E-collectivism: On-line action and on-line mobilisation

 

John Hogan and Anne Marie Greene

 

 

John Hogan

School of Management

Royal Holloway

University of London

Egham

Surrey TW20 0EX

john_hogan@talk21.com

 

 

Anne-marie Greene

Industrial Relations and Organisational Behaviour Group

Warwick Business School

University of Warwick

Coventry, CV4 7AL

irobag@wbs.warwick.ac.uk

 


E-collectivism: On-line action and on-line mobilisation

John Hogan and Anne Marie Greene

Abstract

Using a case study web site, this paper illustrates how interactional processes of the Internet have been harnessed by lay trade union activists to both challenge the oligarchic practices of the formal leadership of their trade union and give voice to membership interest groups. Such analysis is situated within a framework of Trade Union Renewal Thesis[1] and Mobilisation Theory.[2] We look specifically at the potential of the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in contributing to increased internal democracy, representativeness and accountability within trade unions, seen as crucial for the interest formation and identity construction necessary for collective action.

Introduction

There can be no doubt that unions have become less powerful and less demonstrably effective both in the workplace and at national level across the world. Commentators within the industrial relations field have debated the constituent parts of a trade union renewal thesis.[3] Renewal thesis strategies can be classified into two main areas (although they are obviously interlinked): the first dealing with recruitment and servicing of members; the second with organising and mobilising. We focus on the latter area of renewal. In addition, there has been some recent attention to the positive role that new Information and Communication Technologies  (ICTs) might play within union activity.[4] However, the role of new ICTs has currently been disattended to in the renewal debate in Britain, and therefore, we situate analysis of the potentialities of the use of ICTs firmly within debates about strategies for union renewal and mobilising collective action.

We begin by synthesising debates around union renewal thesis, arguing that organising and mobilising strategies offer most potential for supporting trade unionism in the 21st century. We then move to discuss current theorising around mobilisation.[5]  We argue that this analysis does not elaborate fully enough on the importance of internal union democracy to the formation of collective interest, nor on the significant role played by ordinary members and lay activists. To illustrate our argument, we offer a detailed exposition of the case of the web site www.rogerlyons.com. Such detail is justified as it stands as one of the most extensive examples of the auditing, archiving and mobilising capacity of a contemporary lay activist web site and has been developed in order to force accountability and democratic processes within a trade union hierarchy.

Trade unions and Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs)

Existing research has pointed to the positive potential offered by new ICTs in terms of aiding organising and organisational effectiveness[6]  and in terms of fostering and enhancing solidarity and collective action.[7] This primarily involves use of the Internet, including such features as e-mail, web sites, chat rooms, bulletin boards, and on-line application and voting mechanisms. We describe such features as e-forms of trade union recruiting, organising, mobilising, and campaigning.[8]  However, research is largely based within the US context and both academics and trade union practitioners in Britain have been slow to respond to the opportunities that Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) afford for organisation and mobilisation both with and beyond sectors and workplaces. In Britain, we lack the quantitative databases providing information about trade union use of ICTs and application on a national basis, such as exists in the US.[9]

Such US research indicates universal use of more basic technologies such as word processing, and very widespread use of Internet and web-based technologies at national union level, with statistical analysis demonstrating (overall qualified and tentative) support for a view of ICTs as enhancing organising and organisational effectiveness. However, similar assumptions cannot be made within the British context without comparable data.[10]

In addition, quantitative data[11] only provides us with a limited picture of the impact of ICTs on trade union activity. For instance, it offers little understanding of the social processes involved in technology use by unions, such as we gain from more qualitative and anecdotal research.[12]  Furthermore, the US quantitative analysis is limited in its exclusive focus on the national union level, rather than also looking at the local and individual level. There is thus a need for much more case study and in depth analysis in the British union context. Elsewhere, we have tried to begin building up a picture of current use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in the British union context, in particular focusing on the potential offered by ICTs, for increasing the transparency and accountability of union officials, mobilising membership activism and extending solidarity across global arenas.[13]  Here, such themes are situated firmly within debates regarding union renewal.

Trade union renewal

There has been a distinct move in recent years, away from renewal strategies based around recruitment and servicing of members (designed to increase membership numbers) towards organising and mobilising members (designed to increase participation and activism of members). This is not least because the servicing strategies of the 1980s and early 1990s appear to have been singularly unsuccessful. Additionally, the underlying assumptions of such strategies have been criticised.[14]  Deficiencies in union recruitment have significant consequences for membership retention and participation, and the reforming of union bargaining agendas. That trade union decision-making structures are unrepresentative of membership diversity is widely recognised[15] by the term ‘democracy deficit’ describing the present situation within most British unions. The low participation of women and minority ethnic union members is particularly highlighted and must be increased if more people from such under-represented groups are to be encouraged to join trade unions. Organising has thus emerged as a strategy of trade union renewal.

First, areas of potential membership, which have traditionally not been unionised should be ‘organised’, either recruiting new members in workplaces or ‘in-fill’ recruitment of those non-members in workplaces with union recognition. The most recent strategies for renewal have focused around the need to develop an ‘organising’ culture within the trade union movement, drawing on similar trends within the trade union movements in the USA and Australia. Such a strategy has been actively promoted by the British TUC with its Organising Academy, opened in 1998.[16]  These organisers have been trained to recruit both in traditional and growth areas of the labour market, and therefore non-standard, women, young, and minority ethnic workers are particular targets. The first batch of academy trainees has only just finished training, and so it is too early to really assess the affects of this particular strategy or of the diffusion of an organising culture throughout the movement.

Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) offer potential benefits within this area of renewal.[17]  In summary, the use of ICTs can overcome difficulties in recruitment involving distance and cost. In particular, agencies and agents who were traditionally separated by the physical barriers of distance are now highly proximate electronically- they are in daily reach and range of one another. In addition, achieving close physical proximity of union representatives to members is very expensive. Electronic forms change recruitment frontiers because they enable organisation on the basis of informal resources, which is less expensive to organise.

In addition, the TUC ‘Organising Academy’ is charged with attempting to organise activism within union membership, in other words to mobilise membership: that is to increase participation and activism of membership within the union and foster the willingness of members to take collective action. There is much debate about whether mobilisation should be encouraged[18] and if it should be, what the strategies are for mobilising union members. Within these debates, mobilisation theory has emerged as a salient tool of analysis.

Mobilisation theory

Mobilisation theory[19] focuses on the social processes of collective action. Notably this involves how interests come to be defined as common or oppositional, the processes by which groups gain the capacity to act collectively, and the organisation and opportunity requirements for collective action. Kelly’s interest in mobilisation theory is in exploring how people come to see their interests as a common concern and generate within a group, a feeling of injustice, which is powerful enough to move an individual reaction or attitude to a collective response. Various elements of relationships and social interactions are seen as important in generating this sense of injustice and persuading people to come together in collective action in the trade union context. In particular, the actions of key union activists or union leaders are seen as crucial in promoting group cohesion and identity, persuading members of the costs and benefits of collective action and defending the collective action taken in the face of counter-mobilisation.[20]

Overall, mobilisation theory is useful in its focus on social processes and in highlighting the multi-faceted nature of participation and activism in trade unions.[21] Mobilisation theory[22] emphasises the need to try and gauge the extent to which members identify with the union organisation and the degree of interaction, or density of social networks amongst members.[23]  However, there are gaps in the analysis. In particular, improving internal union democracy is not specifically mentioned[24] in the context of mobilisation theory. This is even though one might argue that the extent to which someone identifies with a trade union may rest, at least partly, on how far one feels that their interests are represented correctly, and can trust that union leaders act in one’s best interests.

Internal Union Democracy

One of the established pre-requisites of renewal thesis[25] involves the need for union structures and leadership to be more accountable and more representative, with procedures allowing increased member participation in decision-making and policy formulation. There is thus an explicit concern to revive or revitalise the trade union movement by having decision-making bodies that are more representative of membership. There are of course also links here with the recruitment aspects of renewal: notably the concern for union leadership and structures to be more representative of women and minority ethnic members, such that workers from these social groups might be attracted into membership. This is also significant in aiding membership retention, in making union agendas more representative of membership demands, particularly for those segments particularly under-represented.

Research[26] suggests that local union leaders (in our terms not only full time officials but also lay representatives and activists), by their ability to lead in a way that encourages members to become involved and see the collective implications of issues that arise, can build upon surges of membership participation and interest, thus increasing the strength of workplace unionism. A participatory and collectivist style of union leadership would be more representative (demonstrating commitment to the interests which members express), more accountable (consulting and reporting back to membership and adhering to membership decisions), and more involved (drawing members into workplace decision-making).[27]  Such democratic processes could thus challenge the oligarchy of union leadership.[28]  In terms of mobilisation theory, identification with the union, and willingness to take collective action in support of that collective organisation, is thus seen as dependent, at least partly on how accountable, transparent and representative, the leadership of the union is seen to be.

Technological developments may have benefits for unions in this area.[29]  ICTs clearly have the potential to refashion union democracy, reducing the distance between bureaucracy and rank and file that is so harshly criticised. The proximity of union members to local, regional, national and international on-line trade union resources, through ICTs, increases the transparency of the behaviour of union officials to the union membership and enables an independent assessment of performance of officials, in a manner that was never previously possible. E-forms also offer a level of transparency through the use of intelligent auditing and search functions. Such technology is already used by the US electorate and pressure groups in the monitoring of voting records. It could also be used by individual union members or groups of members to muster and manage the performance profiles of key organisational actors and activities, well beyond the traditional surveillance capacity and skills of union membership.

The lay union member

An additional weakness with mobilisation theory, is that there is a lot of emphasis on the role of the union leader and one might question, where does such a viewpoint leave the ordinary lay member? Furthermore, much of the existing research has also looked at the use of ICTs by national union organisations and full time officials.[30]  The old adage that ‘the union is its members’ seems to stand at odds with the dominant debate around the need for union leaders to promote, persuade and transform the interests and identities of members. A different view is to focus on how lay members can play a vital role in defining both substantive issues relevant to the union, and the styles of behaviour that union representatives can adopt.[31]  The relationship between union leaders and lay members is thus seen more as a two way process, where the lay membership are considered as an important constraint on leader action. However it is important that the lay membership have sufficient channels to make themselves heard and force union leaders to be accountable and representative.

It is useful to focus in on the local level of trade union organisations: in terms of activists, those at branch and workplace level, whilst also looking at the participation and involvement of ordinary lay members.[32]  Such local level analysis then begins to draw out the importance of recognising alternative interests and identities of union members,[33] where a variety of different interests and identities are seen as ‘fusing’ with that of workplace-based identity concerns. There is little understanding of how recognition and representation of these wider interests might contribute to the fostering of collective identity and mobilisation of collective action.[34] We argue that trade unions must be seen to offer spaces for the voicing of a variety of interests, and to represent such interests effectively in the name of union democracy (representativeness, accountability, and transparency) if collective mobilisation is possible.

