Matthew Cain's blog » Labour politics

Where next for Unite the Union?

Matthew — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 08:30:15 +0000

Since I left Unite, the trade union, my blogpost on the subject has become a place for people to exchange opinions about the merits. Some of these comments have been so negative that I’ve had to not publish them although others have been much more positive. Whilst I respect those that have had negative experiences and never wish to have anything to do with trade unions again, I fear it is their loss. There are no other organisations that seek to represent working people like the trade unions. The comments that I’ve found the most inspiring are those that have admonished me for taking my ball home and suggested that I should, instead, engage in doing something to contribute towards a better trade union.

I’m not sure I’m ready to throw myself into active trade unionism, or that most unions can easily accommodate someone who is not from a workplace with a recognition agreement. However, I hope that the observations below may be of some benefit.

Trade unions over promise

Unite has the most compelling list of reasons to join the union I’ve ever seen. Ten Good Reasons to Join Unite is the sort of marketing that I used to wish could be produced. But it massively over-promises. You may earn more if you join Unite, but I reckon that the chances are that you earn more because you are more likely to work for responsible employers. I’m sure you are less likely to be sacked, but every member who is (and there will be lots) will feel considerable pain on reading that claim.

Trade unions under promise

There’s an awful lot of good that a trade union could do. They helped me with public speaking. With understanding how to sit through long meetings. They could have taught me negotiating skills. A better understanding of HR and employment law would be a massive benefit. ‘Join a trade union to get on in your career’: that’s an attractive proposition.

It’s facilitation, not insurance

Lots of comments on my blogpost were from people who felt let down by the union, its reps and its solicitors. Actually their grievance ought to have been with their employer. But the union helped encourage (or didn’t confront) an expectation that the union could sort out your problems. Actually, if the focus was on helping employees represent themselves, the unions would have more resonance in more workplaces. Yet at unitetheunion.org it’s easier to find ways to buy members’ benefits than communities to stimulate solidarity – just the sort of free market attitude that unions oppose.

A lack of grassroots debate?

Depending on your search criteria my blogpost can appear in the top 10 search results for the union. It appears that’s how little people write about the trade union online. The union doesn’t seem to offer any public platform for its members to organise campaigns, chat about workplace experiences or network with each other. That’s extraordinary and must be ripe for change (although there does appear to be an ‘Activist Portal’).

Low awareness of accountability?

Reading through the website it’s very hard to find who works at the union, beyond the general secretary. When people have contacted me reporting problems with union staff, there’s no obvious route through which they can register concerns. There are lots of elections but apparently little awareness of the more mundane procedures by which members can register gripes.

Not all of these observations may be complete, or even fair. But I’ve posted them in an effort to be constructive and learn from the people who’ve shared their experiences of the union with me to discover if these are commonly-held opinions and how we can encourage a more effective trade union. After all, any organisation can only ever be as good as the people that drive it forward.

Minding Labour’s Business

Matthew — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:49:58 +0000

There is no shortage of ideas to help stimulate enterprise in the UK. Only last month David Cameron suggested that empty government office could be rented out to startup businesses. However, as the co-founder of a growing company most of these ideas would have had a marginal impact at best on my company’s success or failure. So I’ve reviewed some of the personal notes I kept as I was setting up the business in order to identify how Labour could better stand for entrepreneurs.

What’s good for Business is not necessarily good for business

Many of the professional organisations that speak on behalf of business are the preserve not of the small startups that the government wishes to encourage but the large or mature businesses who are fighting for their own interests. There’s nothing wrong with that. But the views of the CBI or Richard Branson do not particularly reflect what’s in the best interests of promoting startups. These representatives should be treated with no more or less scepticism than the TUC or the AA.

Often the best business people will have half an eye on what’s bad for the competition when they call for changes to government policy. I was also told by a special adviser that the tax that business people complained about most to Cabinet ministers was the top rate of income tax. If only startups had such things to worry about!

