The Future forUnion Learning

Tom Wilson

© 2010. No part of this publication may be reproduced, transmitted or storedin a retrieval system, in any form or by any means, without prior permissionin writing from Unions 21.

Registered office:Unions 21c/o ATL7 Northumberland StreetLondon WC2N 5RDwww.unions21.org.ukEmail: info@unions21.org.uk

Foreword - Debate 4

Acknowledgements 4

Summary 5

The Author 6

IntroductionWhy learning is a union issue 7

CHAPTER 1The current state of Union Learning 11

CHAPTER 2Union Learning - A soft activity? 16

CHAPTER 3The Union vision for learning 21

CHAPTER 4Future prospects 23

AppendixAn agenda for skills policy 25

Contents

3

4

Unions 21 exists to provide an ‘open space’ for discussion on the future of the tradeunion movement and help build tomorrow’s unions in the UK.

We are mainly resourced by contributions from trade unions and others who work withtrade unions that recognise we need to keep the movement evolving in an everchanging world. We encourage discussion on tomorrow’s unions through publications,conferences, seminars and similar activities.

The Debate series of publications present opinions upon the challenges trade unionsare facing, solutions they may consider and best practice they may adopt. Theseopinions are not endorsed by Unions 21, but are published by us to encourage themuch needed, sensible and realistic debate that is required if the trade union movementis going to prosper.

Please read and consider this publication, forward it to others connected to the tradeunion movement and debate the content within your own organisation.

Sue FernsChair of the Steering CommitteeUnions 21

www.unions21.org.ukEmail: info@unions21.org.uk

Acknowledgements

Special thanks for advice and support are due to Bert Clough, Iain Murray, Liz Rees,Judith Swift, Frances Rafferty, Sue Ferns, Jenny Williams, Tom Beattie,Trevor Shanahan, Mary Bousted, Frances O’Grady, Chris Humphries, Liz Smith,Rod Kenyon, Pam Johnson, Tom Schuller, Paul Head, Paul Mackney and, from manyyears ago, Jim Sutherland.

Other titles in our Debate series:The EU - the next 50 yearsThe future for unionsCompleting the revolution: the challenge trade unions face in tackling sex inequalitiesPublic sector delivery through the third sectorOrganising workers globally: the need for public policy to regulate investmentThe generation game; does age matter?

Debate

• Unions exist to fight poverty and unfairness; Learning and Skills are the key to abetter job and a better life but are grossly unequally distributed

• The UK economy must radically improve skills at all levels but can only improveskills for all by reducing skills inequality, so prosperity and equality arguments gohand in hand

• Unions play a unique and crucial role in workplace learning, no other body canprovide the essential trusted intermediary which employers and employees need

• Unions have always been involved in learning , whether training reps and officers,wider learning for members, or campaigning for a better education and skillssystem; today more than ever

• There is overwhelming evidence that union learning delivers, that is why there isstrong union and employer support

• Wider union campaigning and policy development is based on experience in theworkplace, and vice versa; union learning should embrace both delivery and policy

• Union learning supports organising (and vice versa), and unions are increasinglyintegrating learning and organising

• Strategies for union growth and revitalisation must include union learning; it ispopular with members and potential members, unions can win important memberbenefits, it can help build stronger (not more subservient) relations with employers, itdemonstrably aids recruitment and is a source of fresh, more representative,activists

• History shows there is an onward march of union learning, involving more directunion engagement, more involvement and funding from government, and moreunion influence and engagement in policy; today’s position is the natural progressionof a long history

• The evidence shows that union learning is not “soft” or “semi-detached”, nor thatunions are subservient to government pressure; on the contrary there is a distinctunion vision for learning which combines pragmatism and radicalism; involvementwith government and external accreditation, audit and quality alongsideindependence and democratic member choice

• Government funding is crucial, has been hard won, and is entirely legitimate as arecognition of unions’ role in civil society, the economy and the workplace; it shouldbe celebrated not criticised, its loss would do real damage

• Union learning has already become strongly integrated within union structures, it ishere to stay and will steadily grow

• The next major step for unions is to go further down the road of bargaining onlearning, which will be necessarily complex but could well be a source of substantialachievements

• learning will always be distinctive within unions but there will be fewer complaintsthat it is seen as semi-detached; distinctive but equal, it is taking its place at theheart of union activity, making a powerful contribution to the fight against povertyand unfairness.

• Learning is humanising; it helps reassert human values above material values, thevalue of thinking, listening and working together - the key to well-being andhappiness.

5

Summary

6

Tom Wilson

Tom was appointed Director of Unionlearn, the learning and skills arm of the TUC, inJuly 2009; he first joined the TUC as Head of the Organisation and Services Dept in2003. Prior to that he worked as Head of the Higher Education Dept of Natfhe andAssistant General Secretary of AUT - both of which have now merged to form the UCU.From 1986 to 1988 he was trade union liaison officer with the Labour party and from1980 to 1986 was a researcher with the GMB.

Tom is a board member of Niace, Learndirect, Foundation Degree Forward and Cityand Guilds and is involved in many other bodies aiming to improve learning and skills.He has written widely on a range of skills and union issues, this papmphlet is acomapnion piece to his earlier Unions 21 pamphlet on the Future for Unions..

The Author

7

Introduction

Why learning is aunion issue

(1) Ambition 2020: World Class Skills andJobs for the UK; UK Commission onEmployment and Skills, page 45

(2) The College Wage Premium and theExpansion of Higher Education in theUK, Ian Walker and Yu Zhu,Scandinavian Journal of Economics,Vol 110, pages 695-709

(3) The Spirit Level, revised edition 2010,R Wilkinson and K Pickett, Penguin,pages105-109

Fighting poverty, low pay, unfairness and dreary work are the foundations of tradeunionism; whether by confronting poor employers or by campaigning for a fairer society.But it is not enough just to tackle the symptoms. In today’s UK there is one fundamentalcause of unequal life chances which stands out above all others: education. And that iswhy unions care about learning. It is not something peripheral; learning is at the heart oftrade unionism. It always has been. The very first trade union banners gave equalprominence to three words: Educate, Agitate, Organise. They were, and still are, the keyto progress in fighting poverty and unfairness.

If anything, education is even more important today than ever. In order to sustainreasonable lifestyles for its citizens and maintain a prosperous society the UK needs tobe globally competitive. That in turn demands much higher levels of skilled work.The national skills body (The UK Commission for Skills and Employment) estimatesthat by 2020, on average, half of all working people will need to gain an additionalqualification. Table 1 shows what is needed:

Table 1: Changing distribution of skills in the UK (%)(1)

Forecasts like these often prompt scepticism. Some say there is little evidence ofhigher pay at Level 2. Actually the UKCES evidence is mixed, many level 2 jobs doearn higher pay. And of course Level 2 is a stepping stone to the higher pay at level3 and 4. Some say that there will always be plenty of jobs for the unqualified such ascleaners, waiters or building site labourers. Others that the labour market is already“oversupplied” with graduates at level 4. Neither is true. Cleaners increasingly use moresophisticated methods and materials, waiters need customer care skills, a glance atbuilding sites will show they employ very few labourers and increasingly assemblefactory made components using complex technology. A detailed study of the UK‘college premium’ for young graduates using data from large cross-section datasetsfor the UK from 1994 to 2006 – a period when the higher education participation rateincreased dramatically – found that even though graduate supply considerablyoutstripped demand, which ought to imply a fall in the premium, the study found nosignificant fall for men and even a large, but insignificant, rise for women(2). Of coursethere are exceptions. There will always be some jobs which need few qualificationsand some graduates who find it difficult to get a graduate level job – but the overalltrend towards higher skills is very clear.

