1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Why don't all the teaching and Education Unions come together?!

Discussion in 'Workplace dilemmas' started by coldmetal, Jul 2, 2017.

  1. coldmetal

    coldmetal Occasional commenter

    Please just bring them all together and have one strong voice - Call it something like The United Education Union and cover all education related posts from : Teachers to Lecturers, Pastoral carers, classroom assistants, sen's Teaching assistants and start working for a better profession where actual teaching is the priority. Quality not quantity.
    Landofla likes this.
  2. KingShosters

    KingShosters New commenter

    The NUT and ATL are already doing this, starting in September. Whether other unions want to come on board in the future however is for them to decide.
  3. wanet

    wanet Star commenter

    Has been suggested many times, main issue are those leading the unions and the prospect of some nolonger having their well paid jobs.
    sabrinakat, mikecom, Landofla and 2 others like this.
  4. MacGuyver

    MacGuyver Occasional commenter

    @mikecom , do you do any research before posting?

    ATL and NUT have amalgamated to form the National Education Union. The UCU has informally approached them with a view to joining. NASUWT have expressed no desire to amalgamate.
    peggylu, sabrinakat, Moony and 2 others like this.
  5. wanet

    wanet Star commenter

    Yes, my comment was aimed at NAS and NUT combining.
  6. BillyBobJoe

    BillyBobJoe Established commenter

    UCU and NUT already have a reciprocal arrangement for members crossing between sectors, so a merger would not be hard.

    The problem is going to come over industrial action. It's going to be hard to take meaningful action given the diverse range of views in the profession. Of course, one wonders why those who daren't ever take action are in any union other than Voice, but they are so everyone else has to deal with them.
  7. lizziescat

    lizziescat Star commenter

    I think the problem is tha apathy of the members. Only 25% of NUT/ATL bothered to vote either for or against mergers. So if the membership aren't bothered......
  8. coldmetal

    coldmetal Occasional commenter

    I agree - one of the things i found out over the years is the first priority of the union is the the union and the 2n
    d priority is the union reps and third is the members.
  9. theworm123

    theworm123 Lead commenter

    I have misgivings when it comes to mergers, similar to when the smaller regional exam boards merged to form AQA, OCR etc. Of course a union can't really have a monopoly, but say a single massive union was to take a pro D of E position on a piece of controversial legislation which is against the best interests of their members, there is no union of significant size to speak out against the D of E.

    Although a merged union may be able to flex it's muscle better, not everybody is going to agree on every issue. Just like if a member of the former NUT didn't agree with their position on a policy, they could jump to NASWUT or vice versa.
  10. CuriousTurtle

    CuriousTurtle Occasional commenter

    I'm a member of the ATL, and I didn't vote in the merger vote. The main reason I didn't vote was because I didn't feel I could make an informed decision because of all the pro merger literature I was getting, with absolutely no mention anywhere I could find of any downsides. Now I may be being cynical, but if there were not drawbacks to such a merge, then surely they would have done it years ago.
  11. 50sman

    50sman Lead commenter

    Back in the 1980s when I started teaching we had industrial action AMMA (now ATL) refused to goon strike because doing so would harm the children. A few years ago NAS and NUT went on strike over pensions - most of their younger members went to work because they didn't want to lose a day's pay. The point is that there is little point even having one union if the members do not want to take industrial action - we are no threat and everyone (gov't SLT MATs) know this
  12. mrajlong

    mrajlong Established commenter

    Sounds painful!
  13. ThereAreBunniesInMyHead

    ThereAreBunniesInMyHead Occasional commenter

    I decided not to strike a few years back. Not because I didn't passionately believe in what the unions were fighting for. But like you say, I couldn't lose a day's pay. It might seem petty to some, but my income pays all the bills and rent and food and we struggle a LOT for money. If my pay cheque ends up being £100 lighter one month, we end up missing payments and putting things on credit cards. I'd often like to strike / show my support but financially my hands are tied.
    mrajlong likes this.

Share This Page