A problem, of course, is that the traditionally low level of response to postal ballots could end up being even lower in this ballot if members feel by now that they have been balloted to death, especially as this is one of the busiest times of the year. On the other hand, the turnout in the HE ballot, and possibly in the current FE ballot, look rather good by historical standards. Nevertheless, the temptation in this ballot to put the form to one side ‘to do it later’ must be considerable and we should do everything possible to explain the issue to members and encourage them to vote 'Yes'.
It may be that the existence or otherwise of a fund which allows the union to spend money for political purposes is not uppermost in lecturers’ minds when they are battling with insane workloads, against bullying, in a situation of eroding pay, the threat of privatisation, death by observation and so on. Yet our ability to lobby effectively and campaign over these very issues is undermined if we cannot draw on funds to lobby ministers and MPs, organise lobbies of parliament like the successful lobby against ESOL cuts last year, organise conferences which are aimed at changing government policies and so on.
It’s therefore crucial that members are encouraged to support the fund. Both Natfhe and the AUT had such funds before our merger in 2006 and we should maintain them now.
There are a couple of caveats that we might need to explain to members. The first is that a union which has a political fund may or may not be affiliated to a political party. In our case (and in the case of both predecessor unions) we are not affiliated to a political party. This is different, for example, to UNISON, which is affiliated to the Labour Party. In some unions pressure to disaffiliate from Labour has been understandably considerable given the scale of the attacks on workers’ pay and conditions and the government’s capitulation to the big business agenda to our cost. Trade unionists have long memories for broken promises. Our fund, however, is purely about the union being legally covered to engage in legitimate activity within union policy as determined by democratic union processes for purposes that are legally defined as involving political activity, ie lobbying, etc. This is not about affiliation to a political party, although that issue is moving more and more towards centre stage in the labour movement.
Secondly, it is possible for members to opt out of paying towards the political fund, just as this is possible in those unions which are affiliated to the Labour Party such as UCW or UNISON. Members can opt out of paying their contribution but UCU Left argues against this since we take the view that it must be part of our legitimate activity and our armoury as a trade union operating in a highly political milieu. Not to be able to engage in such activity would make it more difficult for the union to pursue its aims and objectives and more difficult to protect and enhance the conditions and pay of our members.
So we need to seize every opportunity between now and the closing date (April 30th) to flag up the ballot and encourage members to vote to retain the political fund. It would be a considerable setback if the ballot on the political fund delivered a 'No' vote, so we need to do all we can to make sure it is strongly supported.
National UCU Material on the Political Fund ballot - here
Copyright ©
UCU Left
Webmaster: Mark Campbell
Webmaster: Mark Campbell