Equally clear is the impact on inequality. If working people do not manage to gainqualifications then they will increasingly be destined for a life of low pay, poor qualitywork or unemployment. This is not just a problem for those individuals, it affects thewhole of society. The more unequal the distribution of educational attainment(3), thelower is both the average attainment across the whole of society and the lower is theattainment at the highest end. In their massively influential book The Spirit Level,Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett show that national educational scores are closelycorrelated with national income inequality. More unequal countries have worseeducational attainment. Countries like Finland outperform the UK at every level ofattainment and have much less inequality between the highest and lowest levels of

2020

40

28

22

6

4

100

Gap

+9

+8

+2

-11

-8

Level 4 and above

Level 3

Level 2

Below Level 2

No Qualifications

Total

2007

31

20

20

17

12

100

8

attainment. So the prosperous and well educated middle classes should not ignore theplight of those without qualifications. They and their children will benefit if those withleast skills also benefit.

The UK is one of the most unequal societies in the developed world. It came 4th frombottom (only Portugal, the USA and Singapore are worse) in a ranking of 23 developednations measured by how much richer are the top 20% than the bottom 20%. In the UKthe richest 20% are 7 times richer than bottom 20%. In top scoring Japan (Finlandcame a close second) they are 4 times as rich.(4)

This income inequality is reflected in the UK’s poor international standing in theeducational league tables, as shown in the table below.

Table 2: International skills position(5)

And the UK is falling further behind. The UK Commission found that “the UK’s relativeposition is worse for younger individuals than it is for older people. The progress weare making is often less than for other countries and we are at serious risk of being leftbehind”(6). Many of the countries with higher skill levels are those with less skillinequality such as Japan, Canada and the Nordic nations. Many of those with lower skilllevels are emerging from decades of underdevelopment such as Poland, Greece, Spainand Portugal and on current trends will overtake the UK.

In other words, inequality and prosperity go hand in hand. If we want to campaignagainst poverty and inequality we need to improve skills. If we want a prosperous society

Country

USA

Canada

Switzerland

Japan

Sweden

Germany

Denmark

Austria

New Zealand

Finland

Norway

Hungary

S. Korea

Netherlands

UK

France

Belgium

Australia

Greece

Poland

Italy

Spain

Portugal

%Tertiary

39.5

47

29.9

40.5

30.5

23.9

34.7

17.6

29

35.3

33

17.2

32.9

30.2

30.2

26.2

31.8

33

21.9

17.9

12.8

28.5

13.5

%Upper Secondary

48.3

38.7

55.1

44.2

53.6

59.3

46.9

62.7

50.8

44.3

46.1

60.7

43.7

42.2

38.8

41.2

35.2

33.7

36.7

34.8

38.5

21.2

14.1

%BelowUpper Secondary

12.2

14.4

15

15.3

15.9

16.8

18.4

19.7

20.2

20.5

20.9

22

23.3

27.6

31

32.6

33.1

33.3

41.4

47.3

48.8

50.3

72.4

(4) The Spirit Level, pages16-17

(5) Ambition 2020, UKCES,from table 3.1 page 49

(6) Ambition 2020, UKCES, page 48

9

we need to improve skills. And if we want to improve skills we have to do so at all levels,not just for the better off.

Nor can this be left to the next generation. It is an oft quoted statistic that 80% ofthose at work in the year 2020 are already at work today. Demographics and politicalpressures suggest we will work longer and retire later, so the figure looks closer to 85%.So learning needs to be about those already working more than preparing the nextgeneration for the world of work.

And that is where unions come in. Learning is a unique and complex activity. It involvesengaging with people, not telling them what to do. It is not about filling empty mindswith knowledge (the deficit model) so much as encouraging people to grow their ownunderstanding, using their existing skills to grow new skills. It is not about transferringknowledge from teacher to student but helping people how to find out and make senseof things for themselves, especially in the age of the internet. All of this means learningis done with working people and not to them. Managers cannot make employees learn.Genuine understanding only comes with a genuine desire to learn. In other wordsworking people will only learn if, literally, they feel like it.

Through their own unions, working people can collectively discuss the kind of learningthey want, how it should be organised and delivered. Employees (and the state) wantand need learning which is wider and longer term than the more immediate profit drivenneeds of employers. Reconciling these aims is the keystone of any skills strategy. Again,that’s where unions come in. By sitting down with employers, unions can discuss andagree an employee training scheme which collectively meets both short and long termneeds, skills directly related to work and broader developmental learning.

Above all, unions provide the confidence and trust needed for successful work basedlearning. Employees who may feel unsure of their skills are not likely to confide in theirmanager. They are far more likely to confide in their own union learning rep, who is oneof them. There is a perfectly understandable anxiety that managers may think thatemployees are admitting they can’t do the job very well. Good managers know andunderstand this, which is why they encourage and support union learning.

Unions perform another vital role. It is not enough just to gain qualifications. If skillsare not used they are forgotten. Unions can help employers to expand the scope ofjobs to absorb new skills. Upskilling a workforce means changing culture, hierarchiesand job design. A higher skilled workplace may well be less authoritarian, more opento debate, care more about ending dreary job routines – and of course have higher pay.Employees want all that and so should good employers but achieving change needsjoint commitment. The UK is poor at skill utilisation. Unions can help employers makeit better.

The UK skills problem is not because people do not want to learn. Working people knowvery well that better skills are the passport to a better life. But if managers don’t knowwhat kind of training their employees want then they will either not provide muchtraining or provide the wrong kind – and if that results in few volunteers then managerswill wrongly conclude there is little appetite for training. So the union role is crucial.Without the trusted intermediary of the union learning rep it will inevitably be moredifficult to organise the right kind of training. All too often the training budget goes tothose employees who ask for it and have always had the training – professionals andsenior managers. Those who arguably need it most, the least qualified, get least.Giving a voice to the least well qualified, via the union, can transform who gets training.The result is not just a fairer allocation of learning opportunities but also better returns

10

This union learning role in the workplace goes hand in hand with the wider union rolecampaigning for a fairer learning system beyond the workplace. Unions’ understandingof the problems faced by their members at work is the basis of union campaigning for abetter skills system. Fighting poverty and inequality cannot be confined to the realm ofpolitics, nor just to what happens at work. Union learning is a dynamic which includesboth practical support for learning at work and lobbying for better funding, rights andopportunities. Each rely on the other and together they form the unique and vitalcontribution made by union learning to the fight against poverty and unfairness, thefight for better quality work, and for a more prosperous society.

