Revisiting Hyman: direct democracy, shop steward organisation and labour process conflict at Ford's Dagenham plant

Sheila Cohen Sheila Cohen

doi:10.13169/workorgalaboglob.10.1.0080

Abstract

This article utilises detailed research into workplace trade unionism in the Dagenham plant of the Ford Motor Company in the UK to explore fundamental issues of workplace trade union democracy, organisation and struggle. Within this framework, the article re-examines Richard Hyman's influential analysis of workplace trade union representation and ‘bureaucratisation’. It draws on a larger study by the author.

Highlights

In an era of mergers and mega-unions, coupled with the threat of yet more anti-union legislation from the current UK government, analysis of trade union bureaucratisation and its counterpoint in workplace resistance and direct democracy can be argued to have acquired a new relevance
Detailed investigation of everyday shop steward and worker activity at Ford’s Dagenham plant from the mid-to-late 1970s – the setting for Hyman’s research on workplace trade union ‘bureaucratisation’ – to the 1990s and beyond reveals activities and processes which add to our understanding of workplace conflict and the reality, or otherwise, of any trends towards such tendencies within workplace trade union organisation
As one retired union official noted of workplace union organisation at Dagenham, The critical thing . . . about industrial relations at Fords is that each shop steward is elected by a multi-union group, which meant that . . . [shop stewards] were relatively autonomous because they could always say they were representing people from other unions – so . . . really their first loyalty was to their members and to the shop stewards’ committee, which was multi-union . . . (Cohen, 2013:46)

Summary

Introduction

In an era of mergers and mega-unions, coupled with the threat of yet more anti-union legislation from the current UK government, analysis of trade union bureaucratisation and its counterpoint in workplace resistance and direct democracy can be argued to have acquired a new relevance. Against a background of constant disputes over job grading and labour intensification, Hyman’s comment that ‘it is not fanciful to speak of the bureaucratisation of the rank and file’ (Hyman, 1979:58) raises the question, ‘Well, which rank and file are you talking about?’ And that question can in turn be answered by Hyman’s comment that ‘A key mediating role is performed by a stratum of shop steward leaders who have become integrated into the external union hierarchies’ (Hyman, 1979:58) The identification of this stratum as, full-time convenors is indicated by the further point that the supposedly ‘very limited opposition . My emphasis is added to this quotation for reasons which become clear below

Hyman further comments that

Findings

Conclusion