Business doesn’t vote – startups won’t donate

Building a coherent story to support enterprise won’t be easy for the Labour Party. Businesses don’t vote and most startups won’t donate money to the party. I was once fortunate to be invited to Labour’s Thousand Club annual summer party. A Peer and former senior party staffer looked at me with the disdain most reserve for bedroom-based eBay traders when she heard I set up a company. Her mood only shifted when she heard I employed people – as if that was the only measure of success she could understand.

This isn’t natural territory for Labour. That means finding unfamiliar ways to engage with business people – for whom much of politics is equally alien. Entreprenuers don’t like meetings that start late, lack focus and don’t have a clear benefit. Finding activities that can be useful for both parties will not be easy.

So what can Labour do for startups? Here are five modest ideas, intended to help Labour’s Business.

No one got sacked for hiring MIB

‘No one ever got sacked for hiring IBM’: an old adage but absolutely true in my experience. I met many organisations who were very attracted in our ideas but without 2/3 clients and case studies behind us, we were untouchable. Once we had that, we accelerated at great speed. One way of helping organisations reduce the risk aversion to something new would be to provide a ‘Made In Britain’ tax break for any company using services / products from a startup (perhaps within the first 12 months). A 25% tax break would be a significant incentive.

Secondly, stealing an idea from the West Wing, civil servants could be encouraged to spend a day meeting relevant startups with a service to offer. Once we had meetings with the public sector, many civil servants were very amenable. But identifying the right ones required a particular set of skills. And a case study from a government department can be hugely beneficial to get a business moving. Whilst in opposition, why doesn’t Labour publish tenders on its website? Or run a scheme for MPs to volunteer to serve as advisors to startup businesses?VAT free purchases

In the first year (or 2 if you’re unlucky) you will spend more than you earn. And cashflow will be a waking nightmare. Being able to reclaim VAT costs every quarter is painful. Not having to pay them at the start would be a major boost. Giving startups a VAT-free card to reduce B2B costs (web build, computer hardware etc) would free up cash to run the business.

The Child Trust Fund

Financing a business has never been easy but, right now, has rarely been harder. The Child Trust Fund meant that school leavers would have a put of money to invest – ether in HE or, possibly, in starting a business. That would mean fewer bank loans and less reliance on a small pool of hard to reach angel investors. That has to be a good thing.

Good skills

This is a long hard slog; more so than starting a business – probably. Mature businesses may suffer because of small increase to national insurance. For startups, the 12% cost is marginal once we’ve persuaded ourselves that a) we can afford someone else and b) that person isn’t going to absorb so much management time that it holds back the business. That’s about having people who turn up on time. Don’t spend an hour on the phone to friends or checking Facebook. Who do what they’re told and don’t call clients ‘bruv’. It really is that simple, although I have little doubt how difficult it is for government to help achieve this. A small start might be encouraging universities place students in roles with businesses during their degree.

Celebrating failure

Most small businesses fail. Government doesn’t like failure. Better visit ‘success stories’ like Innocent Smoothies or be associated with a Richard Branson than a miserable failure of a business. But most businesses are small nad unglamorous, even if they succeed. But failing can teach you a great deal. And if those lessons can be captured, society is better off. Fewer people make similar mistakes. Government ministers aren’t going to embrace failure in a photo opp. But at the very least remember that a photo opp at the corner shop will likely mean more to more voters in a constituency than a visit to a remote industrial park.

A Progressive Entrepreneurs association

Being ignored could kill Ed Miliband

Matthew — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 07:49:13 +0000

Important parts of the Labour Party are worried about whether Ed Miliband will be left wing enough or right wing enough. It’s the oldest debate in the party so it’s a comfortable one, with the actors playing their usual parts. But the stage has shifted. Labour has no divine right to be heard and this could not be clearer than on social media where Ed Miliband is struggling to be heard by the public.

This isn’t the 1980s where the Labour Party is the political wing of a protest movement which is dominating the public attention. And we’re no longer living in an age where political parties were discussed, voted for and joined as a matter of course.

Actually, Ed Miliband has had worse weeks on social media. People did actually talk about him – for a change. For the first time since the party conference season more people spoke about Ed Miliband than Tony Blair. He even had the highest profile of the shadow cabinet ministers – even if some of this was negative reaction to the disastrous PMQs performance.

