GRANGEMOUTH AND
UNIONS
Some time ago the management of Grangemouth petrochemical facility
put a plan to the workers, through their union Unite, to make the
plant economical as it was losing money. The union disagreed and
stated is was making money. The workers were told of the consequences
and the union urged them to vote for strike action. They voted in
favour, only just, but we live in a democracy so a simple majority is
good enough. So out they went and the plant stood idle. The
management told the union that if they guaranteed no strike action
for 60 days, a reasonable request, they would reopen the plant and
continue negotiations. The union refused but in actual fact, it was
playing politics as the main dispute was over a sacked union
official. The union was really looking after itself rather than the
interests of its members but that didn't come across to the majority.
The upshot of the argument was that the owner of the refinery decided
to close the unprofitable petrochemical side of the plant with the
loss of 800 jobs. As the workers came out of the meeting where they
learned of their fate they all damned the management for their loss.
Not one admitted that they had voted for the strike or that perhaps
the union was wrong. It was all down to the management who had laid
out a very reasonable scheme to make the plant viable and profitable
which included a massive re-investment. They followed union
instructions and voted against that and then with a certain amount of
hypocrisy blamed the management for the end result.
In general owners of businesses that are profitable do not close them
down. If a business is unprofitable it will eventually go bust. In
the eyes of most people looking on at the Grangemouth dispute they
would see the terms offered as being reasonable, not great if you are
an employee taking a pay cut and big changes to your expected
pension, but better than no job at all. It should be mentioned here
that the average pay at the Grangemouth refinery is double the
national average in Scotland. So here we have a company that could be
profitable with some changes in the work practices and a large
investment to modify and update the plant, and a union with a
grievance because of a sacked official able to make a lot of trouble
because of the general unrest it sees amongst its members.
Look at union history and the same story is repeated over and over
again throughout the twentieth century. When the unions were first
started they were genuinely needed. The owners rode roughshod over
their employees. However, give any organisation with the potential of
power an inch and it's a natural instinct to take a mile. Between the
two world wars the unions did a good job. They helped lift workers
out of poverty and improved working conditions considerably. After
the Second World War Britain was in a parlous state, the country was
broke and life was difficult for most people and many businesses. In
an effort to get better deals for their members, unions flexed their
muscles, usually in the form of strikes. Britain became not only the
strike capital of Europe but a bit of a joke. It was regularly termed
as
The sick man of Europe.
As the unions got stronger management got weaker and floundered in a
search of ways to deal with them. The unions had the upper hand, they
just called their members out on strike and the business went further
into the red. During the 60s and 70s the unions got so powerful they
were able to dictate to governments. They were also able to dictate
to the owners and particularly to nationalised industries. The
result, massive over employment in many industries and pay hikes well
above inflation and often far more than the companies could well
afford. This resulted in the closure of Britain's main ports such as
Liverpool, London and Hull. It also led to many industries pricing
themselves out of the market. Shipbuilding, car manufacture, steel
production all fell foul of union manipulation and greed. They had
become parasitic. And like parasites which feed on the blood of the
host they eventually suck it dry and it dies even though that means
their own death.
The news paper industry was a classical example. The unions ruled
supreme, you were a member or you didn't work. Step out of line with
a shop steward or convenor and you didn't work. On the other hand If
you didn't turn up or were told not to bother and have a day or two
off you were still marked in by the union official and paid by the
company. Employees actually didn't have to register with the company
just the union and so they didn't even pay taxes as they booked in
under such names as Mickey Mouse. It was a joke and if the papers
were to continue being printed something had to be done. Eventually
the owners moved out of Fleet Street and in the new premises banned
the unions. One famous newspaper owner offered the Fleet Street
building and all its contents free to the union so it could run it as
a going concern itself. It declined the generous offer because the
union elders knew it was an impossible task if they were to run it as
they had been.
So now back to Grangemouth. The owner stated that the petrochemical
side of the plant would not now reopen, would go into bankruptcy and
that the liquidators would be in by following week. What has the
union done, gone running to him, tail between its legs, and told him
it would accept all his proposals. He is now in the driving seat and
can force through much harsher terms than he was offering before and
my bet is that he will. It's always the workers who lose out but they
never seem to blame the union.