Unions in workplaces that are non unionised.

[didds]

in another thread which i dont wish to derail, a suggestion has been made that an employee with a grievance involve their union, or join one.

My question is ... what if the employer works in an industry/arena that isnt "unionised" and doesn't (for want of a better word) recognise them?

I'm sure as an IT professional I could join a union (the TUC website suggests two that appear logical - both very broad church though). I'm totally unaware of any of my colleagues belonging to a union.

If I joined a union and they went to my employers, why would my employers "have" to engage with them? (Of course the union may provide other services such as legal advice to me)

I should hasten to add I have no dispute with my employers at all This is purely a hypothetical scenario

didds

[Lootman]

My first "proper" job after leaving Uni in 1976 was for a major insurer, and we were unionised. At the time it was ASTMS and was the union for salaried, technical and managerial staff, as the acronym implies. They conducted all salary and benefits negotiations, and represented individuals with a grievance. Membership was not compulsory but everyone knew it was better to join than opt out. At one point we were militating for a 2-day strike but it never happened in the end.

My second job, this time for a Bank, had something a bit gentler, a "staff association". I was actually its representative for a while. Our role was more advisory and we didn't really have a lot of influence or power. A strike would have been unthinkable.

After that job I never saw a union in the City. By now Thatcher was in power and unions were on the decline. No idea what it is like now but I cannot imagine a union being very relevant for a professional or middle manager type, unless you work in the public sector of course. Specifically I cannot imagine why your employer would engage differently with you just because of some notional membership of a non-recognised union.

[absolutezero]

If I joined a union and they went to my employers, why would my employers "have" to engage with them? (Of course the union may provide other services such as legal advice to me)

Short answer. They wouldn't have to engage with them at all - unless the employer chooses to recognise the union.

There is a statutory procedure to gain recognition from an employer who has 21 employees - but I believe this is very long and complicated.

The union would, as you say, still provide you with legal advice and possibly provide a solicitor.
They can also take the 'accompanied by a friend' function and represent you in disciplinary meetings but the employer does not have to recognise the union itself or even communicate with it.

[stevensfo]

My first "proper" job after leaving Uni in 1976 was for a major insurer, and we were unionised. At the time it was ASTMS and was the union for salaried, technical and managerial staff, as the acronym implies. They conducted all salary and benefits negotiations, and represented individuals with a grievance. Membership was not compulsory but everyone knew it was better to join than opt out. At one point we were militating for a 2-day strike but it never happened in the end.

My second job, this time for a Bank, had something a bit gentler, a "staff association". I was actually its representative for a while. Our role was more advisory and we didn't really have a lot of influence or power. A strike would have been unthinkable.

After that job I never saw a union in the City. By now Thatcher was in power and unions were on the decline. No idea what it is like now but I cannot imagine a union being very relevant for a professional or middle manager type, unless you work in the public sector of course. Specifically I cannot imagine why your employer would engage differently with you just because of some notional membership of a non-recognised union.

By coincidence, I was in ASTMS as well, working for the Medical Research Council as an impoverished lab technician in 1986. I vaguely remember that the name of the union changed about that time. As you say, it was considered better being in than out. Also in those days, the MRC had a clear career structure, possibilities of promotion and the right for all staff to attend day-release courses to learn new skills and get higher qualifications. There was a supportive atmosphere and it was heaven for students wanting to work in the Biomedical sciences. Fast forward ten years and I come back from France and work for the MRC again - though only four years, thank God! Everything had changed for the worse. The union had achieved nothing.

Steve

[scrumpyjack]

I recall in 1974 I was sent up to take charge of the audit of a greetings card company in the Midlands (I had just qualified).

One of the big unions was trying to get in and get a closed shop but many/most of the workers didn't want it.

Going round the factory I saw a lot of workers had SOD IT written on their trolleys. I asked what this meant and was told that they had set up their own union to try to stop the big union taking over. They called it the Society Of Democratic Intelligent Thinkers!

Needless to say the big union forced their way in, the company went bust and everyone lost their jobs.

[SteMiS]

in another thread which i dont wish to derail, a suggestion has been made that an employee with a grievance involve their union, or join one.

My question is ... what if the employer works in an industry/arena that isnt "unionised" and doesn't (for want of a better word) recognise them?

I'm sure as an IT professional I could join a union (the TUC website suggests two that appear logical - both very broad church though). I'm totally unaware of any of my colleagues belonging to a union.

If I joined a union and they went to my employers, why would my employers "have" to engage with them? (Of course the union may provide other services such as legal advice to me)

I should hasten to add I have no dispute with my employers at all This is purely a hypothetical scenario

didds

Frankly I'd ignore most of the advice on this thread, which falls under the classification of 'wishful thinking'.

The actual situation is as set out here

https://www.thehrbooth.co.uk/blog/disci ... stigation/

Employees have the right to be accompanied at a disciplinary or grievance hearing. They can choose to be accompanied by a co-worker or a union representative. In larger organisations, often, the union representative will be a workplace representative who is also a co-worker. In the cases of SMEs, where in most cases there is no union representation, the trade union representative will be an official outside of the company. Even if you don’t recognise a trade union, if the employee is a member of the trade union, they have the right to be accompanied by the TU official.