10 Years of the Organising Academy: Purpose, Practice and Prospect

1. 10 Years of the Organising Academy: Purpose, Practice and Prospect Dr Melanie Simms Associate ProfessorIndustrial Relations Research Unit Dr Jane Holgate Research Fellow Working Lives Research Institute

2. New Unionism Objectives – culture change • Recruit and train a cadre of specialist organisers • Attract new ‘kinds’ of people to work in union movement • Target under-represented workers for union membership • Encourage unions to invest in organising activity – both ‘infill’ and ‘greenfield’ • Encourage expansionist activity to non-unionised sectors and workplaces • Promote a specific approach to trade unionism which emphasises membership involvement and participation

3. Organising Academy • Launched in 1998 - central to New Unionism – main externally visible initiative • Emphasised transformational objectives of NU • Also intended to professionalise and specialise organising • One year training programme for 30 – 40 specialist organisers • Very different profile (age, gender, experience) than generalist officers • Time spent in training (TUC) and on-the-job (in sponsoring unions)

4. Tension: what are we organising for? • Fundamental political tension in the purpose of organising activity - and therefore of NU and OA: • Participative unionism: Promoting a particular, member-led approach to trade unionism. Response to problem of lack of relevance of unions. • Managed unionism: Immediate response to declining membership, bargaining leverage, declining finances etc. Management and professionalisation of organising process. • Never expressed coherently, never really explored • Debate expressed as ‘organising’ being contrasted with ‘partnership’ (Heery 1998, Carter and Fairbrother 1998)

5. Research data 10 year, longitudinal study • 1 year participant observation of Academy (1998) • 5 major surveys: union policies (x2), Academy graduates, evaluation of training, organising projects • Interviews with around 250 key participants • In-depth analysis of 5 organising campaigns – and pen portraits of many more • Documentary analysis esp. organising policies, recognition agreements etc. • Most recent round: Nuffield Foundation project – Simms and Holgate, 2007/8

6. Recruit and train a cadre of specialist organisers • Successful on many measures • TUC records vague – we identified 215 graduates over 9 years • Over 70% still working in union movement – around half as specialist organisers, half in other roles • Training rated as effective, appropriate and relevant • However, differences between core skills (rated higher) and strategic skills (rated lower)

7. Targeting under-represented groups • Non-standard work - weak (Heery et al 2002) • BME workers – evidence stronger (Holgate 2004, 2005) but still significant barriers • Migrant workers – some high profile cases (e.g. Domino’s pizza) but inconsistent and difficult to sustain • Largely a function of the labour market segregation of these workers – demands expansionist organising activity

8. Encourage expansionist organising activity • More equivocal • Some evidence – CAC process still being used, Unite’s Justice for Cleaners campaigns (Wills 2007) • But most unions recognise that infill work is a more efficient use of scarce resources • CAC applications tailed off to c60 p.a. – GMB and Unite dominate • Little evidence of voluntary recognition growing significantly across the economy (Blanden et al 2006)

9. Encourage investment in union organising activity • Very difficult to evaluate – but certainly far off the 10% target set in late 1990s • Existence of specialist organisers and organising units in most unions marks a change with the past • But still in the minority – organising still strongly perceived as an entry level job, comparatively poorer terms and conditions, few senior jobs, little career progression

10. Encourage a participatory approach to trade unionism • Mixed – organising is now on the agenda • Provides a narrative and justification: • For organisers as ‘agents of change’ • And for a ‘roadmap’ for change • But evidence of deep tension between ‘servicing’ and ‘organising’ functions: • Unintended consequence of professionalising the organising role • Organising not ‘mainstreamed’ in most unions • Organisers – fighting an entrenched, dominant culture • A direct consequence of the tension between managed unionism and participatory unionism

11. So why does this matter? • 10 years of organising has not delivered significant membership growth - although decline may have been worse without it • Unions are, generally, not trying to move into un-unionised sectors • Organising skills can be lost as specialist organisers move into generalist roles • Some evidence of culture change but some areas more visible movement than others - strong narrative of change (Stuart and Martinez Lucio 2008) • Directly related to the tension(s) inherent in ‘organising’