Future developments


The Trade Union Bill


Despite the underpinning rights, and in common with other types of union rep, ULRs can face difficulties in getting release for training and to carry out their role, and the rights of those in the public sector are about to be weakened further through the Trade Union Bill.


The government says it has saved some £26 million by "curbing" the activities of union representatives in the civil service and it is determined to continue this course of action across the public sector.


The Trade Union Bill includes:


• giving the government the power to introduce a cap on the amount of money public authorities can spend on facility time. The cap could also apply to different trade union duties and activities, such as health and safety, workplace learning and representing members; and


• new powers requiring all public sector employers to publish information on the amount of money used for trade union facilities, including paid time off for local representatives.


The TUC is spearheading a campaign with unions opposing the Trade Union Bill. Details are available on the website at: www.tuc.org.uk/TUbill. See the box on pages below for information about public services union UNISON’s campaign on facility time.


As part of its campaign, the TUC published new research in February 2016 which shows that for every £1 spent on paid time off for public sector union reps to represent their members, taxpayers get at least £2.31 back in savings. The report also demonstrates that allowing union reps time off to represent their members improves staff retention, reduces illness and boosts industrial relations.


The analysis reveals that in the health sector, staff turnover is almost three times lower in workplaces with union representatives than in workplaces without — amounting to a saving of more than £66 million a year for the NHS alone in recruitment costs.


Government ministers have argued that the number of union representatives (and therefore the amount of facility time available) in the public sector is “excessive”.


However, the TUC report highlights that just 2.8% of public sector workplaces with recognised unions have a union rep that spends all or nearly all of their working time on their representative duties.


The report also highlights a recent survey of public sector managers, which found that the vast majority (84%) valued and trusted the work of full-time reps.


In light of these findings the government's motives in pursuing this action seem perverse. As TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady points out: 


“Union reps help save taxpayers millions of pounds a year by making workplaces healthier and more productive. Paid time off for public sector union reps to represent their members is granted by employers because it is good for staff well-being, improves communication and stops problems escalating into disputes”. 


The government’s decision to cap facility time in the public sector was mean-spirited and “incredibly short-sighted” and would “serve only to strain industrial relations,” O’Grady added.


Unionlearn


A unionlearn review of its first 10 years sets out in detail what has been achieved so far and Its aims for the future. The review points out that over the past 10 years there has been a major change in union engagement with skills including:


• the great majority of unions now include ULRs in their rule books; 


• many unions have established learning committees at regional and/or national level. 


• there are a growing number of motions about education, learning and skills to union conferences; 


• the ULF supports an estimated 250 jobs within unions, around 10% of all union employment; 


• many unions have found that learning attracts recruits and encourages members to take up the ULR role. It is often seen as less traditional/confrontational than the normal union rep role; and


• reps engaged in learning are often younger and more likely to be women or black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) than other union reps — though many also go on to take up wider rep roles. For example, teachers’ union ATL found that almost all of its branch secretaries were previously ULRs.


Other points highlighted by the review show that it is not just unions with relatively well-qualified members who are changing. These include:


• shopworkers’ union Usdaw has a “check-out learning” project which has been very successful; 


• general union Unite has developed a new English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) package for migrant food workers;


• public and commercial services union PCS found, like ATL, that learning helps in recruiting new members; and 


• large unions like Unite and public services union UNISON have set up learning and organising departments, aiming to combine the two in day-to-day practice. 


This “mainstreaming” of learning within unions has been a steady development over the past decade. Many unions now run their own learning programmes, not funded by the ULF. It is estimated that these are at least equal in total size to ULF-funded programmes. This, the review says, would imply that around 20% of all union staff (and hence union activity) is on or around learning and education. 


The review recognises that some of that change would have occurred anyway, driven by increasing demand from members and potential union members, and by changes in the labour market and economy placing a greater premium on skills and lifelong learning. However, it says, “it seems reasonable to believe that unionlearn has helped to support and, to some extent, lead this change.”


The unionlearn review highlights a number of areas for future development:


• much more union involvement in the skills system as well as greater rights for union reps, for example, stronger rights to paid time off for skills and other union duties; 


• much more emphasis on quality, for example, a minimum of two years for all apprenticeships; 


• substantially increased funding from both state and employers (via a collective levy), “the kind of collective levy that is very widespread as in most other developed economies”;


• an emphasis on collective learning with a shared and non-competitive ethos; 


• much better Careers Guidance at school and equal value attached to academic and vocational routes;


• priority being given to the most disadvantaged; for example, immigrants with ESOL needs, young people finding it hard to enter the labour market, older workers lacking confidence who have been denied training opportunities, the low paid and unskilled, those with particular needs such as single parents, or learners with issues such as dyslexia;


• a recognition that employers are very different and have different circumstances. Workplace and employer-level negotiations will always be important within a national and sectoral framework; and


• employers need to be organised and represented; they also need to develop the capacity to engage in the skills system, particularly small and medium employers. 


Despite government attacks on trade unions on a number of fronts, not least in the realm of learning and skills, unions remain determined to defend their role in the workplace and in influencing policy.


As unionlearn’s director Liz Rees points out: “Unions have real experience of supporting adult learners and convincing employers that learning benefits both business and individuals. Unions negotiate with employers for time off for learning, run learning centres and encourage and enthuse people to take the first steps in brushing up their English and maths skills and much more. So, whether you are an employee or an employer wanting to bridge the skills gaps or narrow the skills shortages, it is best to talk to the union first.”