It would appear that modern-day trade unions are not as vibrant as they were in previous years. There may be several reasons that may account for this state of affairs, which has come with the passage of time. Speculation remains rife that one of the main problems is seemingly the lack of effective leadership. With this as a core problem, it can be surmised that the trade union movement is in a state of crisis.
In past generations, trade unions were known to have benefited from vibrant and focused leadership. Such was the character of trade union leaders, that they commanded the respect not only of their membership, but also that of employers and the political directorate. This is not to suggest that all trade union leaders have run soft, are incapable and incompetent. Truth be told, it is very disconcerting that many of them are often silent on issues which impact on workers and the society in the main. From time immemorial, trade unions were expected to play a pivotal role as watchdogs and guardians within the society, as this pertains to having oversight to social, economic and political policy changes.
What has accounted for the change in vigilance and passion that once loomed large? Is it a loss of enthusiasm and drive on the part of leaders, or is it a lack of interest on the part of the membership that does little to hold the leadership accountable? Those who are myopic in their thinking may tend to see this line of questioning as an attack or affront on trade union leadership. Those who are more objective would more likely be inclined to see the wisdom in this line of thinking.
It is quite possible that trade union leaders, in the main, have not been progressive in their outlook and thinking, and hence they may be accused of being guilty of not adapting well to the changing dynamics of the time. It is quite possible that many have continued to focus primarily on parochial matters. On the other hand, the fact that many continue to adopt outdated approaches and strategies is also a factor which is worth consideration. There is the probability that there is a level of resentment and push back to young workers, whose thinking and ideas are comparatively different. With this clash in the thinking and outlook of the old and new generation, there are likely to be perceived threats. Young people are of the view that those of the older generation should move on, while some of the entrenched leaders don’t appear to see the importance of succession planning.
Where does this leave the labour movement? Is it difficult to understand that there is room at the table for both the old and the young? It seems logical that young people are prepared for the roles that they will undertake. It is a mistake for young persons to think that the best thing is to rid the trade union movement of the older persons, who have amassed a wealth of institutional knowledge and experience. It ought to be an awareness that there is a price to pay for hastiness and ignorance. The bridging of the generational gap is an issue which needs to be addressed, if only for the purpose of helping to erase the notion that the workings of the trade union are not aligned with their values.
Notwithstanding the issue with the involvement of young workers, trade unions also have to work on image building, as they are known to often battle negative public perceptions and stereotypes that portray them as slow, bureaucratic, or self-serving, thus, making it difficult to garner public support and organise new members.
Dennis De Peiza is a Labour & Employee Relations Consultant at the Regional Management Services Inc.
The post The changing outlook of contemporary trade unions appeared first on Barbados Today.
