Trade Union Members’ Participation at Branch and Regional Levels: A Comparison of Women and Men in UNISON

Abstract

Based on a questionnaire survey of members of the UK public sector trade union UNISON, this article examines factors that influence the ability and willingness of trade union members to take on unpaid roles at the level of the branch and region. The article compares the experiences and views of men and women in relation to potential barriers to union participation. Participation at both branch and regional levels is found to be associated with collective orientations and the extent to which members feel encouraged by UNISON to become active within the union. The findings point to the importance of union efforts to encourage members to take on lay representative roles and participate in union governance.

Keywords

activism participation trade unions UNISON

Introduction

The extent to which trade union members become involved in union activities at and beyond the level of the workplace or branch is an abiding concern of trade unions and industrial relations researchers. Until the 1980s, much research on participation focused on issues related to ‘union democracy’ and the relationship between union leaders and rank-and-file members (see e.g. Fairbrother, 1984; Hyman, 1979). More recently, membership losses and the weakened state of the union movement have encouraged researchers to consider the potential contribution of workplace activism to trade union renewal (Kelly, 1998; Sayce et al., 2006). Attention has also focused on the extent to which trade unions represent the interests of all sections of their membership and provide them with opportunities to participate in union decision-making structures (Colgan, 1999; Kirton and Greene, 2002).

Participation can take many forms. Fosh (1993) distinguished between ‘formal’ participation, which encompasses attending union meetings and voting in elections, and ‘informal participation’, which may include reading union literature and interacting with workplace representatives. Kelly and Kelly (1994), by contrast, consider the ‘ease’ of participation, distinguishing between forms of participation that require relatively little effort on the part of members, such as voting or attending meetings, and those that are more demanding, such as taking on a union role. The ‘ease’ with which union members can participate in the activities of their union may be influenced by employment-related factors, such as their hours of work (Greene and Kirton, 2003). The extent of involvement is also influenced by members’ perceptions of their trade union, for example, the degree to which they feel that their union promotes their interests, encourages them to take part in union activities and provides them with opportunities to voice their opinions (Metochi, 2002; Tetrick et al., 2007). However, as studies of trade unions in various countries, including the UK, Australia, Canada, India, Italy and Sweden (see contributions to Colgan and Ledwith, 2007a), have shown, unions shape opportunities for participation in ways that have often disadvantaged women relative to men, resulting in an under-representation of women’s concerns and limiting the extent to which women take on paid and unpaid trade union roles.

This article focuses on the last of these issues and provides an examination of gender-related differences in the willingness and ability of union members to take on unpaid union roles at both branch and regional levels. Involvement in regional-level forums has tended to be overlooked in the literature on members’ participation in trade union activities. However, in many countries, regional forums play an important role in union governance, providing a crucial link between national and branch levels. In the UK, they help to implement national union policies within regions, provide support to branches and coordinate inter-branch activities. They also provide union members with opportunities to debate and vote on motions from branches, influence regional policies and campaigns, share information, and consider issues affecting particular union branches, industries or sections of a union’s membership. In principle, therefore, regional forums provide trade union members with important opportunities for self-governance. Nevertheless, evidence from the UK (Colgan and Ledwith, 2007b), as well as from countries such as Germany (Koch-Baumgarten, 2007) and South Africa (Tshoaedi, 2007), suggests that women continue to face difficulties in ensuring that they are adequately represented at the regional level.

This article, which is based on findings derived from a survey of members of the UK public sector trade union UNISON, aims to address the relative neglect of regional-level participation in general, and women’s participation at this level in particular. The article begins by examining potential influences on the ability and propensity of trade union members to participate in union activities. This is followed by a description of the research methods, which consisted of a questionnaire survey of UNISON members. The article then goes on to explore barriers to regional-level participation, as perceived by UNISON members. Logistic regression is used to examine the characteristics and attitudes of regional delegates and the extent to which they differ from those of members whose representative role is limited to the branch level and rank-and-file members with no union role. The article’s penultimate section explores delegates’ experiences of regional forums. Potential differences in the experiences of men and women members are considered throughout the article.

Participating in Trade Union Activities

Many researchers have argued that union members’ willingness to participate in union activities is positively associated with the extent to which they identify with their union and its goals and the extent to which they possess a ‘collectivist orientation’, as measured by their enthusiasm for collective forms of representation and action as means of resolving problems at work (Child et al., 1973; Thacker et al., 1990). Examining evidence for blue-collar workers in the US, Fullager and Barling (1989) argued that participation was influenced by the extent to which members felt a sense of loyalty to their union, and that loyalty was itself related to (among other things) job dissatisfaction, low job involvement and early socialization experiences in unions, mediated by perceptions of union instrumentality (the benefits that unions might achieve for their members).

Other studies have suggested that union members’ attitudes towards managers may also influence their propensity to participate in union activities. Kelly and Kelly (1994), for example, found that participation was associated with the extent to which members perceived management in stereotypical ‘them and us’ terms. Drawing on John Kelly’s (1998) subsequent application of mobilization theory to industrial relations, Johnson and Jarley (2004) provide empirical support for the idea that participation is influenced by perceived injustices associated with managerial actions. They also found that participation was influenced by members’ perceptions of ‘union justice’ (e.g. the extent to which members believe a union’s procedures are characterized by fairness, transparency and integrity). Trade unions may, of course, play an important role in shaping the attitudes of their members (Fosh, 1993). Metochi (2002: 102) has argued that union ‘leaders’, by providing information and advice and consulting members, can ‘serve to crystallize members’ perceptions of the union as an organization, and of the extent to which the organization values and supports its membership’. Positive perceptions of union support may in turn encourage members to become more active. Similarly, Tetrick et al. (2007) suggest that shop stewards can help to build ‘strong social exchange relationships’ with members and thereby encourage them to participate.