It is interesting to debate how the dispersed methods of communication and information distribution facilitated by new ICTs, might offer benefits in this regard, indeed ICTs are seen as ‘providing a material basis for transforming unions into more ‘discursive’ forms of organisation’ .[35]  ICTs can be used as complementary tools of collective identity to more traditional forms, making it less important to work on a permanent membership basis for many levels of solidarity actions.[36]

In summary, the need for organising and mobilising members has become a prominent part of trade union strategies for renewal. However existing debate and research has neglected to consider three key areas. The first involves the importance of increased internal union democracy as a tool of mobilisation. Secondly, much analysis has disattended to the important role played by lay members and activists outside of the official union leadership hierarchy, exploring the voicing of varied membership interest groups, necessary for the formation of collective interests. Thirdly, there is a little discussion of the potential of new ICTs in these areas of increased union democracy and interest voicing. We use our case study web site as an illustrative example of how the use of ICTs has enabled activists outside of the central union hierarchy to increase the transparency and accountability of their union leaders.

The case of www.rogerlyons.com

Methodology

The case study web site has been created by a lay activist of the British trade union Manufacturing, Science, Finance (MSF). MSF is Britain’s fifth largest trade union with around 420,000 members. Its membership consists largely of professional and skilled workers drawn from both the private and public sectors, thirty-three per cent of which are women, although the leadership remains white and male dominated. At the time of writing, MSF was in negotiations with the AEEU (Amalgamated Electrical and Engineering Union) for a possible merger, a context which holds greater significance in light of events detailed below.

Material for analysis has been gathered largely on the Internet, surveying the official and unofficial web sites associated with MSF. The chronology of events, proceedings of testimonies and internal union interactions were acquired primarily through the web site www.rogerlyons.com. In addition, analysis has been made of popular media coverage of the events. Finally, contact has been made with MSF officials and the manager of the site www.rogerlyons.com. It should be made clear that we are presenting the data as made available in the public domain at the time of writing. We cannot externally corroborate the authenticity or legality of claims made, or of evidence presented in the web sites and public media we have explored. Thus, any assertions made are based on the evidence available within these public domains and are open to interpretation. In addition, the web sites are updated frequently, and we can only verify the content of web sites at the time of writing.

The background to the creation of the web site revolves around a number of recent allegations of abuses of union resources by officers at the apex of MSF, which have begun to reach the public domain through popular media and web site channels. We present the case through four sections. The first provides a chronology of the main relevant events. We then move on to explore how the allegations of misconduct have been processed within the official union organisation. We then offer detailed analysis of the www.rogerlyons.com web site itself, highlighting the way in which the controversies have been appropriated and mobilised within cyberspace. Finally we reflect upon the significance of the site in light of debate around trade union renewal, mobilisation and internal democracy.

Chronology of events

The context under discussion begins in early 1999, when Marcia Solomon, who was formerly employed in the MSF Finance Department as PA to the Head of Finance Nelson Mendes, passed on information gained in the course of her employment about the financial behaviour of the General Secretary Roger Lyons and Mendes to the then Assistant General Secretary, John Chowcat. Lyons and Mendes were accused of petty and major fraud. The alleged major fraud consisted of setting up false bank accounts in the name of non-existent union branches, known as shell accounts, paying union funds into these and then paying it out to Lyons’ and Mendes’ accounts. In addition, Solomon claimed she had seen mention of accounts relating to these two branches in the official accounts for the union, held by the Unity Trust Bank. The petty fraud allegations involved unauthorised loans, bogus expenses claims and misuse of Lyons’ credit card. Amongst the revelations is that Lyons has managed to get the union to pay for household items, quantities of alcohol, and petrol allowance for family holiday. A host of other minor expenses claims have also been revealed, including ‘a claim on his credit card for a 25p bun from Patisserie Valerie in Soho’ (Guardian, May 23, 2000).

This initial ‘whistle-blowing’ disclosure, then set into motion a whole train of events. In particular, the involvement of the Assistant General Secretary, John Chowcat is highlighted, who brought the allegations to the attention of the union hierarchy. Investigations by the MSF General Purposes and Finance Committee, Personnel Manager and MSF accountants, found no evidence to corroborate the allegations made. Chowcatt’s reward for raising concerns was the charge of gross misconduct.  He was accused of promoting the allegations so as to gain factional advantage. The panel selected for the disciplinary proceedings concluded that Chowcat should be dismissed. However, the decision to dismiss Chowcat was not executed. Instead, a “compromise agreement” was reached, an undeclared severance deal that is thought to amount to £250,000, along with pension supplements, in exchange for a silent departure.

After a Certification Officer’s report had been made, vindicating Lyons and Mendes, Solomon decided to declare to the union the full extent of her involvement in providing Chowcat with information. Her testimony at an investigation meeting (reproduced in full at www.rogerlyons.com), chaired by the personnel manager Tony Ayres, on August 26th 1999, at the office of the MSF, reveals that she was alarmed at the failure of the investigations and was concerned that the union address the allegations properly. Solomon repeated the accusations of serious fraud. She also pointed out that another member of staff could corroborate her claim that cheques had been made out to Lyons and Mendes from the fictitious branch accounts. However, the testimony indicates her concerns that union officials did not investigate the validity of her claims, indeed when she challenged Ayres as to what he proposed to do about investigating this other witness:

He simply said that he was investigating the affidavit that I had submitted and that this other staff member had not submitted an affidavit.  That was where it was left.

This appeared to have caused Solomon alarm, for she went on to state:

The fact that Tony was so dismissive of the possible relevance of the evidence from another staff member confirmed to me that they were interested only in finding a way to terminate my employment, not to understand why I had made the disclosure.

What is more, Solomon clearly regarded her position as particularly parlous, given that

No credence was ever given to the fact that all my other allegations of unauthorised loans, unwarranted expense claims and credit card abuse had been substantiated.

