Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of Figures and Tables
- List of Abbreviations
- Notes on the Author
- Acknowledgements
- Preface
- Introduction
- One What’s the Problem?
- Two A New Approach to Understanding Union Identities
- Three General Union Identity
- Four Industrial/Occupational Union Identity
- Five Organizational Union Identity
- Six Geographical Union Identity
- Seven The Developing Story of Union Identities
- Eight Comparative Analysis of Union Identities
- Nine The Future of Union Identities and Niche Unionism
- References
- Index
Three - General Union Identity
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 March 2021
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of Figures and Tables
- List of Abbreviations
- Notes on the Author
- Acknowledgements
- Preface
- Introduction
- One What’s the Problem?
- Two A New Approach to Understanding Union Identities
- Three General Union Identity
- Four Industrial/Occupational Union Identity
- Five Organizational Union Identity
- Six Geographical Union Identity
- Seven The Developing Story of Union Identities
- Eight Comparative Analysis of Union Identities
- Nine The Future of Union Identities and Niche Unionism
- References
- Index
Summary
Introducing general union identity
General unions are usually considered as such because they organize workers regardless of their industry, occupation or employing organization and only restrict membership to their geographical boundaries. However, it is argued in this chapter that within what might normally be considered as general unions there are degrees of openness and therefore the question arises, following Turner (1962), how ‘open’ or ‘closed’ they actually are. It is argued here that GMB and Unite are the only major general unions which can be considered as ‘true generals’, but that Unison and Prospect are ‘niche generals’ because they restrict membership. Unison is ‘vertical/niche/general’ because it restricts membership to the public sector and public services, whereas Prospect is considered to be a ‘horizontal/niche/general’ because it seeks to organize the higher echelons of employment across economic sectors. Given that neither Unison nor Prospect restrict membership by occupation, industry or organization, it is considered appropriate to discuss them here under the broad heading of general union identity rather than in later chapters which look specifically at niche union identity. Despite its claim to be ‘The union for professionals’, which forms its strapline, Prospect was not classified as a professional union because, in contrast to professional unions discussed later (see Chapter Four), it was not observed to project the characteristics of professional identity, such as requiring professional qualification for full membership or concern over the development and the maintenance of professional standards.
Scale was also considered to be relevant in understanding the general unions, with four unions having a membership of over 100,000 being termed ‘major generals’ and a proliferation of smaller unions being called ‘minor generals’. While the four major generals accounted for 51 per cent of UK certified union membership, the remaining 13 minor generals accounted for only 0.6 per cent. Some of the minor generals are remarkably small, with ten reporting fewer than 2,000 members and seven fewer than 1,000 (Certification Returns, 2017). The four major general unions have all managed to broadly maintain or improve their membership over recent years (see Table 3.1), although in the case of Prospect and Unite this can largely be attributed to merger growth.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Exploring Trade Union IdentitiesUnion Identity, Niche Identity and the Problem of Organizing the Unorganized, pp. 47 - 64Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2020