Sustainable regional development and employment: a role for organized labour?
Graham Symon, University of East London
Jonathan Crawshaw, University of East London
In localities where economic decline has been more obvious, the State has been moved to intervene with initiatives attempting to ‘regenerate’ through job creation and attempts to attract investment from private capital. The Thames Gateway to the east of London is the scene of one of the most significant projects of this kind. Inherent in such initiatives are investments in infrastructure (e.g. Docklands Light Railway), training and skilling (e.g the Learning and Skills Council), the ‘rebranding’ of geographies through aesthetics and symbols (e.g. the 2012 Olympics) and attempts to engineer community cohesion. Critiques of regeneration tend to question the sustainability of state and capital driven strategies of redistribution, citing short-term funding cycles, inadequate planning and insubstantial stakeholder participation (Turok & Edge, 1999).
In the midst of such intense transition and industrial readjustment, traditional working communities have become disaggregated and dissolute. Coincidental in this pessimistic interpretation of post-Fordism are the fortunes of organized labour where the membership and influence of trade unions has declined considerably. Indeed, unions have been absent from strategic influence in regeneration projects as the voice of capital has been privileged. This paper seeks to problematise this state of affairs and further an embryonic but developing strand of the social sciences that has identified a role for unions in a community context: i.e. “community unionism” (Wills & Sims, 2001).
The voice which would traditionally have represented a more homogenous and cohesive body of labour in dominant industries (see Durkheimian accounts) is undermined by a more fragmented and flexible regime of accumulation (Hyman, 1992). Thus the focus of community union mobilisation shifts from the industrial to the spatial labour force. Community unionism has therefore been presented as both an organic and localised social movement and a pragmatic strategic institutional attempt to gain legitimacy. Such presentations expose clear discursive tensions; tensions which have, according to what research exists, been manifested in conflict between central and local union activities. Despite this, community unionism is regarded with a sense of optimism in that a framework for community influence and voice can emerge from circumstances of disenfranchisement and social fragmentation.
For almost three decades the role of organized labour has been debated and conjectures have been made about its future. Community unionism has emerged as a mechanism whereby unions can re-establish legitimacy and ameliorate the experiences of working communities via the organization of voice and influence in economic and social decision making. This paper evaluates such propositions within a political economic context by considering the prospects for community unionism in the Thames Gateway. It is argued that the future of communities subject to regeneration provides a fertile theatre for organizing while making a constructive contribution to sustainable economic, social and democratic development.
References
Hyman, R. (1992) ‘Trade unions and the disaggregation of the working class’ in Regini, M. (ed.) The Future of Labour Movements, London: Sage
Turok, I. & Edge, N. (1999) The Jobs Gap in Britain’s Inner Cities: Employment Loss and Labour Market Consequences, York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation
Wills, J. & Sims, M. (2001) ‘Building community unionism in the UK’, Capital & Class, 82: 59-84