My old trade union, the hard left run PCS, is one of a number of unions balloting for national strike action this year. The union, which represents civil servants, has submitted demands to the government for a 10% pay rise, annual leave of 35 days a year and a reduced working week with no loss of pay. That’s all well and good because many of the civil servants I know earn considerably less than the national average wage and have endured 12 years of a real terms pay cut. So no argument from me about a 10% pay rise, especially since the Bank of England predicts an inflation rate of 13.3% for October. Given that many civil servants carry out vital work on the frontline – benefit fraud investigators, tax collectors, border control staff, passport office workers and so on – a decent pay rise is the least they should expect. But there is a problem with all this. The union is balloting for national strike action when most pay negotiations have long been delegated to individual departments.
National strike action means what it says. PCS is balloting all members including those whose pay has already been settled for this year. For example, HMRC staff are in the third year of a pay deal which members agreed to overwhelmingly. If the ballot is won – and that’s a very big if – then presumably HMRC members will be asked to strike, essentially not for pay: that’s been settled, but for extra holidays and an unspecified reduced working week, while my old friends in DWP will be on strike having had a 2% rise imposed from 1st July. I hope the comrades in charge have thought this through.
The other thing is this: why is PCS not balloting until September and not before? After all, the union’s annual conference decided in May to call for strikes. The answer is simple: this is not a strong union, despite the fiery language of its leaders. Membership levels are not the highest and unlike the leaders, the members are not generally from the hard left. PCS has gone for a long, drawn-out ballot because they need to achieve a 50% turn out. You would think this might be easy but the turn out in union elections is around 7%. This is a very big ask. But let’s assume they somehow achieve a vote for strike action. Somehow, just before Christmas with inflation at over 13%, people will be called out on strike and they will lose pay. The question is how much.
Look at the railway unions. They are far stronger and better organised than PCS and have held a number of one day strikes. On the face of it, the strikes have been successful, with the rail network being brought to a standstill. But have the strikes succeeded? Hardly. The current zombie government has simply carried on as normal, which is to say they’ve made no effort to come to an agreement. Railway workers go on strike, lose money and the next day they go back to work. That’s the problem with limited period strikes. Employers simply ride them out. I was a member of the PCS predecessor union CPSA and in 39 years I’m struggling to think of a national strike that was successful. I am not convinced a few days on strike will change anyone’s minds. That’s why unions like RMT and ASLEF will eventually have to face a grim reality: only all-out, indefinite unpaid strike action might move the employer. Footnote: it never worked in the 1980s after Margaret Thatcher faced down one trade union after another.
When PCS members come to vote in their own strike ballot, there are things they will need to consider. What are they striking for? 10% extra pay, five more days of annual leave and a shorter working week is the demand. What would constitute victory? Do they think a few limited strikes will achieve anything and if not, would they be prepared to go on all out, indefinite unpaid strike? Many members will feel strongly that new PM Liz Truss will back down in the face of strike action and give PCS what it demands and that’s fine. If they believe, as I do, that industrial action of any kind is doomed to failure, what should they do? Vote against strike action? No. Don’t vote at all.
If PCS wants to take strike action, it needs a 50% turn out in the vote. If people don’t want to go on strike, then why vote at all? I know, I know: I’m so negative and so cynical, but I am also being entirely realistic and, I believe, honest. Given a choice between taking strike action and doing nothing, I’d choose the latter. The union can do all sorts of good things for its members, but forcing a hard right Tory government to cave in to what I would say is a perfectly reasonable pay demand is not a realistic possibility.
Call me defeatist and you’d be right. RMT has had four days of strikes so far, with two more days planned for next week. ASLEF has had one strike and has more starting from tomorrow. My guess is that beyond buggering up the lives of innocent passengers, the government will simply ignore it. A couple of one day strikes in the civil service will inconvenience millions, but neither Boris Johnson or his successor Truss won’t give a toss.
Vote for strikes, lose money, lose campaign. That’s the reality of British trade unionism these days. Unions are still vital but they must adapt, recruit and get smarter. With many of them in the hands of people who make Jeremy Corbyn look like a member of Ukip, there’s little sign that they will.