11

Almost every union in the UK has a learning programme. Overall, the scale of activity isimpressive. In the past 10 years more than 25,000 Union Learning Reps have beentrained, over 800,000 working people have been involved in some form of learning,there are over 1,000 workplace learning centres and unions have negotiated over 1,500learning agreements with employers. All this activity has developed steadily since theearly days of the TUC “Bargaining for Skills” programme of the nineties, which in turnbuilt on the experience of many unions before that, including the Unison “Return toLearn” programme and the similar big education programmes delivered by the thenTGWU, AUEW or GMB. And of course the delivery of education for members and repsthrough individual union programmes or via the TUC Education service goes backdecades to the early days of the union movement. Unions have always been involved indelivering, and campaigning on, education for working people, not least through theWorkers Educational Association, the National Council of Labour Colleges, and theOpen University. Unionlearn is the learning and skills arm of the TUC, it was launched in2006 but it grew out of this long and successful history.

Today, unions are more involved in learning than ever before. Latest figures fromunionlearn show that in 2009/10 almost 250,000 working people were involved in alearning opportunity delivered through their union, and supported by unionlearn. Ofthese, 5,000 were enrolled in degree level courses, 22,000 enrolled on Level 3(equivalent to A level), 40,000 on level 2 (equivalent to GCSE), over 35,000 wereengaged in a Continual Professional Development programme and thousands moreengaged in a wide range of other less formal or accredited (but often equally valuable)learning. The courses range from entry level literacy, numeracy or I.C.T to customercare, apprenticeships of all kinds, management, and job specific training. Many coursesare informal and some are “tasters” such as photography or cookery or local historywhich very often lead on to more formal, employment related courses.

There is a vast range of activity which very largely depends on the union involved.For example ATL (a large teaching union) has over 1,000 members enrolled, via theunion, on a professional teaching course through a Higher Education Institution. Unite(a very large general union) has thousands of members who are migrant workerslearning English for Speakers of Other Languages. Unison ( a very large public sectorunion) has embedded learning at all levels and in all regions of the union, Dave Prentis,General Secretary, made it a highlight of his speech at the 2010 annual conference.Many specialist unions have highly developed programmes tailored to their members,for example the Prison Officers Association has been given the contract by governmentto deliver training to ensure all prison officers reach at least level 2; The Fire BrigadesUnion works closely with the Fire and Rescue Service to deliver higher level professionaland management training. The Public and Commercial Services Union (a large union forlow to medium paid civil servants) runs a big learning programme aimed at helpingmembers improve both their workplace skills/job prospects and skills to help thembecome active in the union. Almost every union runs a programme (themselves and/orvia the TUC Education service) to train workplace reps and officers. In 2009 the TUCprogramme trained almost 60,000 – more than twice the number at the height of unionmembership in 1980. Union learning is flourishing as never before.

Employer SupportWhatever their views on other union activities, employers who know about unionlearning are strong supporters. In 2009 unionlearn commissioned the biggest eversurvey of union learning from Leeds University. It covered 415 employers who betweenthem employed almost 1m people in workplaces where there was union learning(7).It found that:

• 91% of managers agree that unions should continue to develop their role in thelearning agenda

Chapter 1

The Current Stateof Union Learning

(7) Assessing the impact of unionlearning and the Union Learning Fund:union and employer perspectives;Prof Mark Start, Hugh Cook, Jo Cutter,Prof Jonathan Winterton; Centre forEmployment Relations Innovation andChange, Leeds university Business

• 79% are very supportive of the union role in learning

• 87% of managers say their organisation will continue to be involved with unionlearning activities

• 81% say union learning benefited the individuals taking part

• 63% say union learning was of benefit to the organisation

The reason why employers are so supportive is straightforward. Union learning deliversresults. Asked whether learning outcomes had increased/stayed the same/decreased,the percentage of managers responding was:

The effect of union learning is not just better learning outcomes; it goes well beyondthat to better outcomes for the organisation as a whole:

On almost all of these indicators the level of employer support was much higher where alearning agreement had been negotiated - which shows how bargaining on skills andsome formalisation can help make even stronger progress. It is also interesting thatmanagers are far more prepared to negotiate or consult the union on training after theycan see value of union input – national figures show that across the entire economy(i.e. including the two thirds of workplaces where unions are not present) the level ofconsultation on training is only 9%.

The added value to employers of working with unions could not be clearer from thesesurvey results. There are relatively few studies which translate training into bottom linebenefits to employers. This survey not only does that but shows a very striking level ofbottom line impact. In other words involving unions in learning not only improves train-ing but is also more likely to ensure that training is cost effective.

12

increased

41%

55%

31%

46%

15%

56%

23%

decreased

0%

1%

0%

16%

2%

1%

6%

stayedthe same

59%

44%

60%

39%

83%

43%

72%

Take-up of job related training?

Number of employees gaining qualifications?

Continuing Professional Development?

Positively addressed basic skills gaps?

Number of apprentices?

Equality of access to training opportunities?

Employer expenditure on training?

increased

32%

34%

39%

4%

42%

39%

42%

40%

46%

decreased

1%

0%

0%

9%

3%

2%

4%

1%

0%

stayedthe same

67%

66%

61%

87%

56%

60%

54%

59%

54%

Organisational performance?

Service and/or Quality indicators?

Health and Safety?

Staff turnover?

Staff Morale?

Employee commitment?

Levels of union/management trust?

Negotiation on training issues?

Consultation on training issues?

13

Union ViewsThe Leeds University survey included a survey of union officers running Union LearningFund(8) projects. It found union learning was equally popular with employees and madethem think much better of their union:

Table 3 Union views on impact of union learning

Again these are strikingly positive figures. Almost 90% of Union officials engaged inlearning say that employees (many of whom would not even be union members) eitheragree or strongly agree that union learning is a good thing for their union to engage in.Over 60% think it has helped unions recruit new members. Over 90% think memberswill become more active within the union. At a time when union membership is broadlystatic (nonetheless no small achievement during a recession) and when unions are keento find new ways to engage more members in union activity, these figures are cruciallyimportant. Union learning must play a major role in any plans to revitalise unionmembership and activity.

Of course many unions already know this. The link between learning and organising iswell established. A 2009 study(9) found that:

“The research suggests that unions are increasingly promoting a relationship betweenlearning and organising at national union level. Unions are bringing learning andorganising together in their departmental structures, or developing links betweenseparate learning and organising departments around specific campaigns. Some unionsare also integrating the two at regional union level by placing Union Learning ProjectWorkers in regional organising teams. Another trend is to designate Union LearningProject Workers as organisers, to reflect how they are organising around the learningagenda. Union education and training is also developing the link between the twofunctions, with learning reflected in activist training and organising in ULR training.”

A good example of this integration is Unison’s Learning and Organising Services(LAOS) which brings them together in a single high profile department. PCS have had asingle department since 2002 and other unions are moving in the same direction.The relationship between learning and organising is strong but varies between unions,reflecting different memberships and strategies. Unionlearn compiled a resource packfeaturing 7 case studies in 2008. It covered a TGWU recruitment drive among migrant

impact

Improved employeesattitudes to the unionContributed to increased unionmembershipIncreased enrolment on otherunion coursesIncreased member involvementin union activitiesIncreased interest in taking onunion rolesIncreased interest by ULRs inother union rolesIncreased capability of unionworkplace reps

stronglyagree

44

20

25

35

20

34

20

agree

44

43

52

46

57

43

54

neither

11

32

17

19

22

17

24

disagree

0

6

6

0

0

6

2

stronglydisagree

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

(8) The Union Learning Fund is a £15.5Mfund, distributed by unionlearn with gov-ernment oversight, to unions after a bid-ding process. It has beenrunning for 12 years, initially managedby government before moving tounionlearn in 2006. The survey askedunion officials involved with theULF for their views on its impact intheir union.

