Union organizing: a response to Carter

Transforming a Trade Union? An Assessment of the Introduction of an Organizing Initiative

“…Instead, Unison adopted a form of ‘managed activism’ (Heery 2003), in which union officials were central to promoting and monitoring the NORS, whereas workplace activists were encouraged to undertake a wider range of support functions. The NORS also allowed ‘strategic adaptation’ (de Turberville 2007) in so far as long‐standing recruitment activities were incorporated where it was viewed that they may assist in raising density. Latitude was afforded to the regions, Service Groups and branches to select appropriate targets for organizing campaigns.…”

“…While advocates of both of these positions assume that change is required if union renewal is to be achieved, it is the nature of the required change that is debated. The former position argues that implementation of only the organizing model will generate renewal, whereas the alternative suggests that unionists should be ‘strategically adaptive’ in combining organizing and servicing if they are to survive (de Turberville 2007: 566). This article contributes to this debate through an assessment of the implementation of the NORS.…”

Joining UNISON: does the reform of a union organising strategy change how members perceive their recruitment?

“…In the context of UNISON, this claim is not sustained as illustrated by the central provision of training and increased funding, the deployment of increasing numbers of F‐T‐Os to support workplace union organisation and bureaucratisation in the form of new managerial and reporting systems. The practice within UNISON tends to support the contention that there is a degree of mutual reliance between organising and serving (de Turberville, 2004; 2007). The evolution of the organising initiative in UNISON has demonstrated that events at the workplace are key to joining as argued by proponents of organising (Russo and Banks, ).…”

“…While these purposes are not mutually exclusive, the debate on relationships between organising and other strategic approaches is more polarised. One position argues that the self‐sufficiency generated by workplace unionism through organising constitutes a significant break with the bureaucratisation of the servicing model (Carter, 2000; 2006), whereas others argue that organising and servicing are to some degree mutually reliant as workplace activities require support from elsewhere in the union, for example, in the form of training (de Turberville, 2004; 2007). Further muddying the water, some trade union officers view organising as a means of dealing with ‘bad’ employers while partnership should characterise relations with ‘good’ employers (Heery, ).…”

“…It is the nature of change that is debated. Those that view organising as necessarily independent from other strategic approaches argue that union renewal will only arise from the implementation of organising strategies, while those viewing the distinction between organising and servicing as a false dichotomy argue that unionists should be ‘strategically adaptive’ in the process of renewal (de Turberville, : 566).…”