Eventually, a disciplinary hearing was convened on December 1st 1999. It was decided that Solomon was to be dismissed. Solomon appealed against the decision within the specified time limits, but the MSF refused to hear her case. In July 2000 Marcia Solomon, backed by her union the GMB, took the MSF to an Employment Tribunal. As she states in her Witness Statement (also reproduced on www.rogerlyons.com):

When I was dismissed, I was told that, by making unsubstantiated allegations about financial impropriety taking place at the highest level within MSF, I had breached the trust and confidence expected of a member of staff and had brought MSF into disrepute. By contrast, I will say that the primary reason for my dismissal was that I had "blown the whistle" on this financial impropriety, specifically because I had alleged it was being perpetrated by Roger Lyons, the General Secretary, and Nelson Mendes, the Head of Finance... In making my disclosure to an appropriate person, the Assistant General Secretary John Chowcat (whose employment has also now terminated), I acted in good faith and without any desire for personal gain.

After four days, the Chair of the Employment Tribunal halted proceedings. It was apparent that MSF could not maintain a credible defence. Instead, on the fifth day, an out of court settlement was announced. According to the Guardian newspaper:

Marcia Solomon…won a £50,000 tax-free payment in a £140,000 out of court settlement... The deal involves the MSF union paying £50,000 plus VAT to cover the legal expenses of the GMB union, which defended its former shop steward. The MSF is also agreeing to take no action against any of its staff who acted as witnesses for Ms Solomon.[37]

However, the case has not ended here. Since the ruling at Solomon’s employment tribunal, MSF has been involved in two other public incidences of what can only be seen as attempts to close down debate about these accusations. This has involved a retirement settlement with a senior official who had threatened to air further accusations at a tribunal,[38] and the case of Roger Lyon’s former chauffeur, who has filed an unfair dismissal suit against the union, due for a hearing in January 2001.[39]

Public press coverage has been particularly derogatory of the conduct of the union. Indeed, such is the depth of the crisis of legitimacy, it has been claimed that the General Secretary of the TUC, John Monks, has advised Roger Lyons to resign. What is more, the press have suggested that during the present run up to the proposed merger between the MSF and the AEEU, the Prime Minister Tony Blair has intervened to insist to Ken Jackson, the general secretary of the latter organisation, that no space be left after merger for Lyons.[40]  The interesting context of events here is that the motivation for such a demand is unlikely to be due to political differences between the Prime Minister and Lyons, indeed the latter has been a consistent loyalist. What is more, the proposed union merger can be regarded as a manoeuvre that will actually increase the weight of Blairism within the trade union movement. Instead, we would argue on the basis of the evidence in the public domain that it appears that the accusations against Lyons are regarded as so serious and damming as to constitute a potentially long-term embarrassment.

Pressure for action upon the MSF leadership has also been expressed by members of the union in the letter pages of the Guardian. Of particular note is the petition posted in the letters page of the paper on July 20th, 2000. Headed by the former Labour MP, Dave Nellist and signed by 133 MSF members, the letter read as follows,

We have followed your articles on our union with horror and regret...There is only one course of action which can restore the union's good name. That is to conduct a new investigation by people with no previous connection with MSF. We call on the MSF executive to arrange for such an investigation to be carried out without delay and to publish the findings in full to MSF members and to the general public. And if it is discovered that wrongdoing has taken place, to ensure the perpetrators are removed from their posts.

Away from the terrain of the mass media, there is considerable evidence that there are significant sections of the union that are not satisfied with the performance of their leadership in relation to the substance and processing of the allegations. Attention has been considerably sharpened by the fact that the union was going through a dramatic financial crisis. It was estimated that MSF was in midst of a financial shortfall of some £3 million.[41]  Activities were threatened with suspension and union staff faced the possibility of redundancy. Yet, the union paid out nearly £1 million in 2000 in pursuing failed legal battles connected with the aftermath of the allegations of corruption. The latter part of 2000 saw a proliferation of motions passed by MSF branches calling for the reopening of investigations into the allegations made by Solomon and others. In addition, eight of the MSF’s fourteen regional councils have demanded that Lyons resign and that the union hold an inquiry.[42]  It has even been claimed that up to 20 MSF full time officials, many of whom are identified as having been traditionally loyal to Lyons, have joined the GMB, the union responsible for representing Solomon. Finally, the Certification Officer has been approached once more and called upon to reinvestigate the accusations of malpractice.

Despite this, the General Secretary continues to assert his innocence and refuses to step down. On August 5th, 2000, Lyons and his allies won a 26-1 vote for a motion that condemned ‘recent misrepresentations in the media’ - and appealed to rank and file critics to give their leader ‘the same right to fair treatment as they would expect themselves’.[43]  However, the campaigns to reopen investigations and force the resignation of the general secretary continue.

The struggle for accountability: The official processing of account

Beyond the events just discussed, critics of Lyons and the leadership of MSF have pointed to a number of incidents that they believe indicate a lack of willingness to investigate allegations thoroughly and reveal marked tendencies towards the suppression of free debate and disclosure. These incidents fall into three areas: attempts to remove dissenting voices, attempts to cover up discrepancies and attempts to shut down discussion.

I) The removal of dissenting voices

Attention has been drawn to the way in which Chowcat was treated. That he alone should be suspended, while the accused should remain at post has been heavily criticised for being inexplicable in terms of due process or fair treatment. It conveys the impression that Chowcat was at fault and that Lyons and Mendes were not.  What is interesting is the consequence of these actions for the management of opinion in the union:

Lyons made good use of the advantage he had achieved, organising a series of meetings for full-time officers and staff round the country. At these meetings he or a close associate briefed the others on the Lyons’ version of events. This was clearly important in influencing the overall response within the union. It is reputed that Mendes also made good use of his time, with reports that he was seen leaving Head Office in the early hours carrying boxes of documents. (MacGrillen, 2000)

ii) Covering up discrepancies

The conduct of the investigations by the union accountants has also been called into question. In short, the objectivity and independence of the investigation is called into question due to the fact that the company has a long history of relations with MSF, which has seen the firm go beyond the provision of accountancy services, with intricate involvement in financial and personnel policy making. So, although the investigation was conducted by a department of the firm with no previous involvement with MSF, the extensive and intensive relationship between the company and union has provoked, in some quarters, serious disquiet about the capacity of the former to impartially judge the behaviour of officials within the latter. That doubt might prevail was given extra impetus when Solomon took the MSF to the Employment Tribunal in July 2000. Her expert witness, a forensic accountant, heavily criticised the accountants’ report, indicating that the investigations had been far from exhaustive or comprehensive.