(9) Integrating Union Learning andOrganising Strategies; Sian Moore,Working Lives Research Institute,London Metropolitan University,Unionlearn Research Paper 8, March2009, page 4

14

Tayside based on better CPD; a CWU (postal workers) call centre campaign aimed atyounger workers issues; an ATL recruitment drive based on better in-service training; aUnison campaign at Exeter University offering workplace skills for the first time in theirlives to administrative workers; and a FDA (senior civil servants) seminar on betterprofessional skills which saw 17 new members sign up on the spot. In every case therewas an increase in both membership and activism, both immediate and longer term.Very many unions find that for members who take up the ULR role it is the first time theyhave ever been a union activist, many go on to further union roles or become unionofficials.

Some see union learning as just about basic “skills for life”. In other words level 1literacy and numeracy and ICT skills. Certainly those are important skills but unionlearning goes far wider. Over 40% of all union members already have Higher Education(degree or equivalent) qualifications. The great majority of the remaining 60% have level2 or 3 skills. Union learning reflects this pattern. Unions like USDAW, representingworkers in retail and distribution, focus on skills up to level 2. USDAW’s pioneering“checkout learning” programme has helped thousands of their members gainqualifications equivalent to GCSE, often for the first time in their lives. Equally, unionsrepresenting more highly qualified employees, aim at HE qualifications. For exampleATL, representing teaching staff, have organised a programme with Edgehill College ofHigher Education which now has 3,000 ATL members enrolled on in-service courses.Very many members are not content to gain just level 2 but, once they realise what theycan do, aspire to level 3 and 4. Unionlearn has negotiated discounts of 10% or more oncourses from the Open University, Birckbeck College, Kingston University and others.A Unison cleaner in a university law department became a lecturer in that samedepartment, through Unison’s “return to learn” programme. The FBU helped a firefightermove from level 2 to a PhD in 7 years, all through work-based learning.

As the economy and workforce move towards higher average skill levels, there will beever more demand for higher level union learning. Nor will it always take the form ofspecific courses. Many professional union members want to engage in continualprofessional development (CPD) but find their employers need persuading or the CPDcourses on offer are not appropriate. So unions are organising better CPD (as ATL did)and ensuring it recognises, supports and enhances the work their members actually do.Unions are helping to break down the barriers between Further Education and HigherEducation; between academic and vocational. As HE becomes ever more expensiveunions are negotiating with employers for more help with fees. Unions are negotiatingwith FE and HE institutions to offer learning tailored to members’ needs; such as moreon-line learning, more recognition of the learning members have already gained viaexperience, more courses tailored to the jobs members do or aspire to. Above all, unionlearning is dynamic and democratic. It champions members’ right to progress, to carryon learning, either for its own sake or to achieve higher qualifications, skills and pay.That is what union members want.

Union Learning Reps are the bedrock of union learning. Unionlearn commissions abiennial survey of ULRs, the 2009 survey(10) showed:

• 43% of ULRs are women, 8.4% are Black or Minority Ethnic and 39% are agedunder 46. In other words ULRs are much more likely than other unionrepresentatives to be women, black and young – and more likely to berepresentative of union membership

• One third of ULRs are new to trade union activity

• Over 80% of ULRs feel supported by the union and 87% are happy to continuein the role

(10) Learning works, Report of the 2009survey of union learning representativesand their managers; Richard Saundry,Alison Hollinrake and Valerie Antcliff,

University of Central LancashireBusiness School, unionlearn April 2010

15

• Over two thirds report adequate support from their line managers but only 34% feelvalued by senior management

• Two thirds negotiate with their employer over learning

• 94% of ULRs had given advice to members/employees(11), and three quarters hadarranged or helped arrange courses for colleagues

• Three quarters of ULRs had helped recruit new members to the union

• Activity is rising, over 40% of ULRs said they were more active against 27% whosaid less active

• Two thirds of ULRs feel their work has helped improve management/union dialogue:over half of managers agree

• Almost 60% of managers think ULRs have helped improve basic skills and 90% saythe recession has not undermined their support for union learning – though bothULRs and managers said the recession had put pressure on budgets and placedmore emphasis on job-related training.

Of course union learning is not confined to ULRs. In fact about two thirds of ULRs alsohold another union post, e.g. shop steward or departmental rep or health and safetyrep. Nor is engaging with employers left just to ULRs. Others from the union branch areusually involved at workplace level and union officers are increasingly involved indiscussions or negotiations with employers. This trend towards “mainstreaming” unionlearning is gathering pace. The vast majority of unions now have formal recognition ofULRs in their rule books, places for ULRs on branch committees, learning committeestructures which are accountable to the Union Executive, learning conferences and soforth. While ULF funding is essential, most unions increasingly supplement this withtheir own resources. At national level union learning is increasingly prominent on unionbargaining agendas. Many ULRs have become active more widely and been appointedas union full time officers, bringing the learning agenda with them as they rise within theunion. Many unions have welcomed the influx of new activism which ULRs bring.

All of this survey evidence confirms that union learning is a growing force, is stronglysupported by both managers and unions, has a major positive impact in the workplace,is delivering benefits to all employees (and particularly to those who have previously hadleast access to training), and is helping raise the nation’s present and future skills.

But at what cost? Has it led unions to go soft on employers or government? Is learninga “soft” issue where unions should be semi-detached? Are unions being seduced into anarrow utilitarian view of learning? Is it diverting unions from a much tougher approachto learning? Why do so many union reps and officials who are involved in learning feelthat their unions treat it as a distinct and lesser activity? These are the issues discussedin the next section.

(11) Very few unions make anydistinction between members andnon-members in practice, very oftenoffering help to non-members is seen asa good recruitment tool

16

A brief look at history helps explain attitudes to union learning. Although there is a longhistory of union involvement in learning, it was for a long time seen as peripheral to thecore concern with gaining recognition and bargaining on pay, jobs and conditions.There is little mention of education, training or learning in the magisterial History ofBritish Trade Unions (vol 1 published in 1964, vol 2 in 1985) by Clegg, Fox andThompson. Nor any mention in Clegg’s 1954 history of the GMWU. Classics likeWorking for Ford by Huw Beynon (1975) or Carter Goodrich’s The Frontier of Control(1920) also contain little on unions and learning, although they are both, arguably, aboutwidening workers’ perspectives in exactly the way that union learning does today.There are hardly any references to training, education or learning in other classics,whether of left or right, such as George Bain’s Growth of White Collar Unionism (1970);Robin Page Arnott’s The Miners in Crisis and War (1961), or Cole’s Attempts at GeneralUnion (1953).

