An analysis of the Unite Community program

Unite’s ambitious new community membership program for people who are not in paid employment, is now underway and so some analysis is appropriate. It seems to be doing very well, and it is an ambitious and welcome entry into a community activist scene dominated by ‘partnership’ approaches and neo-liberal development. There is a great deal more enthusiasm and vibrancy than you might usually find in the rest of the trade union movement. It certainly seems that it has great potential, and with the backing of the biggest civil society organisation in the UK, it will certainly do well. It is a project I am very interested in, in my role as a community activist, and because I am considering whether to start a Unite community branch where I stay. But there seems to be some issues with the program as it stands, and how it can move beyond being a branch for people who are not in paid employment.

What is Unite Community?

First though, how does the community program work? Well, anyone who is unwaged, unemployed, retired, a student, can join, for 50p per week. There are 7, soon to be 10 community organisers each covering a very large region of Britain, who have been employed by the union to coordinate and encourage their community members to take on a range of campaigns, from welfare, to saving local community services.

The organisers are on a generous £30k+ per year, which gives some idea of how financially committed the union is to this plan. Some branches, such as Tower Hamlets and Liverpool have as many as 400 people, with dozens of activists attending meetings, and are running exciting campaigns against cuts and austerity. They are also setting up Unite run community centres, in several parts of the country. It certainly seems that Unite is giving the community program lots of resources and are planning to expand and grow it.

Ambitious plans, structures and campaigns

Unites plan is welcome in a community scene where the dominant angle is the neo-liberal and market based views found in most community development, and ‘big society’ projects. For example, volunteer run libraries replacing council services, and employability schemes that help people back into poorly paid work, without addressing the structural roots of problems. Unite is already providing a great example for progressive community organising which, for example, the partnership focused tenants movement can learn from.

But at the moment it hasn’t coalesced into a coherent program. Unite has said they don’t want a top down approach, but instead to allow for unforseen needs and directions. There are very successful ‘community organising’ models, which are fairly widespread, which they could learn from. Such as the trade union style ‘community unionism’ of ACORN, and its international affiliates. Due to the complex structure of Unite, it isn’t clear yet how community branches fit in exactly, and also they are pretty limited in terms of input into the demographic process of the Union. However it seems that there is appetite for change, and their model is improving all the time.

At the moment, the organisers have a large amount of discretion about how to run their regions, and are bringing together members and helping facilitate campaigns. Things are developing at different rates, and in different ways across the country. Issue based organising seems to be the way it is being run, and it looks likely that it will be focused on fighting cuts and austerity, and these are probably going to be the biggest issues. The poll tax was a single issue campaign, which left very little in the way of permanent organisation behind, but Unite will not make this mistake as it wants to have its permanent neighbourhood based branches doing the campaigning.

One future problem could be a contradiction between a communities interests, and that of the Union. For example, a polluting or otherwise environmentally problematic development may make a section of Unite more powerful, while the community where such a development will happen, may want to fight against it. Mining and certain types of power generation being the obvious examples. Not insurmountable problems, but certainly something to be wary of.

I think one of Unite’s important contributions will be to bring community activism back to the bread and butter of material gains for the working class, away from the quagmire of postmodern identity politics and the culsdesac of single issue campaigns, and here it will no doubt do a great job.

Membership issues

Despite the community membership being advertised as only for unwaged people such as students, the unemployed, and the retired etc., people from other unions and in work are in fact joining. This may cause tensions with other unions, and could leave unite open to allegations of poaching members, which is against the Bridlington Agreement.

Within Unite, one can not presumably be a community member and a healthcare member simultaneously, for example, and so some Unite members who maybe be very active in their community can not properly fit into the community membership structure. Similarly, community development workers who might be well suited to working within Unite’s community membership structure may find difficulties here as well.

Strategically, people in paid employment should probably be in the relevant section of Unite or in the relevant union for their workplace, and hopefully the Unite community membership will not create a barrier to this. Despite these issues though, neighbourhood based union organisations in working class areas have great potential for increasing trade union membership, by reaching people in casual employment who are very difficult to unionise, and are a rapidly increasing proportion of the workforce.

The bottom line?

Money is always an issue in politics. Unite membership is 50p per week, a very affordable rate for an unemployed or unwaged person. However, only 7.5% of this returns to community branches. This means that branches are not able to be financially self sufficient, and they are recommended to apply for money from other branches of the union that have more money. It seems that there will be a fair bit of competition for funding within Unite once the community program grows, and employed branches will run out of money. This 7.5% rate also does not encourage branches to work to recruit, but hopefully the quality of the campaigning will be enough to bring in new members.