Decisions relating to trade union membership and participation continue to be conditioned by the division of domestic labour and by the employment situations into which men and women enter. Women account for a substantial majority of part-time employees in the UK and the decision to work part time is often the product of a constrained choice (Gregory and Milner, 2009). However, part-time workers appear to be less likely than full-time workers to join a trade union (Hicks, 2002). Possible reasons for the difference include restricted opportunities to form contacts with the local union, a perception that trade unions pay insufficient attention to the interests of part-time employees and inadequate organizing efforts on the part of unions (Tomlinson, 2005; Walters, 2002). Gender-related differences among trade union members are also apparent. The typically disproportionate share of ‘domestic responsibilities’ shouldered by women has served to limit their ability to participate in trade union activities and serve aslay representatives or paid officials, and created additional pressures for those who do take on these roles (Kirton, 2005; Sinclair, 1996). The constraining effects of the gendered division of domestic care responsibilities are, of course, not limited to the UK. Benson and Griffin’s (1988) study of the Municipal Officers Association (MOA) showed how family responsibilities served to limit the ability of Australian women to take on union roles.

The difficulties that some women experience in finding time for union activities may be compounded by problems associated with male dominance of trade union decision-making structures, including experiences of sexism and a perception that potential opportunities for involvement (e.g. branch meetings) are not women-friendly (Dorgan and Grieco, 1993; Kirton and Healy, 1999). Women trade union activists have attempted to address these difficulties in a variety of ways, including self-organization and the creation of separate, semi-autonomous structures of representation. In countries including the UK and Canada, various types of ‘women’s groups’, including committees, conferences and courses, have been created with the objectives of strengthening the voice of women trade unionists and increasing their involvement in union decision-making structures (see Briskin, 2007; Parker, 2003, 2009). In addition, trade unions have sought to increase women’s involvement in union governance by establishing proportionality rules and reserved seats for women on national executive committees and at national conferences.

The UK trade union UNISON, which provides the focus for this article, has been at the forefront of attempts to improve the representation and involvement of women trade union members in union governance. UNISON was created as a result of a merger of three public sector trade unions: the National Union of Public Employees (NUPE), the National and Local Government Officers Association (NALGO) and the Confederation of Health Service Employees (COHSE). Prior to the merger, both COHSE and NUPE had taken steps to encourage greater representation of women at regional and national levels, while NALGO had encouraged ‘self-organization’ on the part of black members, members with disabilities and gay and lesbian members (McBride, 2001). These initiatives were built upon once UNISON was formed. UNISON members are allocated to ‘service groups’, which relate to the key industries and occupations in which they are employed (e.g. healthcare, education, local government). The creation of service groups reflected COHSE’s concern that its members’ interests should continue to receive adequate representation once it had merged with the two larger unions (McBride, 2001: 38). The ‘service’ and ‘self-organized’ groups, which include groups for women, disabled, black and lesbian and gay members, are supposed to ensure that the union’s governance arrangements conform to principles of ‘proportionality’ and ‘fair representation’. This means that the representation of men and women at branch, regional and national levels should reflect the composition of the union’s membership in respect of gender, occupation, sexuality, race and disability. In practice, however, the principles of proportionality and fair representation have encountered opposition at branch and regional levels and women have remained under-represented at national conferences and among the union’s officers (Colgan and Ledwith, 2007b: 165, 168–170).

The union’s key regional forums are the Regional Councils and the Regional Committees. Regional Councils, which are composed of delegates elected by branches, have the power to make policy at the regional level. They meet annually to debate motions from branches and Regional Committees. Regional Committees exercise the functions of the Regional Councils between their meetings and meet at least quarterly. Their membership includes representatives from self-organized groups and service groups, which have their own Regional Committees (the regional bodies thus, in principle, cover all sections of UNISON’s membership). However, representation of women and other self-organized constituencies on the main regional bodies varies considerably and, in many cases, fails to conform to the principle of proportionality (Colgan and Ledwith, 2007b: 176). Poor attendance at regional meetings has also been identified as a problem. McBride’s (2001) study of UNISON identified a number of factors that have contributed towards low attendance rates. Some delegates experienced difficulty in securing time off for meetings or had to deal with more pressing issues within their branches. McBride also found that regional meetings often served as a reporting mechanism, leaving little time for debate or decision-making.

The principal aim of the present study is to explore factors associated with the relative willingness and ability of UNISON’s men and women members to take on roles within branches and regional-level bodies. While few, if any, studies to date have examined determinants of involvement in regional bodies, some have explored predictors of members’ willingness to take on lay representative roles within the branch, act as delegates or engage in other relatively demanding forms of participation (Bartram et al., 2010; Kelly and Kelly, 1994). These studies have highlighted the importance of members’ attitudes, such as the strength of their identification with their union and the extent to which they have a collectivist orientation, as explanatory factors. While this article is primarily concerned with the relationship between gender and participation, the analysis that follows will include an examination of members’ attitudes and the extent to which they serve as predictors of participation.