To some extent, this may well have been right. In the 19th century unions had a hardstruggle simply existing, let alone providing training services, in the teeth of fierceopposition. Not surprisingly, issues of organising, recognition, and bitter battles overpay and conditions took centre stage(12). In the 20th century, as union membership grewand unions became more established, unions’ own education services also grew, albeitslowly, and primarily aimed at helping reps and officers carry out their union work. Ofcourse throughout their formative years unions had a passionate interest in educationfor their members and the working class. The struggle for the 8 hour day was largely toallow time for adult instruction in evening classes, which is where many union leadersgained both their union and wider education. The TUC lobbied hard for the 1870Elementary Education Act which gave free schooling, for the first time, to the children ofthe working class. The TUC carried on the fight for better funding and raising the schoolleaving age (it only got to age 12 in 1899 and even then was partly discretionary) andstill does today. Central to the New Unionism of the 1890’s was a belief that themovement should do more to improve wider social conditions. Tom Mann, theengineering union leader, attended evening classes three times a week which, he said,helped him become a union leader and in particular lead the 8 Hour movement.He called for “Leisure to think, to learn, to acquire knowledge, to enjoy, to develop; inshort leisure to live.”(13) (his emphasis).

At the same time, organisations aimed at helping union education grew up outside theunions: the WEA was founded in 1903, Ruskin College in 1899, the Plebs Leaguefounded the Central Labour College (CLC) in 1909, The Workers Education Trade UnionCommittee WETUC) was formed in 1919 to strengthen the WEA’s work with unions andthe CLC became the National CLC in 1921. For the next 40 years there was great rivalrybetween the WEA (which received some state funding) and NCLC, each accusing theother of Marxist indoctrination/selling out to capitalism and it was not until 1964 thatthe TUC finally took over the NCLC and WETUC so as to bring trade union educationin-house. It was then managed by the TUC Education Committee which covered bothpolicy issues (lobbying government for better training and education systems) anddelivery of union education for reps and officers. This did not end the debate butthereafter it carried on within the TUC, and was frequently the subject of impassioneddebate at Congress.

Shortly afterwards the 1968 Donovan Commission was set up to consider the tradeunion “problem”. Its report(14) contained much (including some trenchant criticism) onunions and training. The TUC evidence to Donovan(15) described the work of the TUCEducation Committee and gave it some prominence. An influential research paper forthe Donovan Commission by John Hughes of Ruskin College on Trade Union Structureand Governance, argued strongly for much more emphasis by both unions and the TUCon training of representatives and officers, though he commended the (generally)

Chapter 2

Union learning – asoft activity?

(12) For an excellent summary of thehistory see An Historical Overview of

Trade Union Involvement in Educationand Training; Moira Calveley, inLearning With Trade Unions,

Ashgate, 2008, pages 13 to 31

(13) From Calveley, see above, page 15

(14) Royal Commission on TradesUnions and Employers Associations,

Chair Lord Donovan, Cmnd 3623, June1968, Para 357 to 359, pages 92 to 93:“Prejudice against women is manifest atall levels of management as well as onthe shop floor. Among the professionsthere are to be found demarcation rulesand rules for qualifying to practise which

are no less strict and no less open toquestion than those practised in many

crafts. There are, however, someencouraging signs that the need for atransformation in our system is gainingwider recognition. The trades unions

co-operation in the rapid expansion ofthe government training centres is

greatly to be welcomed. The levy andgrant system under the 1964 Act has

stimulated employers to devote greaterattention to industrial training in all itsaspects. We doubt, however, whetherthe urgency and scale of the problem

have yet been appreciated.”

(15) Trade Unionism; pub by the TUC,November 1966, pages 10-11

17

exemplary efforts of the GMWU and the TGWU. There was much activity and debate onunion education (for reps and officers if not for members), even if it had a lower profilethan reforming the law on taking industrial action.

Yet the 1964 Industrial Training Act, which established levies on employers to encouragetraining, overseen by joint union/management training bodies, was perhaps the highwater mark of union involvement in training. (Though some commentators might say thehigh water mark was in the mid seventies with the involvement of unions in the earlydays of the Manpower Services Commission.) The criticism it faced was from those whosaw unions being sucked into a managerial agenda and those who wished to preservethe restrictions on entry to skilled trades by “dilutees”. The Donovan Commission, onthe other hand, argued strongly for what would be seen today by most trades unionistsas a more progressive agenda: reform of the apprenticeship system needed because itdiscriminated strongly against women and because “time serving” gave no guarantee ofskill level; reform of the dilution agreements or at least that unions nationally should tryto ensure they were observed locally.

On TU Education it said(16) “So far as training is concerned, trade unions are urged todevelop courses for junior full time officers, both on and shortly after appointment andafter some experience, and for shop stewards. For the latter, day release courses withthe employer’s co-operation offer the best prospects; grants from industrial trainingboards could be used to increase the number and raise the standard of these courses.”There was little mention of trades unions offering a wider learning service to members,that was seen as either the role of the state through, for example, adult evening classes,or of organisations like the WEA, funded by the state or local authorities.

Throughout most of the seventies and eighties, trade union involvement in learningfocussed on building up rep and officer training on the one hand, funded by unions andgovernment, and on the other hand a long hard fought retreat from involvement inemployer training. By the end of the eighties there were only two industries left withtraining levies and statutory union representation, Construction and EngineeringConstruction. Unions’ own capacity, voluntarism, grew as involvement with the state,corporatism, declined. Between 1976 and 1988 training strategy (such as it was) withinBritain was run by the tripartite (Government, CBI and TUC) Manpower ServicesCommission. In 1988, following the refusal by the TUC representatives on theCommission to support a new training scheme (which included little real training) for theadult unemployed, the government abolished the Commission replaced it by theshort-lived Training Agency which was replaced by local employer-dominated Trainingand Enterprise Councils (TECs). Initially some unions refused any dealings with TECsbut union involvement gradually increased until almost every TEC had a unionrepresentative on its board and a concordat was signed with the TUC(17). The advent ofthe 1997 Labour government brought statutory rights for ULRs and much moreattention to skills. Sector Skills Councils were set up with union involvement (often onlyafter some pressure) and the Learning and Skills Council also set up with union andTUC involvement, but long cherished TUC policies for extending statutory recognition tocover collective bargaining on training made no progress though the Conservativegovernment’s cuts in funding for union education were reversed.

What does this brief historical tour show about attitudes to unions and learning?First, that bringing training of reps and officers under union control is relatively recent.Second, that extending union learning to members is even more recent. Third thatdebate over the purpose of union learning is not new, albeit the terms of the debatehave largely moved from overthrow/accomodation to capitalism to skills for work/widerlearning. Fourth that active government involvement in training policy and unions’ owntraining (for which government funding is essential) has grown but always been

(16) Donovan Commission; page 272

(17) For an excellent overview of thisperiod see Unionlearn Researchpaper no 5, From Voluntarsim to Post-Voluntarism, the emerging role of unionsin the vocational education and training

18

controversial; there is deep rooted scepticism about government involvement.But history also shows a clear sense of direction: unions have become increasinglyinvolved in both delivery and policy over the years. Government support has grown.Union involvement in skills policy is becoming more important.

