Branch autonomy

I have been involved with the politics of UK Trade Unions for 25 years now and held several senior positions within NALGO and Unison.

One argument from some quarters is that local branch autonomy should prevail over regional or national control. So there are those who think that a branch with, for example, 3,000 members should be able to determine what they do, when and how often they do it or who they allow to come in. I have never agreed with this and always insisted that an individual branch should be able to determine its own day to day business but the line must be drawn when it comes to following national policies and procedures. A branch with 3,000 members is only as strong as a union with 1.3 million and if they want to change or influence policy they have a perfect opportunity  when national conference takes place to try and do so. There have been many examples when I did not agree with what national conference decided but as  branch Secretary I followed and implemented those decisions.

There are also those who don't like who their regional support officers are and would wish to distance themselves from them. That is a huge mistake and it gives out the wrong signal. Regional staff who are there to do a job should be extensively involved and indeed asked to do the work that they are employed to do and not told not to attend meetings??