The fact that this community program is tied into Unite in this way, means that they may have difficulties recruiting people from other unions or people who have a wage, and so compared to independent community organisations who can recruit anyone, like ACORN, this is a disadvantage. Because it can properly recruit waged people, ACORN Canada has dues of between $10 to $30.

Unite have worked out that it takes 1500 members to cover the costs of a community organiser, and despite assurances being made that ‘its not about numbers’ you can’t help but wonder, if the program isn’t coming close to breaking even at some point will they axe it? There are of course ‘positive externalities’ which wouldn’t be taken into consideration with a ‘bottom line’ approach, such as increasing peoples positive impressions of unions (it is widely felt for example that unions are selfish and only in it for themselves) something which is being countered by the community program. I believe though, that the value of the campaigns run by Unite’s community branches will be worth the costs, and the union as a whole will recognise this.

Political problems

Politically there are interesting questions as well. Labour party affiliation is a big concern for many people, and its very off putting considering the role of the party in cuts and the rolling back of the welfare state in the very recent past – something which is exactly what the community program is fighting against. So, quite rightly, many people are pointing this out and are not happy. Though, the answer to that is that you can argue and vote for disaffiliation within the union better than from without.

The other political issue is the fact that the community program is the significant far left involvement. This may be off putting to some potential members. Some may also question the far lefts competence and ability to manage such a program, and put aside its sectarianism and infighting. The left sometimes ‘projects’ issues onto a community which it thinks are important, rather than asking the community what its needs are. The other issue is that the more centrist mainstream of the union may not appreciate a growing far left influence. The far left could get the community program shut down, if it is clumsy with its plans, which in part seem to involve using community membership radicalise the union.

Suggestions

I am strongly in favour of community organising and working hand-in-glove with the trade union movement, and would love to see this kind of project succeed. So, how could the Unite model of organising be improved then? Or what might be a more appropriate vehicle for a model of community organising working hand-in-glove with the unions?

In terms of Unite’s plans, they could learn from a very trade-union style of community organising such as that found in the hugely successful ACORN model. This is membership based, multiple issue, turf based organising, in working class areas, with an emphasis on door knocking and having conversations with people in order to find the most widely and deeply felt issues in those areas. ACORN branches run powerful and participatory campaigns, involving direct action, protest, and publicity stunts. ACORN grew to 500,000 members in the United States, and was credited with redistributing tens of billions of dollars from the state and big business to low income people. ACORN has an international, with affiliates in south America, Europe, and Asia. The 45,000 strong Canadian section for example, is active on living wage campaigns amongst many others. Clearly a formidable example of ‘community unionism’.

How could Unite follow ACORN more closely? They would need to allow all their members to be ‘community members’ in some way, and allow them to hook into the community branches more properly. For example, Unite could have workplace and community branches, where membership of a community branch is automatic for all its members depending on where they are living. Every Unite member regardless of industry, could be a member of the relevant community branch. This doesn’t avoid the potential problem of people being in other unions though.

Overall, it seems to me that Unite running this community program by itself is a disadvantage. A joint project run by the big unions, potentially through the TUC would be more appropriate, through a semi-independent organisation. This could allow people who work to be members of a community organisation, not just the unwaged. And it would ensure that problems of people already being members of other unions be no longer a problem. This organisation could encourage all the people it meets in working class areas to join the appropriate union, while also encouraging them to be involved in turf based community organising. All the benefits of being backed by big unions like Unite, and fewer of the problems.

Concluding thoughts

The Unite Community project will no doubt be a success, since it has the backing of the biggest civil society organisation in the UK. It is also not a program set in stone, and seems keen to learn from its experiences on the ground to improve what it is doing. It has an approach which I believe will refresh peoples views about what community organisations should be doing in a time where the very idea of ‘community’ has been stolen by neo-liberals and used as an excuse for rolling back the welfare state. But at the moment, it may struggle to move beyond being a powerful unwaged section of Unite. People in employment belong to communities as well, and may find it difficult to properly be ‘community members’ as things stand.

I would like to see powerful community organisations, working hand-in-glove with the unions, with a national scope and influence, and Unite has certainly made a positive step towards this, but we are not there yet. I had been considering setting up a Unite branch in my neighbourhood, however, because of the issues noted above, I will be pursuing a project in my area following the ACORN model of community organising. I will ensure we have very strong links with Unite, and the wider trade union movement, but maintain the independence that allows for better financing, and the involvement of a broader section of the working class.