Recent growth in union learning is the continuation of this long march. The advent ofULRs, the growth of the ULF and unionlearn, union involvement with training policy viaSSCs (although this has varied with each SSC) and greater government funding – theseare all squarely in line with the fundamental aims and historical development of tradeunionism. The challenges it faces today are the same as those in the past. Seeing unionlearning as a semi-detached or “soft” activity reflects old debates, the charge had littletruth then but even less today.

Mark Stuart, author of the Leeds survey,(18) describes and rebuts the kind of challengeswhich union learning faces today well: “First, what is the benefit of union learning forunions themselves and their membership? Is union learning about individual memberservices or can it embody more collectivist approaches? Critics would see learning as a‘displacement’ activity that distracts unions from core issue of pay and collectivebargaining (McIlroy, 2008). Yet, research suggests that members’ themselves areenthusiastic about learning, with a large unmet demand for learning that unions canmobilise around and link to core union activities (Findlay et al, 2007; Moore and Ross,2008). Second, how does union learning influence employer policy and practice onlearning and do employers see any value in engagement with unions? For critics, thelack of constraints on employer prerogative means that cooperation with unions onlearning may not be forthcoming or limited to marginal policies and practice: with theeffect that unions are unable to raise levels of employer investment in training (Hoqueand Bacon, 2008). Yet, equally, there are numerous studies that show that unions caninfluence employer policy and learning outcomes for the better (Heyes and Stuart, 1998;Stuart and Robinson, 2007). Moreover, few studies have actually surveyed employersabout their views on any perceived benefits of engagement with unions on learning(Bacon and Hoque, 2009, is an exception). Finally, what do developments in unionlearning tell us about the relationship between unions and the state? Critics argue thatfunding for union learning activities has reduced the TUC to an ‘arm of the state’;delivering, instead of influencing, state policies, whose limited ambition fails to deliver ahigh skills economy (Lloyd and Payne, unions can shape government policy (Mustchin,2009). More widely, how unions use state funding; McIlroy, 2008). Yet, research hasshown how unions can shape government policy (Mustchin, 2009). More widely, howunions use state funding and the outcomes that this delivers requires empiricalassessment.”

Stuart is right. The empirical evidence simply does not support these challenges.

Union Learning is not inherently individualistic, quite the reverse. In fact the curriculumfor Trade Union Education relies heavily on a collective approach, using discussion andproblem sharing. It teaches the skills of listening, sharing and collective action.Wider learning for union members is equally collective. The network of Collegeproviders that unionlearn works with are chosen for their commitment to a collectivetrade union approach to learning. And unionlearn is piloting Collective Learning Fund(19)

pilots i.e. a way of employees and/or unions pooling their funding. Far from distractingfrom collective approaches, the growing union involvement in learning has fuelled amore collective approach to training, both in relations with employers and relations withgovernment.

Union learning does have a significant influence on employers, given the chance toshow what it can do. The Leeds survey provides clear evidence not just of strong

(18) Leeds Report; pages 9-10 whichincludes references to the authors cited

(19) See www.unionlearn.org.uk

19

employer support but also of how employers are changing their behaviour: increasingtraining spending, opening up learning opportunities much more equally, and taking onmore apprentices. Of course employers should do far more and it is still relatively earlyin the life of ULRs and the ULF, but these are positive signs.

Less clear, admittedly, is influence on government. Certainly the former Labourgovernment demonstrated its strong commitment to union learning and ministers in thecoalition government have also expressed strong support.(20) They have seen andwarmly welcomed the significant expansion of union learning. Critics would point tounions’ failure to get any statutory right to collective bargaining on training, to the lackof a genuine social partnership approach, or to the weakness (e.g. compared to Europe)of apprenticeship frameworks. Others would point to the new statutory right to requesttime to train, the inclusion of TUC and union representatives on the UK Commission forEmployment and Skills or the erstwhile LSC, and to the fact that Labour massivelyexpanded apprenticeship training and other funds for workplace learning. Much that theLabour government did was in line with union policy, for example the £5bn investmentin basic skills to help those in most need. Some might say that government might havebeen more influenced if the union movement had developed a more coherent andpracticable policy agenda for learning and raised its profile further. Appendix 1summarises such a possible agenda. Overall it seems reasonable to say that unionshave undoubtedly had some impact and will continue to do so.

What about the argument that taking government funding has reduced unions, and inparticular the TUC or unionlearn, to being an arm of the state?(21) There are two answersto this. The first is that the facts suggest otherwise. The government does not dictate,for example, the allocation of ULF grants to unions. That is done by a panel of unionofficers according to criteria agreed by the unionlearn Board, drawn from the TUCGeneral Council. It is certainly true that government is represented and involved butdoes not seek to control the process. Equally, the Trade Union Education programme,while it is delivered in Colleges which draw down government funding, is not subject togovernment control. The curriculum and training of tutors are all overseen by unionlearn.This is not, of course, to argue that unionlearn can do what it likes. Courses are allaccredited externally, funding is subject to transparent external audit and activity issubject to external quality assessment via Ofsted.

The second objection is that a glance at the history of union learning would celebrate,not criticise, government funding. It has been a long standing union aim to getgovernment recognition for unions; both for their role in civil society and their role in theworkplace.(22) Of course unions want to retain their independence and there has been along tradition of voluntarism in the UK (unlike e.g. the USA where unions are far morehighly regulated) but unions cannot themselves fund and organise all the delivery oftraining to their members, nor should they. Unions campaign today (as they did in themid 19th century) for state education and training, both initially up to age 18 andbeyond. Most progressives would see the state having a strong role in funding lifelonglearning as one of the hallmarks of a civilised society. That should include unionlearning, both wider learning opportunities for members and union education for repsand officers. Many admire the strength of the Nordic trade unions, which have a majorrole in the state welfare and training system, and would celebrate the fact that, unions(in the shape of unionlearn) are given a similar (unique in the UK) role in distributinggovernment funding.

Here is an example of workplace learning which would never have happened withoutunionlearn: Many union members struggle with cancer, affecting them, their friends orfamily. In 2009 unionlearn and Macmillan cancer support jointly began work on a guideto help union reps gain the skills to help. Many people do not find it easy to know what

(20) Both the Secretary of State,Vince Cable, and Minister for Skills,John Hayes, expressed strong supportfor unionlearn at the July 27th 2010unionlearn annual conference

(21) See, for example, McIlroy, John,Ten Years of New Labour: WorkplaceLearning, Social Partnership and UnionRevitalization in Britain; British Journal ofIndustrial Relations, Vol. 46, Issue 2,pages 283-313, June 2008

(22) Ref to BERR (now BIS) estimate ofmonetary value of union contribution

20

to say, how best to offer work-related advice and support. The joint guide, launched in2010, along with associated training, gives practical examples and has been warmlywelcomed by employers and unions alike. It builds on union’s health and safetycampaigning, offering emotional support as well as defending workers’ rights. Here isanother example: In 2009 unionlearn launched a nationwide project to help workingpeople affected by the recession. The project offers help in reskilling, either to avertredundancy or to help the jobless find new work. It trains reps in the skills needed tohelp members who may be worrying about or dealing with redundancy, gives advice onmoney, managing relationships, finding new jobs, persuading an employer to trainduring short time working. And it firmly points training in the direction of the “green”skills needed to build a competitive low carbon economy. These projects are not drivenby government, neither would have happened without union learning.

