obtaining ten days' paid educational leave for groups of workers who have previously had no access to it, staff in the Department of Education and Training have argued that this has not been through the addition of a new item to the bargaining agenda. Rather, they argue that UNISON is providing a solution rather than making an additional demand, in bringing its resources and expertise to a partnership. The view in UNISON, however, is that the partnerships do not lead to a more co-operative approach to industrial relations in general, but should be seen as a separate arena of activity in substance and procedure which does not interfere in the union's right to be conflictual on other industrial relations issues which are directly related to the wage relation. In this way, this "single issue' type of partnership is very different from the company-wide employer-union partnerships described above, where concessions are made by the unions. In the case of the UNISON-employer partnerships, where employers wish to offer the Return to Learn programme, the union may gain concessions from the employers. This can be illustrated by two examples. First, partnerships have been established with two housing associations where UNISON had been de-recognized, on condition that the union was rerecognized. In this context the programme may provide a lever to enable the extension of collective organization. The second example concerns partnerships that are being established with subcontractors to the public sector (e.g. SERCO/UNISON, n.d.), which are increasingly interested in being seen as part of the public-sector establishment. Employees whose jobs were subcontracted as a result of compulsory competitive tendering in local government and market testing in the National Health Service experienced a deterioration of terms and conditions of employment8, but the provision of employee development opportunities through partnerships with employers is an example of how improvements can be made on one aspect of the employment relationship.
The development of partnerships with employers on learning and development does not fit easily into the framework of the GMB's "new bargaining agenda". Rather, in UNISON, staff in the department of Education and Training have identified a "new learning agenda". This arises primarily from recognition that, as demonstrated in Kennedy's report9 on the Return to Learn programme, membership development can contribute to union activism. It is also consistent with the perception, at the time of the creation of UNISON, that there was scope in a new union with a predominantly female membership for recognizing different forms of activism which did not necessarily have to take the traditional form of shop steward representative activity. We discuss one example - the recognition of the role of the learning advocate, known as a "lifelong learning adviser", in the branch structure - below. Nevertheless, UNISON, like the GMB, has linked these developments to the recognition of learning opportunities as a recruitment tool. Return to Learn courses delivered through partnerships with employers are open to non-members, who may be encouraged to join the union. Some of the new vocational pathways linked to the programme, for example for teaching and healthcare assistants, are being developed because these occupational groups have relatively low levels of unionization and are perceived as having recruitment potential. This research supports Williams's argument that "the provision of such seemingly individualistic services none the less entails a collective dimension"10. The Return to Learn partnerships encourage a greater identification with the union and for a significant group of graduates lead to active participation in union activities.
[Top]