But the attention he’s getting is not from anyone who he needs to vote for him, even if Labour is to hold what it’s got at the next election. Seven out of 10 people who talked about Ed were politicos, journalists or news junkies. Miliband is failing to even provoke comment amongst hard working mums on forums, bargain hunters on Moneysavingexpert, TV watchers on DigitalSpy or football fans on leading fans’ forums.

If you measured the sentiment it would be even worse – but there’s little point when the debate is happening between party supporters. It’s like canvassing the canvassers.

The leadership election gave a false impression of Labour’s standing. There was little other political news, the government looked uncertain, the media were obsessed by the fraternal battle and the BBC gave it unjustifiable airtime.

If Ed doesn’t start to define himself, others will. And as the Economist points out he will be positioned with reference to Bob Crow, Vince Cable and Simon Hughes. And that would require a comeback of Istanbul proportions.

Ed Miliband struggles to break through

Matthew — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 10:18:04 +0000

Ed Miliband made his first major contribution since paternity leave – but it failed to capture significant public interest. Whilst this raised his profile to a similar level to that seen during a typical day during the leadership race (around 800 user generated conversations), the total conversation it generated still amounted to fewer comments and conversations than the reaction to Ed Balls’ interview on the Andrew Marr show the previous day. That Miliband generated five times the reaction than the revelations that deputy leader Harriet Harman was involved in the coup to unseat Gordon Brown, should serve as some comfort.

It was always a tough ask for Team Miliband to generate significant interest outside the Labour Party for what amounted to a piece of internal communications (the establishment of a policy review). And indeed, just 49% of those people who tweeted about the interview were from outside the Labour/media nexus. It’s not a story you’d expect to see generate significant interest on Mumsnet.

So what did people talk about? The message of profound change came through strongly. However, once again Mandelson featured more strongly than David Cameron. And the reaction was more clear about what Miliband was not going to do (ride with huskies) than what he might do (keep a higher rate of tax) though doubtless some will be pleased to see socialism feature prominently.

But there’s still a lot to do if Miliband is to engage with wider public – and it’s not immediately clear how the process of a policy review will achieve this. Further radio silence may be the more likely outcome.

Being ignored could kill Ed Miliband

Same Old New Labour

Matthew — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 07:00:16 +0000

There is a deficit in this country. It is big and reducing it is the central challenge of politics. That’s obvious to most people – but apparently not the Labour party.

Trufflenet – the company I founded – has today published an analysis of the debate surrounding the election of the new leader of the Labour Party. As a long serving party member I think its findings are alarming.

The insights that ought to give greatest cause for concern are these:

The relentless focus on personalities and process over policy – whether the deficit, the economy or even public services
The complete absence of a debate about the implications of Gordon Brown’s tenure
The negligible interest amongst the wider public

It was a long campaign that generated almost no greater interest on the last day as it had the first. So contrary to every pundit who predicted that the long campaign would allow for a more reasoned, deep look at the future of Labour party instead emerged a dull campaign that failed to communicate with Labour’s lost voters; one that focussed more on the length of Andy Burnham’s eyelashes than climate change.

Trufflenet worked for David Miliband during parts of the campaign and the data and analysis is drawn from that. For this reason, we may be criticised as having a party political point to make. We don’t. I left active politics to set up my company. Instead I hope that people concentrate on the data and the challenge it presents the party.

So how can Labour move forward? There are three central questions that we face:

1. Can we re-engage with the public without going through a public process of learning the lessons from Gordon Brown’s leadership?

2. Is it possible for any Labour politician to talk about the economy again credibly until the public decide that the Tory plan has not worked (assuming it doesn’t)?

3. Can such a small party, caught in a sandwich between the coalition on the one hand and a (currently) small number of people passionately hostile to the cuts both lead opposition to the coalition without pushing middle England further away?

I don’t know the answers to these – although I’d like to gather the data to track how Labour responds. But I do hope that our report stimulates that debate.