iii) Shutting down discussion

When dissenters within the union tried to question the process of investigation and discipline, it was made abundantly clear that critical scrutiny was unwelcome. For instance, Hugh MacGillen, the Secretary of the London Regional Council of MSF, wrote on behalf of the London Management Committee, voicing dissatisfaction with the dismissal of John Chowcat and demanding an open investigation of all claims. However the President’s reply does not convey a spirit of open discussion:

I believe that your letter indicates a gross interference in matters concerning relations with MSF employees, officers and staff, and violates their rights to agreed procedures. I shall be referring your letter and its contents to the next NEC meeting for the NEC to consider whether any further action is necessary. [44]

What is more, Cooke subsequently sent two more circulars to branches and Regions strongly advising them not to discuss the matter at all.

Restrictions upon discussion were also experienced at the union’s 1999 Annual Conference. Here is one account of how the leadership processed the issue:

Conference did not discuss the current allegations of corruption in the union after a ruling by the President. The events had generated intense interest in the run-up to Conference. A large number of emergency motions were submitted. When the Standing Orders Committee sifted through these, they declared that only two were in order, from London branches as it happens. But before Conference could decide what it wanted to do with these, the President took matters into his own hands. He made a lengthy statement, as he had previously notified the Conference he would do. The gist of his argument was that the circumstances were governed by Rule 47c) on disciplinary action against full-time officials and it would prejudice the procedures to discuss the matter in Conference. He therefore ruled that no discussion could take place.[45]

The drive to remove Chowcatt and the processing of his departure are also suggestive of a desire to manage and conceal information. A decision had been made to dismiss Chowcatt for “gross misconduct”. Yet, a “compromise agreement” was found that saw the union provide what is widely thought to be generous package of financial benefits in exchange for a muted departure. This course seems contradictory, unless one acknowledges that fear of public disclosure of the allegations weighed more heavily upon the minds of the union leadership than the apparent incompatibility of providing generous financial benefits to an officer who they had claimed was deemed unfit for office.

When members and activists attempted to challenge the secrecy surrounding the terms of the Chowcatt severance deal, it is alleged that their inquiries were simply brushed aside and in some cases met with threats of legal action. One particular incident is worthy of note. An article appeared in the London Region Bulletin of MSF towards the end of 1999, entitled “SCANDAL IN MSF”, which highlighted that allegations of corruption had been made and that a lack of openness prevailed within the union.  Lyons instructed his solicitors to respond. Colin Ettinger of Irwin Mitchell wrote,

"….there is an article called 'Scandal in MSF.' This concerns allegations concerning 'misconduct in MSF over the last several years.' Again this does not relate to local issues or indeed advance the interests and policies of the union...There is an issue relating to the costs of this publication. I would anticipate that the union is already committed into a contract to pay the publication costs and these would have to be met. However, those who may have sanctioned the printing of this journal will have done so beyond their remit. In such circumstances it may well be the case that they should be responsible for any of the publication costs...I would also draw your attention to rules concerning disciplinary action to take against individuals. In particular an individual can be removed from office if they have been found to be 'guilty of defalcation of the union's funds.' Defalcation of course means misappropriation. Payment for a journal/newsletter which has been commissioned in breach of the union rules may well, in my view, amount to such a breach."[46]

Apparently, Roger Lyons read this letter out to the Regional Council.  He also received the support of the NEC in preventing publication of the bulletin.  What is more, it is claimed that the General Secretary went so far as to contact the bulletin printers to tell them that would not be paid for their work.[47]

In many ways Solomon’s Tribunal hearing and the growing interest of the press in the corruption allegations, which accompanied the build up to and aftermath of the case, are thought to be the most significant forces bringing the details of the case to the attention of the MSF membership. Yet, the press was not the only communicative arena in which members of the union have begun to gain greater access to the allegations about the conduct of their leadership. One of the consequences of the Solomon case was to finally to place some core documents in the hands of MSF members. We now move on to look at the way in which the controversies in MSF have been processed on an unofficial web site set up by a lay activist.

Challenge, appropriation and mobilisation in cyberspace: The web site www.rogerlyons.com

This site is at the centre of the cyber campaign against the leadership of MSF and was set up by David Beaumont, a lay activist within the union. He created the site after reading the first Guardian article to expose the allegations:

I was outraged when I read the Guardian article…I only buy the Guardian occasionally, but I use email every day. Other union members would email me newspaper stories as they came out and I began collating links to them. When I had a dozen or so it occurred to me that I could publish them on a web site... The site is there mainly to let people know what is going on by providing links to legal documents, details of Lyons' expenses and newspaper articles. (www.rogerlyons.com)

The main features of the site (at time of writing) are as follows. The home page greets the visitor with a colour cartoon figure of Roger Lyons, a caricature of one of the figures from the TV cartoon series, The Simpsons. Out of the mouth of the figure comes the speech bubble, “Mmmm…buns”, a humorous reference to the claim he made on his credit card for a 25p bun from Patisserie Valerie in Soho. The home page also has graphics of beer, food and hi-fi equipment swirling around the page, present at all times, to remind the reader of the goods and services that the union’s general secretary is suggested to have availed himself of. In order to help assess the readership of the site, and the impact that it has made, there is also a specification of the number of visits that the site has received. In only six months of operating the site claimed over ten thousand hits.