Research Methods

UNISON, which has approximately 1.3 million members, is the UK’s largest public sector trade union and the second-largest trade union overall. The research on which this article is based derives from a research project that was commissioned by the regional head office of the Yorkshire and Humberside region of UNISON in reaction to concerns relating to persistently low levels of attendance at regional meetings. The project’s focus was subsequently expanded to include an examination of members’ attitudes and participation at branch level. The findings are derived from two postal questionnaire surveys of UNISON members in the Yorkshire and Humberside region. The surveys were conducted during late 2004 and early 2005, although the issues that they addressed remain matters of concern to UNISON and to other trade unions in the UK and overseas (Colgan and Ledwith, 2007a). The first survey was based on a random sample of 5% of UNISON’s members in the region, excluding current delegates to regional bodies. The sample was generated by UNISON using their membership records. A total of 7556 questionnaires were distributed and 849 responses were received, giving a response rate of a little over 11%. Of the 849 respondents, 14 (eight men, six women) claimed to have had experience of being a delegate. However, it was not possible to discover whether they were delegates at the time the survey took place and their responses were therefore excluded from the analysis. A further four respondents were no longer UNISON members and they were also excluded. The size of the adjusted sample of non-delegates was therefore 831. The second questionnaire was simultaneously sent to all 598 members who appeared on UNISON’s records as delegates to UNISON’s regional bodies. A total of 91 usable responses to this survey were received (a response rate of 15%).

The self-completion questionnaires consisted of five sections. The first section asked members to provide information about branch activities and the second section asked about their participation in various union activities. Delegates to regional bodies were asked about their experiences of being a delegate. Those members who had never been a delegate were asked to provide reasons. The third section of the questionnaire asked about members’ workloads while the fourth section was concerned with members’ experiences of, and views about, managers and trade unions. The final section collected information about members’ age, gender and hours of work. The specific measures employed are described in the findings sections.

Response rates to both surveys were low, which presents a potential threat to the representativeness of the findings. However, it was possible to compare the sample to the population from which it was drawn (i.e. UNISON members in the region), at least in terms of gender composition. Women accounted for 72% of UNISON’s members in the region, yet only 63% of the survey respondents were women. The data were therefore weighted so as to correct for non-response bias.

Yorkshire and Humberside is one of the largest of all UNISON regions in terms of membership, although it is typical in terms of the occupations that it covers and the gender composition of its membership.¹ However, there is no reason to assume that the findings can be generalized to other trade unions. Unions differ in terms of their rules, systems of governance, structures of representation, occupational coverage and the gender composition of their memberships. UNISON is an exceptionally large union, it organizes in the public sector and three-quarters of its members are women – a proportion that exceeds that of almost all other UK trade unions (Daniels and McIlroy, 2009: 138). However, UNISON has been an innovator in terms of its efforts to improve the representation of women and other potentially disadvantaged groups and, as Colgan and Ledwith (2007b: 181) note, it ‘has been seen by other unions in the UK and abroad as a leader in its innovative, tri-partite equality constitution’. It is this ‘exemplar’ status that justifies its selection as a case study.

Influences on Participation

The questionnaire allowed for the factors that may influence the ability and propensity of members to become a UNISON representative to be explored in two ways. One set of questions asked members who had not served on a regional body to provide reasons for their non-participation, while other questions allowed for the characteristics and attitudes of delegates and non-delegates to be compared.

The three most common reasons given by non-delegates when asked to explain their non-participation in regional bodies were that they had never considered being a delegate (66%), had commitments outside of work (63%) and had never been approached to be a delegate (59%). Substantial proportions of respondents also identified constraints associated with their work commitments and their employer: 43% indicated that their job left them with insufficient time to participate and 17% said that their employer would not allow them time off work. The latter problem was experienced disproportionately by members working in schools and the National Health Service (NHS), and therefore had particular implications for women members, 26% of whom worked in schools compared to only 6% of men. In the case of the NHS, the proportions were 22% and 14.5%, respectively.

The findings reported in Table 1 indicate a number of differences in the reasons that men and women gave for not having sought to become a delegate. Among the most notable differences are the substantially larger proportions of women than men citing a lack of confidence, a lack of interest in becoming more involved in union activities and a lack of knowledge about what being a delegate would involve. In each of these cases, the difference was statistically significant when measured by a chi-square test. Gender differences did not extend to time constraints: the proportions of men and women indicating that they had too many commitments outside of work, that they would not be able to take time off work and that their job did not leave them with sufficient time to act as a delegate were similar. It should be noted, however, that the question relating to commitments outside of work did not focus solely on domestic commitments and, as such, it should not be inferred that domestic commitments constrained men and women equally.

