to think this Union Rep has his loyalties totally wrong?

[MortifiedAdams]

After a year of consultations at DHs workplace, and many staff members worried about the loyalties of their union rep, an email has been sent around which accidentally included at the bottom a conversation berween the Rep.and DHs boss. In short, it included the sentence

"Can you let me know what the average pay drop will be as that will be easier to sell to them"

Surely the rep.works for the employers? The rep should be "selling" to the bosses, not the employees?

A recall email was sent round within minutes but not before copy was printed.

DH is, of.course, up in arms. Is it just a misunderstanding or could this Rep be in serious trouble?

I think you've got it right tbh. Union reps negotiate with both parties.

Union reps are supposed to represent the interests of the union members, hence the name. I wouldn't be happy, and wouldn't rule out backhanders. A replacement union rep is in order.

Agree, if the union has negotiated the best deal (such as saving jobs), then maybe a pay cut is the only way to get it - thus needs to 'sell' to the members

Tvtonight, the 90 days consultation was quietly halved to 45 days in the name of having a 'flexible workforce', good old Tories for you.

The wording the rep has used is what concerns me, because it gives the distinct impression that the rep is willing to pull the wool over the eyes of the members and use spin to confuse them. If you are trying to work on their behalf, why do this? The employer must also get the impression they can get away with more if this is who they have to negotiate with. Of course unions must be able to compromise and accept economic realities, but this isn't the way to accomplish that.

The wording and the fact they immediatley recalled the email makes me want to agree with DH that the rep is less concerned with their interests than the interests of the bosses.

Not a global/national corporation. A local, large, firm.

Does your dh have any other reason to distrust his union rep?

On its own, I wouldn't say that the email was proof that the rep doing his job badly, or that he is disloyal.

Agree with others. If the rep has been negotiating hard with management on his members' behalf and has done all they feel they possibly can, then it is legitimate to talk about 'selling' the final deal that has been struck, assuming the alternative could be job losses, etc.

However, I have known union reps who have gotten slightly too cosy with management (from my HR perspective) and this guy could likewise be one of those. Hard to tell from this one email IMO.

Is the rep going to consult with your DH and his colleagues with the full package negotiated with management? It's difficult to say whether the rep is indeed siding with the employer without knowing the full story - are job losses being mitigated? Were other terms and conditions under threat? The wording was certainly unfortunate but the rep may still have been acting in the best interests of the members.

If your DH and his colleagues don't like how this person operates then one of them needs to step up to the plate and stand against him or her.