The site also encourages email participation in discussion and opinion polls. Frequently throughout the pages of the site, the reader is invited to email the author to make comments on the site itself or on the issues discussed. There are also invitations to participate in electronic discussions, at one point, readers are invited to write to MPs who are MSF members. A feature that was added in November 2000 is an invitation to the visitor to register an online vote on two key questions. First, ‘Should Roger Lyons resign?’ Second, ‘Do you think that MSF should merge with AEEU?’ In addition, the visitor can inspect how the votes are progressing. On November 20th, the votes in favour of resignation stood at nearly 90%, whilst a similar proportion rejected the proposed merger. Thus, wider issues and concerns are brought into the discussion. Although sight has not been lost of the principal aim: the exposure and removal of Lyons and others implicated in the alleged corruption, it has also begun to widen its remit to provide a critique of the forthcoming proposed merger with the AEEU. To this end, there are links to detailed articles and commentaries that call into question the value of the merger and raise questions about the ways in which the MSF leadership is trying to mobilise and justify support.

One of the site’s principal strengths is in providing a detailed archive of events, associated materials and connected links. Indeed, the chronology of events presented in this paper would have been much more difficult and time-consuming without the resources offered by this site. For example, there is a link to “Roger in the News”. In this section the visitor can see at a glance that the allegations of corruption have featured in at least 27 national newspaper articles in the previous six months. Each of these pieces, bar one, can be viewed electronically, at the click of a button. The stories cover the allegations, the denials by Lyons and other senior figures in MSF, as well as reports about the proceedings and outcome of the various Employment Tribunal cases, along with references to the dissent expressed within sections of the union. As a resource, this centralised referencing, combined with the automated links to the source materials, is highly valuable in providing a means to gain an overview of events at high speed and low cost.

In particular, the site contains a link devoted to the case between Marcia Solomon and MSF. This is an amazingly detailed resource. Here, one can see an affidavit by Solomon, along with a 13,000 word, highly detailed, Witness Statement submitted at the London North Employment Tribunal for her case held in July 2000. There is also the opportunity to read the Aide Memoire provided by Chowcat for the case. In addition, there is a day-by-day account of the tribunal, with accounts of the conduct of witnesses, lawyers and Tribunal members, as well as reports of stories and rumours circulating around the court. Added to this is a further link entitled, “Lyons Defence”. This contains a paper that details a document that was circulated by MSF to the NEC, branch secretaries and delegates to conference. The document is alleged to be the work of the MSF Public Relations Department, although it contains no specification of author. It contains a systematic rebuttal of the accusations made against Lyons. The paper analyses the case for the defence and disputes each point. In addition, there are links to documents that provides lengthy and detailed analysis of the alleged corruption and also provide a precise description of the union general secretary’s expenses.

David Beaumont is clear about the objectives of the site, which can be gained through links to Frequently Asked Questions (FAQS). Analysis of this rationale indicates firstly, concerns of the costs, both financial and in terms of reputation, of the way that the union leadership appeared to be covering up the accusations detailed above:

My ultimate aim is to get rid of what I see as the corruption in this union that oozes from the top down.

Secondly, concerns for the union leadership to be more accountable to and representative of membership views, taking into consideration the participation of lay members are presented:

I would like the union to be more accountable to its lay (unpaid) members. In the rules the Annual Conference of lay members is the supreme governing body of the union, in practice the NEC just ignores or subverts it. The lay members' democracy is constructed into regional councils. By the end of July more than half the Regional Councils had passed motions for Lyons to resign or face a new, independent inquiry. The NEC have refused to print these motions in their minutes, let alone discuss them.

Thirdly, David Beaumont highlights some of the advantages offered by electronic forms of communication, supporting existing research. In particular, speed of dissemination and interaction facilitated by new ICTs is emphasised:

..I find maintaining the web site relatively quick and easy. Email is particularly useful, with 10 minutes work I managed to email every single MSF employee last week and all 79 MSF MPs this week. I just wouldn't consider writing paper letters for that..

At the centre of the message disseminated on the site is a rejection of Roger Lyon’s defence, supported with reference to official and internal documents (also reproduced in full for the visitor). David Beaumont claims to have no party political affiliation. Instead, his activity centres upon the union.

I just want to be a member of an open, democratic and honest union. Is that too much?

Significance of the site

Although the online documentation is significant, there are a number of other features that are particularly noteworthy. Firstly, the site provides space for those who are marginalised within the union. In a sense, the whole theme of the site is that of providing information to, along with a voice for, the blinded and gagged. Secondly, the site demonstrates the capabilities inherent within the new ICTs to allow for the rapid and cheap posting of sophisticated mobilisation materials. On the home page, there was an invitation to “Meet Roger”. On clicking this link, the visitor was notified of a meeting:

Roger Lyons is coming to the Yorkshire and Humberside regional meeting on Saturday 18 November at 10:30 am. in Wakefield Town Hall opposite the Prison. The meeting is open all MSF members. Ask him to autograph your expense claim.

The notice contained a high resolution picture of Lyons, thus making him more readily identifiable, but also it contained a further link to Wakefield Town Hall, which if clicked brought up a detailed Ordinance Survey map, so that all those who might wish to go to the meeting could find the venue more easily.

The site also contains reference to activities that indicate an awareness of the potential for the ‘e-form’ to break through organisational boundaries and to be used as a distinct weapon of insurgency. Here, particular attention needs to be paid to the link, “Staff Edition”, which when opened revealed an emailed memo sent to all MSF staff encouraging them to visit the site. The significance of this communication is that given one can assume access to the at least near complete list of staff email addresses, the campaign to publicise the case against Lyons can reach the target audience in a matter of minutes. Furthermore, the rich content of the emailed memo, with direct hyperlinks to different parts of the www.rogerlyons.com site effectively places an opportunity to view the contents of the web site of the site in every email in-tray.