The real argument about government involvement is not about funding (few wouldseriously disagree with that beyond the extreme right) but about the strings attachedi.e. government influence over what is taught. In fact there are few strings. Sian Moore’sevaluation of ULRs puts it clearly: “Whilst the government's learning and skillsagenda has moved away from a broad conceptualisation of learning for social andself-development and towards an increasingly narrow interpretation of lifelong learningbased upon employability, ULRs and trade unions have not abandoned this vision.At the same time, union expectations of the role of the ULR appear to have shiftedand they are increasingly seen as part of wider union recruitment and organisingstrategies.”(23) In other words, the government vision has not become the union vision.So what is the union vision?

(23) The evolving role of ULRs;Sian Moore and Cilla Ross,

Working Lives Research Institute,London Metropolitan University,

Professional Development in Education,Vol 34, Issue 4, Dec 2008,

pages 423-440

21

Unions have always been concerned with members’ welfare: chiefly members’ pay;together with members’ conditions, jobs and ability to lead fulfilling lives. But if unionsbargain only on pay, they will have little ability to influence pay. The economy and labourmarket are changing radically. In today’s complex, global, high skill economy pay isincreasingly the outcome of many different factors. Unions need to influence thosefactors to influence pay – and jobs and conditions and leading fulfilling lives.Chief among those factors are the skills of the workforce. That pragmatism is a majordriver of union involvement in learning.

Members know this. Indeed recent surveys(24) have shown a sharp increase in thenumbers of working people interested in training. That has partly been fuelled by therecession but also by recognition that gaining skills is essential to getting or retaining adecent job. The professional/associate professional unions have long expected theirunions to play an active role in professional regulation and continuing professionaldevelopment frameworks. The same pressure is there in the manual, semi-skilled andcraft unions which have long argued for training agreements giving members moreopportunities and better payment for higher skills. The recognition of the importance oflearning for work is not new, it is simply becoming stronger. The NIACE survey showsthat employees at all levels want and are getting more training:

• 60% of full time adult workers plan to take up training, up 13% since 2009

• 58% of part time adult workers plan to take up training, up 9% since 2009

• 67% of the unemployed plan to take up training, up 17% on 2009

• 56% of social classes AB have had current or recent training

• 51% of social class C1 have had current or recent training

• 37% of social class C2 have had current or recent training

• 30% of social classes DE have had current or recent training, up from 25%

These are striking figures; the DE jump up from 25% (where it had been for many years)is very significant and may reflect union learning influence as well as wider governmentpriorities.

Of course this pragmatic reason for supporting skills is not the only factor. There isradicalism too in the union vision of learning. Paulo Freire famously argued inThe Pedagogy of the Oppressed, for an education built around the learner, theirunderstanding of their place in society, their oppression and how it had evolved.He argued for an educational system based not on authoritarian hierarchies but onshared problem solving: “In problem-posing education, people develop their power toperceive critically the way they exist in the world with which and in which they findthemselves; they come to see the world not as a static reality, but as a reality inprocess, in transformation.”(25) This could easily serve as a description of Trade UnionEducation. It builds on the experience of the learner, develops their understanding oftheir situation and their ability to act, through negotiation and organising, to change it.The fact that at the same time TUC Education (like many union education programmes)is both quality assured and accredited (itself a significant achievement) does not lessenits radicalism. Accreditation is very important to learners who want to know that theirlearning has a currency, is recognised by their own or other employers, and issomething they can feel proud of. But at the same time, of the 233,000 learners involvedin learning with unionlearn support in 2009/10, around half were not engaged inaccredited programmes. They were doing a variety of “taster” courses through e.g.Learning at Work Day or the autumn 2009 “Festival of Learning”. Some learninginvolved people exchanging skills, teaching each other. Learning does not have to be

Chapter 3

The union visionfor learning

(24) A Change for the Better, the 2010NIACE survey of adult learning

(25) The Pedagogy of the Oppressed;Paulo Freire, 1970, Penguin ed 1996,

22

accredited (though unions want to make sure it is of good quality) to be valuable, bothto employers and learners. The important point is that the learner has a choice, as Freirewould argue, and is not tied down by training which only their employer recognises.

Or take Ivan Illich, another radical educationalist. He argued against formal educationalstructures which suppressed real change and for a different kind of teacher. Arguingagainst what he described as educational administrators he argued for network builderswho would: ...”demonstrate genius at ...facilitating encounters among students, skillmodels, educational leaders and educational objects. Many persons now attracted toteaching are profoundly authoritarian and would not be able to assume this task:building educational exchanges would mean making it easy for people ...the educationalpath of each student would be his own (sic) to follow, and only in retrospect would ittake on the features of a recognisable programme.”(26) This network builder is not a baddescription of a ULR. Many workers became attracted to the second chance offered byunion learning precisely because it was better than their authoritarian and negativeexperience of schooling. The use of collective exchanges and networks is how unionssupport their learning. Indeed unionlearn has recently re-launched an electronicInformation Advice and Guidance tool a “Climbing Frame” which provides practicalsupport to learners and ULRs in the way Illich describes.

This wider, radical, vision is immensely powerful. It was vividly brought to life in ThePitmen Painters, a hit play(27) describing a group of miners in the thirties who took uppainting in an evening class which they largely ran themselves, though their tutor was auniversity academic provided through the WEA. The same vision drove the earlypioneers who set up working men’s or mechanic’s institutes, the weavers who recitedShelley at their looms, and just as much today, the thousands of working people whohave set up learning centres at their workplace so they have their own space where theyfeel comfortable learning. It is a vision which crosses political boundaries, witness theenthusiastic support for adult education shown by the new coalition government. And itis a vision which has massive public support, evident in the surging numbers attendingmuseums or art galleries, digging up local or family history, watching TV documentaries,forming book clubs or attending pub quiz nights. Learning, especially learning which isboth enjoyable and organised by the learner, is more popular than ever before. Unionlearning is a powerful way in which unions can strengthen their links with this widerpublic movement.

So union learning is unashamedly pragmatic, but also radical. It helps learners in theirjob or to get a better job; but also, if they wish, to transform their lives and dosomething quite different. It is passionate about equality and fairness, challengingemployers and educational structures to ensure that the most disadvantaged (not leastmigrants) get a better deal. It argues for both state funding and independence; forexternal accreditation, quality control and audit, but also for choice over course andcertification. If this is complex and messy then that reflects people’s lives and choices.Critics who argue against government funding, or external assessment, or employerinvolvement would reduce choices available to members. The current pattern of unionlearning has been developed by unions to represent what their members want. Thatdemocratic base is the fundamental reason why it works.

(26) Deschooling Society;Ivan Illich, 1971, Marion Boyars

ed 2002, page 98

(26) The Pitmen Painters; Lee Hall,inspired by a book by William Feaver.

