FROM THE ARCHIVES:Amid some public debate in 1953 about the qualifications of trade union officials, The Irish Timespolitical columnist who went under the pseudonym of Aknefton set out to find out what they actually did. – JOE JOYCE
In order to discover the answer to this question, Aknefton has interviewed several trade union officials, and has discovered a common denominator. These men are pragmatists, not perhaps consciously, but in fact. They are conditioned to accept that thought or ideas have value only in terms of action, and that results are the sole test of the truth of one’s beliefs.
When one talks to them about social theory or philosophic concepts, they look a little tired, a little amused. When they were young, they may have believed in this theory or that theory; they may have been socialists or liberals, or conservatives or extreme nationalists, with a view of life which could be neatly packaged and labelled.
After years in the trade union world it was no longer possible to divide ideals or conduct into those neat compartments. These men do not now absorb life; rather they are absorbed by it.
They have conferences with employers in the mornings, they deal with individual members in the afternoons, they have large-scale meetings at night. Far from having an ivory tower into which they can retreat, they would find it difficult to spend 10 minutes in a corner with a book.
They become irritated at the suggestion that they should discuss the philosophic basis of their approach to their job.
They are asked to be part lawyers, part leaders, part father-confessors; they must have a sound knowledge of industrial law, they must be orators of a high standard, and they must have the human touch for each and every one of their members. Without these attributes, they will not get very far. [ . . . ]An employee may be dismissed from his job, and comes in to his union to seek redress. Now, of course, no man is ever sacked for good and justifiable reasons; always he has been “victimised.” Sometimes this is true, sometimes it is not.
If it is true, the trade union official must take up arms on the man’s behalf, and attack the employer with the full weight of the union’s strength. If it is not true, and the man has been negligent, or incompetent, then the only hope is an apology, and an appeal to the clemency of “the boss”.
Have you, gentle reader, ever tried to explain to a worker that he has been justifiably sacked, or tried to explain to an employer that he should give an incompetent worker one more chance? It is not easy, but it is just part of the normal day’s work.
For some reason or other, the trade union official is expected to find houses for his members and their families, pull from under his hat mortality and other benefits for uninsured persons, find jobs for hopelessly inadequate sons, daughters, nephews and nieces, and advise about marital difficulties or the problem of the alcoholic brother.
This goes on all day every day.
http://url.ie/cvci