Sorry Bud, my branch will be sticking with Derek.

I suspect both my workplace and many branches will be backing Laurence as a true honest candidate.  I think this is the end of Derek's reign.  By the way I am sorry about that.

It is a time for the centre and left to work together.

Support Laurence.

By the way he has the support of many clp secretaries!

Shows you something!

John

Sorry John, still behind Derek.

And why is that when you are supporting a leftist your positioning of the candidate and the campaign is that this is the time for the left and centre to work together - could this have something to do with the fact that the Left do not have the electoral support to elect one of their own without the help of those who manifestly do not agree with you.

How about trying something radical.  Nominate and support someone from the centre like, hmmm, Derek, and then get both the right and the left to support the centre...just a thought.

I agree with HenryG.

Just look at these three bullet points:

• Its time to move on with building UNITE as a single union for the members.
• We need to support all officers and staff in representing all our members.
• We need to support our members in defending their interests at work.

In my opinion they are rather neutral, catch-all and don't say anything concretely political.

Contrast with that on Derek Simpson's website, who admittedly can refer to action he has taken in post but clearly appeals to members on the basis that he has empowered them since taking office:

• I outlawed ‘sweetheart deals’ – worthless agreements with employers made without reference to the members and signed off by full time officials.
• I instructed that no workplace agreement would be concluded by any officer unless it had the support of the members to whom it applied.
• I slashed the number of officers attending conferences – members would no longer be intimidated into taking decisions but could now debate in a free and open forum.
• I have championed the rights of the industrial sectors to make their own policy on issues affecting themselves.

Laurence has made himself very clear.  He is a progressive.  If the National Amicus Unity Gazette is backing him with many left members, something must be .  Simpson will lose because of the following:-

1) No longer has the support of the National Gazette including some in his own region.  They are backing Laurence

2) Has backed Gordon two many times when he should be asking for concesssions on workers rights as well as trade union legislation and pesnions.

3) He has turned on many his own section of the union - including staff and NEC members

4) He has left the Amicus section of the union severly in debt endangering the merger of the union

5) I sit on many committees on the union and I was one of Dereks' biggest fans and to be truthful until the last twelve months I supported him.  This is until the arguments with woodley which have endangered the merger.

We need a more democratic union that must not let its political unit to be lap a dog of the Government.  We should be a critical friend and demand concessions on future funding for all members

We need elections of full time officials which is democracy.  I could be here all day.

The fact is change is coming and I will make sure that happens.

John Wiseman
Chair
Merseyside Area Committee of Amicus
Director of Amicus Trustee Company
Shop Steward
Parliamentary Panel Member and Labour PPC

John,

Election of full time officials, are you mad?

I spent a few years as the political officer of a major trade union, have worked on the election campaigns of a few trade union general secretaries and I am married to a full time trade union official.  I have also always been a member of a trade union relevant to my job - and Amicus because they were (or a forerunner was) my first union and I have an innate loyalty to them.

So, despite being someone firmly on the new Labour wing of the party I have experience of the union movement and hold its ideals close to my heart, which is the reason that elected officials are such a nonsense idea.

Officials are not political - except in terms of supporting the union's political work - and should not be dragged into the political infighting of the organisation which should be the gambit of lay members.  They are professionals.  They negotiate with employers.  They represent members in tribunals.  They support individual members at their lowest ebbs, deliving some amazing deals for those most in need.  They are members of staff and in their own trade union as members of staff.  To suggest that we should put the professionalism and skills of these staff on the line because they should become involved in the internal politics of the union by standing for election in what will be activist driven elections with woefully low turnout (based on turnouts for national elections) is ridiculous. 

The whole process would be costly in the extreme and would make officials spend most of their time worrying about winning elections so that they can pay their mortgages and buy clothes and food for the kids rather than getting on with the jobs they are paid to do.

And where do we stop.  Should we elect press officers, political officers, assistant regional officer, policy officers, legal officers, office managers, etc.  All of them are professionals.  All of them work on behalf of members, so why differentiate regional officials?

I can think of nothing more likely to destabilise unions and make officers take their eye off the ball with regards to their core task of looking after members and negotiating with employees than having to wonder every five years whether they will get elected again at the behest of the most vocal local activists.

Mad idea and if Laurence is backing this then he does not deserve the votes of anyone who values the work of their regional office team and their full time official.

Dear Proud voting Labour

I have been along time in my union from the AEU days, when officers where elected.  That is why we are going through a vote now.  It is demoracy.  We need change,like what happened in the states but on a smaller scale.  The new labour you are attached to shows that many of our past political officers where the stooges of the right.  I am not.  I stand by my principles and would not sell them out for anybody or anything!

Wiseman 

John,

Well done, you stand by your principles, assuming that means those that actually support the Labour Government somehow do not stand by our principles, but I will let that one lay where it is.

More importantly you have, as do most union activists on the left, a false impression of officers as outlined by your description of them as "political officers".

Regional Officials are not political officers - they are industrial officials, employed to support members, negotiate with employers, provide training and support to lay officers and representatives, and to help build the union through organising and recruitment. 

To see these people's jobs through the filter of "politics", by which you mean internal factionalism and support for the Labour Government, does you no favours and lowers the professionalism of officers down to which side of the internal political divide they sit on.

By the way, how many regional officials does UNITE have these days and how much does an election cost?  TImes the two together and then add the amount of time your salaried officers would spend campaigning for their own jobs and then work out how many recruitment meetings and leaflets you could do; or how many organising events you could run; how much you could spend on education facilities for members.