It was a co-production between the LiveTheatre Newcastle and the NationalTheatre, London and ran for severalmonths. The group of miners met intheir hut after work and, having hadno previous training, produced someamazing paintings as well as learning,through argument and discussion with

23

Chapter 4

Future Prospects

Jobs, pay, conditions and welfare will always be the centre of union activity, but learningwill increasingly take its place alongside them. The economic, social, cultural and labourmarket pressures described above will only become stronger. Already the vast majorityof unions are, or have already written ULRs into their rule book, established learningstructures at branch regional and national level, appointed learning staff, and linkedlearning to wider union strategies like organising.(28)

The next stage in the process of integration is to include more learning issues in thebargaining agenda. Of course there has always been bargaining on skills. The craftunions have a long tradition of negotiating agreements on training and apprenticeships.Teaching unions have agreements on e.g. in-service training. The health unions have acomprehensive “skills escalator” framework within the Agenda for Change agreement.The Public Services Forum, which brings together government and the public sectorunions, reached agreement on a detailed set of recommendations aimed at improvingskills. So there is already a strong foundation on which to build.

But learning is more complex and diverse than most bargaining issues. Differentunions will take different positions on a range of key questions, depending on theirmembership, traditions and strategies, for example:

• Which learning should the union aim to provide itself and which press the employerto provide?

• Should the union aim to cover the full range of learning needs?

• What balance to strike between informal or accredited; job-related or wider?

• Should the union aim to deliver the training itself or organise it via a third party?

• Should learning be a distinct service? Integrated with organising? With bargaining?

• How much should be centrally managed and how much devolved to regionsand/or branches?

• What balance to strike between education for reps and officers/wider learningfor members?

• How much should be funded by the union and how much by government or otherexternal funding?

• Should the union invest in policy development and research as well as delivery?

The answers to these and many other key questions will determine bargaining strategy.For example whether to press the employer for:

• more apprenticeships, with better pay and conditions and higher quality training

• achieving a minimum level of qualification for all staff(29)

• minimum paid leave entitlements for all staff

• funding for learning centres

• action on equality, prioritising skills for those who have least e.g. the low paid, BMEor women members

• stronger agreements which include raising employer investment in learning

• improved ULR facilities including time off which is a major problem for many ULRs

• stronger joint bargaining, rather than just consultation, through a formalisedtraining committee

(28) See Leeds Report, table 4, page 15

(29) The PSF Joint Statement of 2008agreed on a minimum of Basic Skills(roughly equal to level 1) for allemployees delivering public services,directly employed or via a contractor;and that level 2 for all would be goodpractice

• better access to independent skills and career advisory services

• a jointly managed learning fund

Moreover, unlike pay and conditions, where the issues can (usually) be clearly costedand decided between employer and union, learning involves third parties such asgovernment agencies who may provide some funding or colleges who deliver thetraining. This can make bargaining a more complex process. On the other handemployers may well be more prepared to enter into discussion on learning than on paysince there are plainly advantages for them in having a more highly skilled workforce.As the Leeds survey showed, employers were even stronger supporters and theoutcomes (for both union and employer) were even stronger where there was a learningagreement. Unlike pay bargaining where (usually) more pay for workers means lessmoney for employers; bargaining on learning can bring gains to both sides. So, thoughit may take time and will not be simple, there is every likelihood that the onward marchof union learning will continue into the heart of union affairs, the world of bargaining.

Of course the elephant in the room is what would happen if government funding werewithdrawn or sharply reduced. That remains to be seen and of course major publicspending cuts are expected almost everywhere, though government expressions ofsupport for unionlearn could scarcely be stronger. However the removal of fundingshould not be seen as some kind of virility test which unions ought to be able towithstand. Reduced funding would undoubtedly do major damage. For the past 150years the union movement has sought government support and rightly so. Funding forthe education of reps and officers is a recognition of unions’ role in civil society andsupporting the national economy. The relatively small amount of government funding isrepaid many times over by the direct benefits to employers in avoidance of unnecessarydisputes, better employee relations and reduced staff turnover. For wider union learning,government support is also part of the adult learning service. Of course unions willalways provide their own support too, but it will never replace government support,which is a tiny fraction of support to business, nor be expected to.

Union learning will always be distinctive. There will always need to be separate centresof expertise within unions on learning, just as on legal or health and safety issues.But there should be fewer complaints in the future that it is treated as a second orderunion activity within unions. Increasingly it is taking its place at the centre of unionaffairs. Different but equal, it will continue to make a major contribution to the centralunion mission of fighting poverty and unfairness; and helping members improvetheir lives.

And finally, there is one further argument in support of union learning. Unions stand for aset of values based on care and respect for people; that society and the economyshould be the servants of the people and not the other way round. Learning does that.It is a profoundly human activity, involving thinking, listening, discussing and collectivelysharing some common learning goals. Learning at the workplace helps humanise theworld of work, it encourages managers to listen to their employees (and vice versa), itprovides a space within which human issues such as different learning styles andinterests can be voiced. It encourages learning for its own sake, a central element inunion learning. In short it helps us create a world where work is enjoyable and fulfillingfor all, not as now, just for the highly educated few.

24

Appendix

An agenda forskills policy

A comprehensive union skills programme(30) might include:

• Make the current £3.5Bn tax relief for employers contingent on raising levels ofparticipation and accreditation so as to ensure government funding supportsadditional training, not that which would have happened anyway

• Extend currently minimal tax relief for individuals e.g. to cover cost of course fees,up to a ceiling of the basic rate of tax

• Require employers to publish basic details of their training investment inAnnual Reports

• Publish (perhaps via the UKCES) an annual equality and diversity report on thedistribution of learning throughout society to highlight where action is needed tohelp disadvantaged groups of actual or potential learners

• Require SSCs as a condition of relicensing and continued government funding, toa) consider further occupational licensing,b) show how they are encouragingemployers to increase investment in “green” skills,c) how they are encouraging a wider sense of entitlement to learning amongemployees, andd) publish and promote a minimum benchmark level of investment for their sectore.g. 2% of paybill

• To recognise both demographic and workforce change, rebalance total governmenteducation and skills spending, over 10 years, from the current ratio of 86% forthose under 25; 11% for the 25 to 50’s; 2.5% for the 50 to 75’s; and 0.5% for theover 75’s to new ratios of 80%/15%/4%/1% - all of this shift could be achievedwithout cutting investment in under 25’s as their numbers will shrink withdemographic change

• Promote an extended entitlement to Level 2 for all, as the minimum needed toensure people can exercise their right to participate in society and work

• Develop a free, universally accessible, Information Advice and Guidance Servicedesigned to help all over 18, which would include signposting to union learningand access to high speed broadband support for e-learning

• Incentivise, via the funding system, further development of a nationwide credittransfer system applicable across FE and HE to increase the variety and flexibilityof ways of building up qualifications for working people

• Develop a system of financial help for learners, perhaps via skills accounts and/orsubsidised loans, available to all learners, including those in FE and studying Part Time,on a comparable basis to student support for HE

• Explore ways of offering further support for union learning, including ways ofencouraging employers who do not recognise unions to consider its benefits

• Use the lever of government procurement to apply good practice in learning, forexample requiring contractors to employ a proportion of apprentices and/orgraduates, reach a minimum of level 2 or CPD for their workforce, or apply the SSCrecommended minimum % investment in training.

25

(30) Some of these ideas are drawn fromWork and Learning Thematic paper no 7from the Inquiry into the Future forLifelong Learning (IFLL), by the authorand Jenny Williams. Available via NIACE.

26

27