Table 1

Reasons for not seeking to become a regional delegate by gender

	Gender	Reasons for not seeking to become a regional delegate		Most important reason for not seeking to become a regional delegate
		Yes %	χ²	Yes %	χ²
I have not been approached	Men	63	3.19	10	9.22**
I have not been approached	Women	57		5
I have never considered it	Men	62	3.40	8	.11
I have never considered it	Women	69		7
My job does not leave me with sufficient time	Men	44	.11	8	.25
My job does not leave me with sufficient time	Women	42		7
I do not wish to become more involved in union activities	Men	45	10.40***	22	.29
I do not wish to become more involved in union activities	Women	58		24
I do not know what being a delegate would involve	Men	38	8.27**	6	.00
I do not know what being a delegate would involve	Women	50		6
My employer would not approve	Men	6	.10	1	1.06
My employer would not approve	Women	6		2
I would not be able to get time off work	Men	14	1.84	2	.08
I would not be able to get time off work	Women	18		2
I have too many commitments outside of work (e.g. family)	Men	59	2.35	31	.67
I have too many commitments outside of work (e.g. family)	Women	65		34
Issues discussed on regional bodies are not directly relevant to me	Men	9	.04	1	.54
	Women	9		2
I would not feel confident about participating at this level	Men	28	30.66***	9	.74
	Women	50		11
Other reason(s)	Men	5	1.51	3	1.08
Other reason(s)	Women	3		2

Notes: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; p < 0.00.

Non-delegates were also asked to indicate the most important reason for their non-participation in regional forums. The responses and accompanying chi-square test statistics reported in Table 1 suggest that there were few substantial differences in the views of men and women in this regard. For both men and women, ‘commitments outside of work’ was the reason most frequently identified as being ‘most important’, followed by disinclination to become more involved in union activities. Approximately one-tenth of both the men and women non-delegates gave ‘lack of confidence’ as their most important reason. A further 10% of the men non-delegates identified ‘never having been approached’ as the most important reason for not having been a delegate. The proportion of women non-delegates who viewed this as the most important reason was considerably lower (5%).

The average number of hours worked in paid employment (including paid and unpaid overtime) by delegates was 39.6, compared to 35.1 in the case of non-delegates. Part-time workers (defined in this research as those contracted to work fewer than 30 hours per week) were more likely than equivalent full-time workers to identify time constraints as a barrier to participation in regional bodies. Of part-time workers, 44% said that ‘commitments outside of work’ was the single most important reason for not becoming involved in regional forums, compared to 31% of full-time workers (χ²= 7.24; p < .01). This finding indicates a gender-related constraint, given that women were far more likely than men to work part time. Of the women ‘non-delegates’, 31% were employed on a part-time basis, compared to only 4% of the non-delegates who were men. Expressed differently, women accounted for 93% of all those in part-time employment.

The findings thus far suggest that time commitments in and outside of paid employment can constrain participation in union activities and that the nature of these constraints may differ for women and men. A lack of interest in becoming further involved in the activities of the union also appears to be significant, a finding that points to the importance of attitudes and orientations in explaining participation in union activities. The determinants of participation in regional bodies were probed further using multinomial logistic regression, a method of statistical analysis that is used to predict membership of more than two categories (Field, 2009). The following analysis explores the relative importance of objective characteristics and attitudes as predictors of the likelihood that members will become involved in regional or branch activities. It includes the following measures.

Union Role

The dependent variable for this part of the analysis is ‘union role’. Both survey questionnaires asked members to indicate whether they held a position within their branch (e.g. shop steward, branch official). Excluding retired members, only four of the regional delegates did not also hold a position within their branch. These individuals were excluded from the analysis, along with the retired members. The ‘dependent variable’ thus consists of three potential outcome categories: first, members who did not have a position within the union; second, members who held a position within their branch but did not serve as a regional delegate; and third, members who both had a branch role and were delegates to a regional forum. In the analysis that follows, members in the first group (those with no role, coded 3) are compared with those in the two remaining categories (coded 1 and 2, respectively).

Hours of Work

Given evidence that full-time workers are more likely than part-time workers to join and participate in trade unions, it was hypothesized that working full time would be associated with an increased likelihood that members would take on a union role. Respondents were asked to supply information about the average number of hours that they worked each week. The model compares those who worked over 30 hours per week (full time, coded 0) with those working up to 30 hours (part time, coded 1).

Work Pressures

Many workers have experienced an intensification of their workloads, a process that in the UK has disproportionately affected women workers (Green, 2001: 66–70). At least one study has found that increased work pressure has resulted in workplace representatives finding it more difficult to carry out their union responsibilities (Upchurch et al., 2002). The present study set out to test the hypothesis that greater work pressure would be associated with a lower likelihood that members would take on unpaid union roles. The questionnaire therefore included five questions relating to pressures of work and work–life balance. Some of these questions were based on those used in Hyman et al.’s (2003) study of work–life balance and asked members to indicate the extent to which they agreed with statements such as ‘My job often leaves me feeling tired or exhausted’, ‘The amount of work I have to do has increased over the past 12 months’ and ‘I often have to take work home with me’. Perceptions were measured using a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 = ‘strongly disagree’ to 7 = ‘strongly agree’. Following a factor analysis, the responses were combined into a single scale measuring work pressure (α = .78).

