Saturday 19 May 2018

General Secretary Election 5

News comes in from a reader that yesterday's London Napo Branch meeting was not only quorate, but came to the unanimous conclusion that a lot more information was required before any candidate for General Secretary could be endorsed. I understand a motion to the NEC demanding the opportunity to question both candidates by rank and file members, possibly online or in person, will be forthcoming. 

Apparently some members are strongly of the opinion that the incumbent has a significant advantage over the other candidate and despite some enthusiastic support for the challenger, not enough is known about them. There would appear to be quite a head of steam building in some quarters to demand an extension to the selection process in order to ensure proper scrutiny takes place for what will be a 5 year term of office. 

This interesting development not only serves to highlight that some members are not at all happy with a shoe-horn-in of the incumbent for another term, but that a change of leadership and fresh ideas is required. They are also dissatisfied with the whole process. On Facebook there has recently been some lively discussion regarding the perennial complaint of a lack of information from Napo HQ and some fairly lame responses that tend to highlight an unwillingness or inability of the union to acknowledge the world of social media and effective direct communication in an online world:-
"An advert went out on our website and press, your NEC rep should have reported back to branch members that it was happening as it was discussed at length at last NEC. Ian has been mentioning it regularly since last AGM when he announced he would be re-standing. Branches have been informed this week, get in touch with you local branch officers to find out how they are dealing with it as each branch is different."
What's clear from the Facebook exchanges is that post-TR and the split, many branches are barely functioning effectively with officer posts unfilled, inquorate meetings and even suspended according to one contributor! It surely serves to highlight the gulf between what's actually happening on the ground and the theory as espoused by HQ. 

Of course there was a time when all members got a regular emailed newsletter from the Joint Chairs, but this seems to have been dispensed with in favour of the General Secretary's blog. I suspect many members would expect regular direct communication from those charged with the direction of the union, as well as the General Secretary. But this only serves to highlight the dysfunctionality of accountability within the union that has been discussed here on many occasions.

It is the NEC that both employs and holds the General Secretary to account and thus has a vital role in the selection process. Over the years many union members have been astonished to learn how often this group has been inquorate, a situation that not only disables effective oversight and direction of the union and General Secretary, but effectively disenfranchises the membership, particularly those members who's NEC rep fails to turn up for any reason. 

More than ever, it's clearly of vital importance that individual members make sure that their Branch NEC rep will not only be turning up on June 5th, but that they are absolutely clear as to the mandated wishes of the Branch regarding the General Secretary election process and indeed whether either candidate meets the selection criteria. As employers, this group has the power and authority to decide as it sees fit and appropriate, taking full account of members wishes and what is felt to be in the best interest of the union. 

Such is the nature of any group that holds power over the direction of an organisation, there are bound to be factions, groupings, cliques and vested interests at play and so it's vital that ordinary members make their views known over the coming weeks, both at Branch meetings and by personally seeking out their NEC reps prior to the June 5th meeting. Failure to do so could mean the very future of the union is put in further jeopardy.

11 comments:

  1. At the core of his claim that “the trade union movement itself has fundamentally changed in nature (…not simply in industrial composition)” is that today “union leaders are unprepared to defy the law, and so are utterly reluctant to provide any type of effective leadership”

    http://isj.org.uk/why-trade-union-legislation-and-the-labour-party-are-not-responsible-for-the-decline-in-strike-activity/

    ReplyDelete
  2. Who whittled it down to two candidates?

    ReplyDelete
  3. No other job would be able to extend its closing date so why would NAPO? This smacks of sabotage and I'm surprised it is on this blog. Integrity and democracy are the fundamental foundations of a Trade Union. I don't like the sound of this one bit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually it’s quite normal for vacancies to be extended or readvertised if there is not enough interest.

      Delete
    2. Yes but there was obviously a minimum of two applicants and they are through so that's that then. What we need is to see how they stack up against that incredible and total appallingly written job description and people spec. Whoever put that together needs a lesson in plain English and simple use of phrasing. Followed by what you actually need to be a trade unionist. It reads like a bureaucratic piece by a manager for a manager. Not enough of a union.

      Delete
    3. My concern with the process is why it proceeded with only the minimum number of applicants, both whose suitability is in question. Limited input from branches that barely function. It all seems a bit shady to me by all involved, and seems only to serve to keep the current GS in post. I think MR has been hand picked by IL to run against him, with the expectation IL will win by a close margin. Napo’s secrets will be safe and it’s exec will live handsomely for another 5 years.

      Delete
    4. Not likely in my view. Our problems start with the sort of total nonsense in the job description. That will put many good prospect of candidate off. The information is known about the process although I have heard there are a lot of fixes going on but it was not IL who chooses to have any competition. Why would he want that. Risk his own job. Perhaps he does want to lose and get the massive pay off ? I have understood from some of those in the so called know that it is a grudge candidate and all is very unpleasant in the Team Napo IL camp. The stewardship of Napo in past several years has been disaster yet you cant blame IL for that it is his teams capacity to understand the situation and unfortunately they neither look to far to find out attend don't work to do anything and their team myopic vision is greater than the total of their collective talent pool. If IL gets released the next in line will have to go soon after having already served one master he wont be allowed to ruin another's prospects. Mike R is not daft not by a long way.

      Delete
    5. 21:41 If you are saying that If MR wins he will sack DR etc then you do not know how Napo as a union works. The employers are the NEC and DR etc are their employees. MR would not be able to hire or fire that is the job of the currently dysfunctional NEC. If the report in this blogpost is accurate then London are sending the clearest possible signal to the NEC that they need to reconsider the suitability of the candidates. Let IL go and carry on without a GS whilst recruiting. I bet we won’t notice much difference short term with DR acting up except longer term we may start seeing some improvements in organisation. The AGSs aren’t worth bothering with.

      Delete
    6. It would be interesting to know how many applicants there were and who will be on the interview panel. Some suggestions in my office have included ILs personal trainer, any member of the NEC who normally doesn’t bother attending but will turn up if IL needs them to vote for him, ILs best friend the POA GS.

      Delete
  4. Anon 21:41 is Mike R

    ReplyDelete
  5. Napo is non existent in Durham Tees Valley CRC, no communication at all from local Chair, no meetings, nothing. Forgotten members. Complete overhaul of Napo required

    ReplyDelete