Comments on: Mythbuster: The truth about the unions

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 18:03:13 +0000

The problem with the current system of balloting is that it has the potential of providing an entirely false picture of the depth of support for action. Union leaders will state that they have ‘overwhelming support’ based on the fact that 75% of the ballot papers returned were in favour of such action. But as has been pointed out, the majority in this instance didn’t return a ballot paper. So there wasn’t ‘overwhelming support’ but it makes a good soundbite. On the day reality sets in. There will be those who voted for action who will keep to their word, but there will be those who either didn’t vote, voted no or changed their mind from the yes vote they sent in, who will work normally. The union leaders will point to the number of marchers/pickets etc and claim a resounding success, whilst the bosses/government will smile and nod as the organisations continue to function. Both sides will claim victory, just as both will seek to poor scorn on the other’s claims of victory. Nothing will change. What it demonstrates is the inability of union leaders to motivate the grass roots. The issues that those higher up the food chain in organisations see as being important are lost on those at the sharp end. The concerns of the ordinary worker fail to reach the ears of those senior people. The message gets corrupted in the retelling – chinese whispers reigns supreme. It used to be the case that workers thought that employers had too many layers of management, but now they are faced with union organisations that are every bit as convoluted. Time to go back to the drawing board.

By: Dr. Mike Reddy

Dr. Mike Reddy — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 04:47:23 +0000

“I’m sorry Dave, I’m afraid I can’t do that.”

Take your trolling, that is…

The strike is legal, it’s ethical, it’s moral, and it’s right. Many are so ground down, they’ve given up. At least let those who still give a s**t to try to fight.

By: Dave

Dave — Fri, 25 Nov 2011 09:29:27 +0000

75% of 30% ended up voting Yes… that’s pathetic.

By: Wendy

Wendy — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 22:37:54 +0000

I pay my dues. I have not had a ballot paper neither have I had any communication regarding this issue or information on the result of the supposed ballot. I have had a ballot on whether my union should join another union so they have my details correct…I don’t believe negotiations have been concluded. I don’t believe 75% of 50% is a conclusive reason to strike it means less than half have said yes. Dilemma.

By: Sam

Sam — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 14:06:50 +0000

If unions were allowed to do workplace ballots turnouts would increase. However, the government’s anti-union laws make this illegal. Ballots get lost in the post, people may fill it out wrong, people forget to send them in on time etc. This could all be changed if they allowed workplace ballots.

However, if turnouts increase it gets rid of the governments chief argument about legitimacy. Funny no one raises these questions about MPs.

By: Keith

Keith — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 12:22:28 +0000

not voting in a union ballot is not the same as not voting in a general election: genuine disinterest and apathy can be inferred from a lack of voting in a general election, but in a union vote, it is fair to assume that if a member abstains from a vote, it is because they dont have strong feelings either way, or dont feel informed enough, but are happy to abide by the decisions of those who do vote – that seems to me to be a fundamental principle of a union, the idea that you will support your colleagues

By: Paul

Paul — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 11:57:13 +0000

David, 100% of the membership were given the chance to vote and lots didn’t. If they are too lazy or too disinterested to vote yes or no, I am sorry then they cannot complain.
If they don’t want to strike they should have taken all that energy it takes to put a cross on a piece of paper and then the tiring task of putting that paper in an envelope. That had a democratic right to do so and chose not to.
We currently have an unelected government on a small turn out that are crippling the country and yet they have the hypocrisy to point fingers at the results of the unions.
I am not in favour of the strikes as I feel the unions are playing into the hands of a government that wants them to strike for many reasons, but, the law says it has to be over fifty percent of those that voted so I have to respect the majority.

By: Ciaran

Ciaran — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 11:53:24 +0000

David – saying that ‘the remainder didn’t vote Yes’ doesn’t really make much sense.

Of the 30% of people who responded to the ballot, more than three quarters voted to strike. So, the number of people who said ‘No’ was only 6.6% of the union.

By your implied rules the union would be forced to choose a third option between Yes and No, as neither of those got a majority. What exactly would that option be?

As more than three times as many people voted yes than no, having a strike is the only option.

By: David

David — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:47:02 +0000

PS my view about undemocratic elections applies to General Elections as well – a majority of voters can not be said to represent the view of the majority of people.

By: David

David — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:42:52 +0000

“No strike can take place without the support of at least 50 per cent of those voting by postal ballot. Two out of every three MPs didn’t get 50 per cent of the vote at the last general election.”

To this I’d point out that strike ballots have two answers – Yes or No. One of the results *has* to be 50%+ (If no majority, they’ll both be 50% of course)

What’s the average number of people contesting a parliamentary seat? It’ll be more than two. Which makes it much more unlikely that the “majority” will be more than 50% of the electorate.

Not a fair comparison.

My issue with this strike is the turnout – from my quick calcs of results, around 20-25% of union members voted Yes, the remainder didn’t vote Yes. That isn’t democratic. I think unions should take care not to reduce democracy to only considering the views of those who return a ballot… The words coming from union leaders (“overwhelming Yes vote”, etc.) are dismissive of those who voted No or didn’t vote (for whatever reason). I expect that of MPs, not of unions.

Votes/surveys/ballots are often more complex than a yes or a no – these strikes are one of those situations, hence the need for this Mythbuster. And too late, perhaps.