Attitudes

Previous studies (Bartram et al., 2010; Kelly and Kelly, 1994) have found that ‘difficult’ forms of participation, such as holding a union position, are associated with the possession of specific attitudes on the part of union members. In this study, it was hypothesized that union role-holders would be less likely than rank-and-file members to have an individualistic orientation to workplace relations and to place trust in managers. Members were asked a number of questions about their attitudes towards management and trade unions. Some of these were adapted from Kelly and Kelly (1994) (e.g. ‘At the end of the day, the only person who really matters at work is yourself ’, ‘Improvements in terms and conditions can only be won by employees standing together’). Responses were measured using seven-point Likert scales, ranging from 1 = ‘strongly disagree’ to 7 = ‘strongly agree’. A subsequent factor analysis (principal components with varimax) suggested that the items formed three factors, as shown in Table 2. The first three items provide a measure of members’ trust in management (α = .78). The second group (items 5, 6, 7, 8) provide an indication of the extent to which members have an individualistic (or collectivist) orientation. The reliability score of the resulting scale is .59 and is thus below the conventionally acceptable minimum value of .7. However, some have argued that Cronbach’s alpha scores below 0.7 can be acceptable, particularly where the number of items that form a scale is small (as in this case) or scales are newly developed (Nunnally, 1978). The factor has therefore been retained, although it should be treated with caution. However, the reliability score for the third group of items (α = .419) is too low to allow for the scale to be included. The scores from the items loading onto the first two factors were aggregated and included in the logistic regression analysis that follows.

Table 2

Rotated component matrix

	Component
	1	2	3
1 Managers at my workplace always treat staff fairly.	.846
2 Managers are sufficiently concerned about the needs of employees.	.837
3 Managers would treat staff fairly if a trade union was not present.	.687
4 I feel my trade union has too little influence over my employer.	€−.474
5 Managers should be free to manage without being influenced by trade unions.		.444
6 The only reason for joining a union is the help you can receive as an individual.		.748
7 At the end of the day, the only person who really matters at work is yourself.		.656
8 It does not bother me that some colleagues choose not to join the union.		.480
9 Trade unions and managers should work closely together as partners.			.751
10 Improvements in terms and conditions can only be won by employees standing together.			.711
11 I would always join a union no matter where I worked.			.490

Encouragement

It was hypothesized that members would be more likely to take on a union role where they felt encouraged to participate. Members were asked to indicate the extent to which they felt that the union encouraged them to become involved in its activities. Views were measured using a single seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 = ‘strongly disagree’ to 7 = ‘strongly agree’.

Union Efforts

Lack of participation does not necessarily signify that members are dissatisfied with their union (Child et al., 1973). On the other hand, ‘instrumentality’ (the extent to which a trade union is regarded as delivering improvements to workers’ pay and conditions) is widely regarded as a predictor of participation (e.g. Tetrick et al., 2007). This study tests the hypothesis that the likelihood of taking on a union role is positively associated with members having a positive opinion of the union’s efforts on their behalf. Members were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed with two statements: ‘My union works hard to win improvements to my pay and conditions’ and ‘My union succeeds in winning improvements to my pay and conditions.’ Views were measured using a single seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 = ‘strongly disagree’ to 7 = ‘strongly agree’. Responses were aggregated to form a single measure. The mean value of this variable is reported in Table 3, along with the means of the other Likert scale items.

Table 3

Mean scores (standard deviations in parentheses)

	Delegate and branch role	Branch role only	No role
Work pressure	25.8 (6.41)	20.8 (6.3)	21.45 (6.99)
Trust in management	7.87 (3.98)	10.5 (4.35)	10.71 (4.69)
Individualism	8.38 (4.08)	11.58 (5.44)	14.12 (4.89)
Union efforts	10.25 (3.03)	9.78 (2.85)	8.58 (3.23)
Encouragement	5.69 (1.31)	4.72 (1.57)	3.68 (1.81)

Age

The decline in union membership has been particularly marked among young people and at least one study has found that the age distribution of workplace representatives is skewed towards those aged above 40 years (Upchurch et al., 2002). The present study therefore tests the hypothesis that older workers are more likely than younger workers to take on union roles. Age was measured using an ordinal variable with six categories (e.g. 16–20, 21–30 … over 60). For the purposes of the model, responses were subsequently recoded (0) for ages up to 40 years and (1) for 40 years and over.

Gender

The gender variable was coded male (0) and female (1). The independent variables were entered into the model using a forced entry method. Table 4 shows the value of the regression coefficient (B), standard error (SE) and odds ratio for each of the independent variables. The analysis suggests that some variables are common predictors for both branch-only and dual (branch and regional-level) role-holding. The extent to which members felt encouraged by UNISON to become involved in the union’s activities was a positive and statistically significant predictor of both forms of participation. ‘Individualistic orientation’ had a negative and statistically significant association with both forms of participation (i.e. higher scores on the ‘individualistic orientation’ measure were associated with a lower likelihood of participation). By contrast, some variables were found to have no bearing on either form of participation. Neither age nor members’ evaluations of the union’s efforts had any statistically significant predictive power. The results relating to gender suggest that women were more likely than men to have a branch-only role. Gender was not, however, a significant predictor of ‘dual’ role-holding. Given that a substantial majority of the union’s members are women and that regional representation is supposed to conform to the principle of proportionality, this finding might suggest that women risk being under-represented compared to men. The findings also suggest that full-time employment was positively associated with the likelihood that members would act as regional delegates (put another way, members who worked part time were less likely to be regional delegates), further suggesting that women may be disadvantaged in comparison to men. On the other hand, the findings do not suggest that time for union duties was being squeezed out by work demands from employers. Work pressure was not a significant predictor of role-holding restricted to the branch level. However, higher levels of work pressure were associated with an increased likelihood that members would hold roles at both branch and regional levels. One interpretation is that members who are committed to union goals will wish to participate in union governance despite having to cope with a substantial workload (of course, this is not to imply that they will find it easy to do so). ‘Trust in management’ was also a predictor of regional-level participation: higher levels of trust were associated with a reduced likelihood that members would have a dual role. However, no association was found between trust and the likelihood of members taking on a ‘branch-only’ role.