Discussion and implications

The implications of the www.rogerlyons.com site are hard to measure with precision, especially at this early stage. However, there is little doubt that it is important. It has already received coverage in local and national press, it has been featured in protests organised and reported at this the 2000 TUC conference, and has received a remarkably high number of visits. What is more, it has been reported that MSF have instructed lawyers to take action to close down the site[48] illustrating the significance of the threat that the site is seen to pose. As an aside, it is worth noting that the threat of closing down the www.rogerlyons.com site has already been anticipated and guarded against. Visitors have been warned that the site might not be there when they next log on, but that all they have to do is go to www.notrogerlyons.com, a mirror site where all the materials will be transferred. Given the centrality of forcing greater openness to the site’s campaign, the threat of being banned gives the site even greater cache.

The significance of the debate around this site is that it clearly links into our previous discussions regarding union democracy, voicing of interests and mobilisation of collective action. Arguments about oligarchy, have focused on the way that information can become the exclusive property of a small group of ‘elite’ union officials at the apex of the union hierarchy. The www.rogerlyons.com web site challenges this exclusivity, in a context where there appear to have been official efforts to prevent the disclosure of information and to clamp down on discussion. The web site provides a space for the voicing of grievances and the creative manipulation and presentation of information, which allow people to make up their own minds about the events occurring within their own union domain. It also allows particular events and issues to be linked to wider concerns and interest groups. It demonstrates clearly the way in which ICTs can more easily facilitate the two-way interaction processes within the union hierarchy, with ordinary members and lay activists finding the spaces to make their opinions and views heard amongst a wider audience, cheaply and very quickly.

The documents reproduced on the website are not ordinarily and easily available to the lay member. While some clandestine circulation obviously would, and did occur, this web site places the material within easy access of a much wider audience. We can therefore reiterate our arguments that the proximity of union members to local, regional, national and international on-line trade union resources, through ICTs, increases the transparency of the behaviour of union officials to the union membership and enables an independent assessment of performance of officials, in a manner that was never previously possible. In addition, through a well constructed archive, lay members can trace and track through the unfolding of events; assessing the activities of the leadership over time, and preventing external agencies from breaking their history by disrupting the social relationships which constitute union solidarity. It is as repositories of collective memory that unions can give shape to conceptions of the past, present and future and in doing so construct sustainable worker identity.

What gives the site its greatest meaning is perhaps what it represents in abstraction. It may well be the case that the insurgency fails. After all, the internal machinations of any union, no matter how bizarre or dramatic, will more often than not pass the ordinary member by: it is highly probable that for the time being this drama is one that is going to exercise the passions of only a small group of activists and full-time officials. It is difficult at this early stage to assess what the real impact of the site has been in terms of the playing out of events around the accusations made against Roger Lyons. One may argue for example that events became too serious, and too wide-reaching to be covered up by officials and public coverage was inevitable. Indeed, it must be remembered that the initial impetus for the web site derived from the author reading about details of the case in a national newspaper article. However, the site has had more impact since then, allowing the speedy and most up to date coverage of events, providing a detailed archive and repository of documents and opinion, and providing easy, cheap and fast means of responding and participating in the discussion.

There is little doubt that such cyberspaces will become increasingly important in the future, as Internet use increases and electronic forms of communication become more and more habitual. At this point in time, what the www.rogerlyons.com site indicates is that cyberspace is a place where traditional patterns of cognitive policing cannot be exercised. What is interesting therefore, is that academics and practitioners, in the trade union arena have not really come to fully discuss the implications of new ICT developments for trade union action, particularly at lay activist level. Further research into the use of electronic forms could provide useful spaces for theorising about the nature of collective participation and mobilisation.

 

References

Bacon N. and Storey, J. (1996), ‘Individualism, collectivism and the changing role of trade unions’, in P.Ackers, C. Smith and P. Smith The new workplace and trade unionism, London: Routledge.

Batstone, E., Boraston, I. and Frenkel, S. (1977), Shop Stewards in Action: The Organisation of Work Place Conflict and Accommodation, Basil Blackwell: Oxford.

Beynon, H.  (1973), Working for Ford, Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Black, J., Greene, A.M. and Ackers, P. (1997) ‘Size and Effectiveness: A Case Study of a Small Union’, Industrial Relations Journal, 28, 2, 136-148.

Cockburn, C (1995) ‘Strategies for Gender Democracy’, Brussels: European Commission.

Darlington, R. (1994), The Dynamics of Work Place Unionism: Shop Stewards' Organisation in Three Merseyside Plants, London: Mansell.

Dickens, L (1997) ‘Gender, Race and Employment Equality in Britain: Inadequate Strategies and the Role of Industrial Relations Actors’, Industrial Relations Journal, 28:4, 282-289.

Fairbrother, P. (1989), ‘Work place trade unionism in the 1980's: A process of renewal’, Studies for trade unionists London: Workers Educational Association, Vol. 15, 57.

Fiorito, J. (2000), ‘IT, Union organising and detours along the way’, paper presented at the LSE industrial relations seminar series, November 2000.

Fosh, P. (1993), ‘Membership Participation and Work Place Trade Unionism: The Possibility of Renewal’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Dec, 577-92.

Fosh, P. & Heery, E. (1990), Trade Unions and their Members: Studies in Trade union democracy and Organisation, London: Macmillan.

Gall, G. (1999), ‘The prospects for workplace trade unionism: evaluating Fairbrother’s union renewal thesis’, Capital and Class, 66, 149-157.