Table 4

Multinomial logistic regression analysis of the determinants of marginal probability of representative status

	B (SE)	Oddsratio	95% Confidence interval
	B (SE)	Oddsratio	Lower	Upper
Branch role only versus no role
Intercept	−4.71 (1.15)***
Gender	1.26 (.38)***	3.53	1.70	7.35
Work pressure	−.01 (0.03)	99	.95	1.04
PT/FT	1.11 (0.64)	3.05	.88	10.57
Age	−.45 (.37)	.64	.31	1.31
Trust in management	.02 (.04)	1.02	.94	1.10
Individualistic orientation	−.12 (0.04)**	.89	.83	.96
Union effort	.06 (0.07)	1.06	.93	1.22
Encouragement	.31 (0.11)**	1.36	1.09	1.70
Delegate and branch role versus no role
Intercept	−6.27 (1.01)***
Gender	.21 (.33)	1.23	.64	2.36
Work pressure	.10 (0.02)***	1.10	1.06	1.15
PT/FT	1.00 (0.45)*	2.72	1.13	6.53
Age	.24 (0.37)	1.27	0.62	2.62
Trust in management	−.13 (0.04)***	.87	.81	.94
Individualistic orientation	−.24 (0.04)***	.79	.73	.85
Union effort	.08 (0.06)	1.09	.97	1.21
Encouragement	.73 (0.11)***	2.08	1.67	2.59

Notes: R²= .245 (Cox and Snell), .413 (Nagelkerke). Model χ² (16) = 223.04, p < .001. *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

Table 5

Delegates’ views concerning participation at the regional level: Men and women delegates compared

	Gender	Mean	s.d.	t
I find being a delegate too time-consuming	Male	3.60	1.71	−.115
I find being a delegate too time-consuming	Female	3.65	1.72
The meetings are held at inconvenient times	Male	3.47	1.94	−.481
The meetings are held at inconvenient times	Female	3.70	2.04
Meetings fit comfortably with family commitments/social life	Male	3.97	1.96	.972
	Female	3.51	1.85
It is easy to get time off for meetings	Male	4.76	1.81	2.49*
It is easy to get time off for meetings	Female	3.51	2.13
The meetings are usually interesting	Male	5.00	1.49	.656
The meetings are usually interesting	Female	4.75	1.56
The meetings can be too confrontational	Male	2.79	1.47	−.122
The meetings can be too confrontational	Female	2.84	1.48
The meetings can be intimidating	Male	2.31	1.51	−.616
The meetings can be intimidating	Female	2.54	1.50
My views are listened to at meetings	Male	5.69	1.51	1.52
My views are listened to at meetings	Female	5.08	1.69
I am able to influence decisions at meetings	Male	5.21	1.45	1.49
I am able to influence decisions at meetings	Female	4.62	1.69
The items on the agendas are not directly relevant to me	Male	3.21	1.90	.551
The items on the agendas are not directly relevant to me	Female	2.97	1.55
Women and their interests are not adequately represented at meetings	Male	2.76	1.85	−1.11
	Female	3.27	1.88
Men and their interests are not adequately represented at meetings	Male	3.68	2.11	2.58*
	Female	2.46	1.69

Note: *p < 0.05.

Experiences of Being a Regional Delegate

For union members to be considered active participants in regional structures, it is not enough that they agree to act as a regional delegate: they also have to be willing and able to attend and participate in meetings. McBride (2001) has suggested that meetings might provide few opportunities for meaningful interventions by delegates and provide them with little scope to shape regional strategies, which might in turn discourage attendance. Delegates may also experience difficulties in securing time away from work. The survey of delegates explored these issues. Delegates were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed with a number of statements. In each case, their responses were measured using a seven-point scale running from 1 = ‘strongly disagree’ to 7 = ‘strongly agree’.

Men and women tended to hold similar views. However, men were more positive than women about the ease with which they could secure time off to attend meetings. All of the men delegates worked on a full-time basis while 16% of the women delegates worked part time, and this may in part account for the relative difficulty that some women experienced in obtaining time off.

The findings do not suggest that regional forums provided an inhospitable context for participation by either men or women. Both men and women tended to disagree with the statements ‘The meetings can be too confrontational’ and ‘The meetings can be intimidating’ and there was little difference between the strength of feeling of men and women delegates in this respect. On average, men and women also tended to express weak levels of disagreement to the statements ‘Men and their interests are not adequately represented at meetings’ and ‘Women and their interests are not adequately represented at meetings’. The strength of feeling differed between men and women delegates: on average, men were less strong than women in their belief that men and their interests were adequately represented. The opposite was found to be the case in respect of women and their interests (i.e. women felt less sure than men that the interests of women were adequately represented).

Delegates were asked to indicate whether they felt the meetings were interesting, whether their views were listened to and whether they felt able to influence decisions taken at meetings. On average, men and women expressed only weak agreement to the statements relating to these issues. One-seventh of respondents provided answers that suggested that they did not find meetings interesting or that they did not feel that their views were listened to. One-fifth indicated that they did not feel that they could influence decisions.

The delegates were also asked to indicate how many regional-level meetings they had attended over the past 12 months (the response options were: none; less than half; half; more than half; all). Again, there was no significant difference in the responses of men and women. However, there were positive associations between frequency of attendance and the extent to which members felt that their views were listened to (γ = .27; p < .05) and that they could influence decisions (γ = .30; p < 0.05), and the extent to which they disagreed with the statements ‘Items on the agendas are not directly relevant to me’ (γ = −.36; p < .01) and ‘I find being a delegate too time-consuming’ (γ = −.47; p < .001).

Conclusions

Regional forums may facilitate the development of more participatory forms of trade unionism that allow union members to become more closely involved in decision-making and the development of union policies (Fairbrother, 1984: 98). Yet opportunities to participate are not equally distributed among union members and some groups are systematically disadvantaged. UNISON has been at the forefront of attempts to address this problem. Its efforts have met with considerable success, although attempts to achieve proportionality and fair representation have encountered some resistance within the union, and barriers to participation remain (Colgan and Ledwith, 2007b; Munro, 2001).

Previous research (e.g. Dorgan and Grieco, 1993) has suggested that women sometimes find traditional trade union decision-making forums unwelcoming, to the extent that they encounter sexist behaviour on the part of men. The findings of the present study suggest that this problem is not widely experienced by women regional delegates in UNISON. In general, neither women nor men found meetings intimidating or confrontational, both sexes tended to agree that their views were listened to, and women did not tend to feel that their interests were inadequately represented. Furthermore, while men tended to find obtaining time off to attend meetings easier than women, the findings do not suggest a widely perceived conflict between the timing of meetings and work or family commitments. However, the fact that existing delegates did not tend to experience substantial problems in this regard does not mean that time pressures were not a factor in explaining participation. On the contrary, ‘commitments outside of work’ was the most commonly identified constraint on members’ ability to participate in regional forums. Other studies have similarly shown that time pressures often result in union members being unable to find the time required for unpaid union roles (Bartram et al., 2010).

Part-time workers face particular problems in this regard (Sinclair, 1996) and the findings of the present study indicate that they were less likely than full-time employees to act as regional delegates. This implies an obstacle to women’s participation, given that women comprise a large majority of part-time workers, and further suggests that UNISON will be unable to deliver fully on its commitment to fair and proportional representation unless it is able to do more to encourage and facilitate the involvement of part-time workers. Indeed, the study found that the extent to which members felt encouraged by UNISON to become involved in union activities was a significant determinant of involvement at both regional and branch levels. Given that most regional delegates are elected by branches, efforts to encourage members to become active in their branch must remain a priority. The findings suggest that the willingness of at least some members to take on union roles might be increased through direct approaches, information provision and enthusiastic encouragement. Confidence-building is also essential. While women members were more likely than men to indicate that they would not feel confident about taking on a regional role, a lack of confidence affected substantial proportions of both men and women.

Previous studies have found that representatives tend to be less trusting of managers in comparison to rank-and-file members (Bartram et al., 2010). While the findings of this study provide support for this claim as far as dual role-holders are concerned, trust in management was not a significant predictor of the likelihood that members would take on a role that was restricted to the branch. However, for both forms of representation, there was a negative association between individualistic orientations to workplace relations and members’ propensity to take on a union role. This finding complements those of other studies that have pointed to the importance of collective orientations in explaining union activism (Kelly and Kelly, 1994). While experiences prior to entering work may influence the extent to which members have collectivist values and identify with trade unions, attitudes are not necessarily fixed but may change over time and according to circumstances (Fosh, 1993). Local trade union leaders have a potentially important role to play in shaping attitudes and encouraging members to recognize common interests (Batstone et al., 1977; Metochi, 2002; Tetrick et al., 2007), which may eventually lead to participation in branch and regional forums. However, if participation is to be effective, it is important that regional forums provide members with opportunities to debate and exert genuine and significant influence over decisions. The findings suggest that where delegates feel unable to exert influence, attendance at meetings will suffer.

This article, in examining trade union members’ involvement in regional-level trade union governance, has shed some light on a form of union participation that has received little attention in the research literature. However, the limitations of the research, particularly the low survey response rates, must be acknowledged. Furthermore, the questionnaire was not designed to test a full range of social-psychological determinants of participation in regional bodies. An expanded study of the attitudes, perceptions and orientations associated with different types of union role-holders would be of value. In addition, there is a need for investigations of the relationship between branch-level activism and regional activity, and the potential for branch-level activism to sustain and refresh regional debate and policymaking.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements and Funding

I am grateful to the journal's editors and two anonymous referees for supplying constructive comments on an earlier version of this article. I am also grateful to UNISON for providing financial support.

Note

References

Bartram

Stanton

Elovaris

(2010) The role of job representatives in an organizing strategy: The case of the Australian Nursing Federation. Journal of Industrial Relations 50(1): 25–44.

Batstone

Boraston

Frenkel

(1977) Shop Stewards in Action: The Organization of Workplace Conflict and Accommodation, Oxford: Blackwell.

Benson

Griffin

(1988) Gender differences in union attitudes, participation and priorities. Journal of Industrial Relations 30(2): 203–215.

Briskin

(2007). The equity project in Canadian unions: Confronting the challenge of restructuring and globalisation. In: Colgan

Ledwith

(eds) Gender, Diversity and Trade Unions: International Perspectives, London: Routledge.

Child

Loveridge

Warner

(1973) Towards an organizational study of trade unions. Sociology 7: 71–91.