Greene, A.M., Hogan, J. and Grieco, M. (2000), ‘E-Collectivism: Emergent Opportunities for Renewal’, in B. Stanford-Smith and P. K. Kidd (eds.), E-Business: Key Applications, Processes and Technologies, 845-853. IOS Press: Omashu.

Heery, E, Simms, M., Delbridge, R, Salmon, J., Simpson, D. (2000), ‘The Organising Academy: An assessment’, Paper presented to the 18th Annual International Labour Process Conference, April, Glasgow.

Hencke, D (2000a) ‘Union pays £140,000 over expenses case’, The Guardian, Saturday July 8.

Hencke, D (2000b) ‘Third tribunal payout gags MSF allegations: Union official drops victimisation case for £200,000 retirement deal.’ The Guardian, Tuesday July 18.

Hencke, D (2000c) ‘Lavish spending union told to make £3m savings’, The Guardian, Friday September 22.

Hencke, D (2000d) ‘No 10 tries to bar Lyons’, The Guardian, Friday September 22.

Hencke, D (2000e)MSF chief in No 10 talks’, The Guardian, Saturday September 2.

Hogan J. and Grieco. M. S. (2000), “Trade Unions on line: technology, transparency and bargaining power”, in M.Donnelly and S. Roberts (eds.), Working together for change, Proceedings of the Second Scottish Trade Union Research Network Conference.

Hyman, R. (1997). ‘The future of employee representation’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 35:3, 309-336.

Hyman, R. (1995), ‘Changing union identities in Europe’, in P. Leisink, J. Van Leemput and J. Vilrokx (eds.) The challenges to trade unions in Europe, Aldershot: Edward Elgar.

Kelly, J. (1998) Rethinking industrial relations: mobilisation, collectivism and long waves, London: Routledge.

Kelly, J. (1996) ‘Union militancy and social partnership’ in P.Ackers, C. Smith and P. Smith The new workplace and trade unionism, London: Routledge.

Labour Research (1998) ‘Are Women out of Proportion?’, March, London: LRD, 12-14.

Lee, E. (1997), The Labour movement and the Internet: the new internationalism, , Pluto Press: London.

Michels, R. (1915) Political parties: A sociological study of oligarchical tendencies in modern democracy’, Glencoe: Free Press.

MacGrillen, H. (2000) Is MSF a corrupt Organisation? http://www.londondefencecampaign.freeserve.co.uk/msfcorrupt.htm

Pliskin N., Romm, C. T., and Markey, R. (1997), ‘E-mail as a weapon in an industrial dispute’, New technology, Work and Employment, 12: 1, 3-12.

Shostak, A. B. (1999), Cyberunion: empowering labor through computer technology, M.E. Sharpe.

Tilly, C. (1978) From mobilization to revolution, New York: Mcgraw Hill.

Waddington, J. & Whitson, C.  (1992), ‘Why Sign Up? New Trade Union Members Reasons for Joining’, IRRR Research Review, 6.

White, M (2000), ‘Union leader apologises for flawed judgement but refuses to quit’, The Guardian, Monday August 7.



[1] Fairbrother, 1989; Gall, 1999; Heery et al, 2000

[2] Kelly, 1998

[3] Notably Peter Fairbrother (1989) and which has also taken up by Fosh (1993), Gall (1999) and Heery et al (2000)

[4] Greene et al, 2000; Hogan and Grieco, 2000; Lee, 1997; Fiorito, 2000; Shostak, 1999; Pliskin et al, 1997

[5] Most recently developed in John Kelly’s (1998) book Rethinking industrial relations: mobilization, collectivism and long waves

[6] Fiorito, 2000; Lee, 1997

[7] Shostak, 1999; Pliskin et al, 1997

[8] Greene et al, 2000

[9] Fiorito, 2000

[10] Lee (1997) offers a useful compendium of the ways in which ICTs might be used as tools of union activity of all kinds, but the analysis is more limited in its theoretical development about the nature of union participation and collective action.

[11] Such as that offered by Fiorito (2000)

[12] Found in Shostak (1999) and Pliskin et al, 1997

[13] Greene et al, 2000; Hogan and Grieco, 2000

[14] See summary in Greene et al, 2000; Waddington and Whitson, 1992; Black et al, 1997

[15] Labour Research, 1998; Dickens, 1997), and Cockburn (1995)

[16] Heery et al, 2000

[17] Greene et al 2000

[18] Bacon and Storey, 1996; Kelly, 1996, 1998

[19] John Kelly (1998) and particularly drawn from Tilly, 1978

[20] Kelly, 1998: 35

[21] See also Fosh, 1993

[22] As espoused by Tilly (1978)

[23] 1998: 37

[24] By Kelly (1998)

[25] See Fairbrother, 1989; Gall, 1999

[26] Fosh’s (1993)

[27] Fosh and Heery, 1990

[28] Michels, 1915

[29] Greene et al, 2000

[30] Fiorito, 2000

[31] Beynon, 1973; Darlington, 1994

[32] Such a local or micro focus is found in the US context in the work of Shostak (1999)

[33] This is a critical point made in John Kelly's final chapter on Postmodernism and the labour movement. It is interesting however, that such arguments come late in the volume and are not directly related to the processes of mobilisation.

[34] Richard Hyman’s analysis (1997; 1995) offers some further elaboration, recognising the way in which collective interests as citizens, as well as more personalised life-style concerns are forming part (or should form part) of trade union representation.

[35] Hyman, 1997: 326

[36] Greene et al, 2000

[37] Hencke 2000a

[38] Hencke, 2000b

[39] Hencke, 2000c

[40] Hencke, 2000d

[41] Hencke, 2000c

[42] Hencke, 2000e

[43] White, 2000

[44] MacGrillen, 2000

[45] MacGrillen, 2000

[46] MacGrillen, 2000

[47] MacGrillen, 2000

[48] Hencke, 2000c