Colgan

(1999) Recognising the lesbian and gay constituency in UK trade unions: Moving forward in UNISON? Industrial Relations Journal 30(5): 444–463.

Colgan

Ledwith

(2007a) Gender, Diversity and Trade Unions: International Perspectives, London: Routledge.

Colgan

Ledwith

(2007b). Gender, diversity and mobilisation in UK trade unions. In: Colgan

Ledwith

(eds) Gender, Diversity and Trade Unions: International Perspectives, London: Routledge.

Daniels

McIlroy

(2009) Trade Unions in a Neo-liberal World: British Trade Unions under New Labour, London: Routledge.

10.

Dorgan

Grieco

(1993) Battling against the odds: The emergence of senior women trade unionists. Industrial Relations Journal 24(2): 151–164.

11.

Fairbrother

(1984) All Those in Favour: The Politics of Union Democracy, London: Pluto Press.

12.

Field

(2009) Discovering Statistics Using SPSS, 3rd edn. London: SAGE.

13.

Fosh

(1993) Membership participation in workplace unionism: The possibility of union renewal. British Journal of Industrial Relations 31(4): 577–592.

14.

Fullager

Barling

(1989) A longitudinal test of a model of the antecedent and consequences of union loyalty. Journal of Applied Psychology 74: 213–227.

15.

Green

(2001) It’s been a hard day’s night. British Journal of Industrial Relations 39(1): 53–80.

16.

Greene

A-M

Kirton

(2003) Possibilities for remote participation in trade unions: Mobilising women activists. Industrial Relations Journal 34(4): 319–333.

17.

Gregory

Milner

(2009) Editorial: Work–life balance: A matter of choice? Gender, Work and Organization 16(1): 1–13.

18.

Hicks

(2002) Trade union membership: An analysis of data from the autumn 2001 LFS. In: Labour Market Trends, July, London: The Stationery Office, 345–353.

19.

Hyman

Baldry

Scholarios

Bunzel

(2003) Work–life imbalance in call centres and software development. British Journal of Industrial Relations 41(2): 215–240.

20.

Hyman

(1979) The politics of workplace trade unionism: Recent tendencies and some problems in theory. Capital & Class 8: 54–67.

21.

Johnson

Jarley

(2004) Justice and union participation: An extension and test of mobilization theory. British Journal of Industrial Relations 42(3): 543–562.

22.

Kelly

(1994) Who gets involved in collective action? Social psychological determinants of individual participation in trade unions. Human Relations 47(1): 63–88.

23.

Kelly

(1998) Rethinking Industrial Relations: Mobilization, Collectivism and Long Waves, London: Routledge.

24.

Kirton

(2005) The influences on women joining and participating in unions. Industrial Relations Journal 36(5): 386–401.

25.

Kirton

Greene

(2002) The dynamic of positive action in UK trade unions: The case of women and black members. Industrial Relations Journal 33(2): 157–172.

26.

Kirton

Healy

(1999) Transforming union women: The role of women trade union officials in union renewal. Industrial Relations Journal 30(1): 31–45.

27.

Koch-Baumgarten

(2007). Changing gender relations in German trade unions: From ‘workers’ patriarchy’ to gender democracy? In: Colgan

Ledwith

(eds) Gender, Diversity and Trade Unions: International Perspectives, London: Routledge.

28.

McBride A (2001) Gender Democracy in Trade Unions. Farnham: Ashgate.

29.

Metochi

(2002) The influence of leadership and member attitudes in understanding the nature of union participation. British Journal of Industrial Relations 40(1): 87–111.

30.

Munro

(2001) A feminist trade union agenda? The continued significance of class, gender and race. Gender, Work and Organization 8(4): 454–471.

31.

Nunnally

(1978) Psychometric Theory, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

32.

Parker

(2003) We’re on a road to somewhere: Women’s groups in unions. Industrial Relations Journal 34(2): 164–184.

33.

Parker

(2009) Women’s collectivism in context: Women’s groups in UK trade unions. Industrial Relations Journal 40(1): 78–97.

34.

Sayce

Greene

A-M

Ackers

(2006) Small is beautiful? The development of women’s activism in a small union. Industrial Relations Journal 37(4): 400–414.

35.

Sinclair

(1996) The importance of gender for participation in and attitudes to trade unionism. Industrial Relations Journal 27(3): 239–252.

36.

Tetrick

Shiore

McClurg

(2007) A model of union participation: The impact of perceived union support, union instrumentality, and union loyalty. Journal of Applied Psychology 92(3): 820–828.

37.

Thacker

Fields

Barclay

(1990) Union commitment: An examination of antecedent and outcome factors. Journal of Occupational Psychology 63: 33–48.

38.

Tomlinson

(2005) Women’s attitudes towards trade unions in the UK: A consideration of the distinction between full- and part-time workers. Industrial Relations Journal 36(5): 402–418.

39.

Tshoaedi

(2007). Women in the labour movement: Perceptions of gender democracy in South African trade unions. In: Colgan

Ledwith

(eds) Gender, Diversity and Trade Unions: International Perspectives, London: Routledge.

40.

Upchurch

Danford

Richardson

(2002) Research note: Profiles of union workplace representatives: Evidence from three unions in South-West England. Industrial Relations Journal 33(2): 127–140.

41.

Walters

(2002) Female part-time workers’ attitudes to trade unions in Britain. British Journal of Industrial Relations 35(4): 515–546.