From Cradley Heath to Liverpool: The History of Unions Betraying Female Workers

[IwantToRetire]

The Oldest Story in the Labour Movement Has a New Chapter, and It Stinks…

In 1874, a bookbinder named Emma Paterson founded the Women’s Trade Union League because the unions of her day would not organise women. This is not a new story. It is, if anything, the oldest story in modern history, and not only in the labour movement. Men shut the door. Women build their own room.

Those rooms worked. Mary Macarthur built the National Federation of Women Workers for the women the established unions would not take, and in 1910 the women chainmakers of Cradley Heath struck to force employers to honour a minimum wage the law had already granted them. They won. The movement absorbed their victory into its mythology and has been proud of it ever since. That is the pattern, and it repeats: women organise separately because the general movement has neglected them, they win something nobody else was fighting for, and afterwards the movement discovers it had always believed in equal pay. Women are welcomed as symbols, celebrated on anniversary posters and praised from conference platforms. The warmth disappears when they organise as women, identify their own interests and refuse to surrender control of the room.

It is disappearing again now, in the run-up to Liverpool…

UNISON, ASLEF, USDAW and the Musicians’ Union are boycotting Labour’s Women’s Conference because its formal proceedings are reserved for women. The seats they leave empty do not belong to four general secretaries, a policy committee or a press officer at union headquarters. They belong to the female members whose subscriptions paid for them.

That is the betrayal at the heart of this dispute. Union leaders have taken political representation purchased by women workers and thrown it away to make an ideological gesture against women organising as a sex.

Labour’s Women’s Conference will take place in Liverpool in September. Transgender members may attend fringe meetings, receptions and exhibition areas, but only women will participate in the main conference proceedings, debate policy, vote on motions and elect representatives to the National Women’s Committee. Labour says the arrangement reflects the Supreme Court judgment on the meaning of sex in the Equality Act and the party’s legal obligations. The four unions have responded by refusing to send delegations, while confirming that their attendance at Labour’s main annual conference will continue as normal.

Of every room available to them, they chose to empty the women’s room; it is an attack on women and women’s voices…

Article continues at https://heartlandstribune.com/the-empty-delegation-how-four-trade-unions-sold-out-their-female-members/

Thanks, and interesting article as usual from PK

"Power does not disappear when a union walks out. It passes to those who remain, and if the unions won’t use it, then women must organise themselves."

Maybe it's a good thing that the Unions who are fighting against women are boycotting the Women's Conference, it will mean no time will be wasted on them and the conference can concentrate on what it's there to discuss.

It's tiring that women have to do it all over again but if they end up with something that works for women it might be worth the effort.

Keep up the good work women, and create something better than the dregs you've been left with now, women are good at organising for themselves. 👊

Out of interest, are there any current or former MU members hanging out round here? Feel free to PM me if you don't want to say on here.

Great article. Further context:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5560214-sexist-unions-boycott-labour-womens-conference

Can non members attend the women’s conference? Im minded to go to show solidarity for the event and help boost numbers

Thanks - am having so many problems with MN search. I had tried to find conference discussion thread, even though I thought this article might be of interest on its own.

In the Scotland section of the Times:
https://www.thetimes.com/article/b69ba4c1-0e13-4117-bdd8-85edc5b1a96b?shareToken=7090c4047053f0d68f066105a9e6feff&ver=article

Gribbon, a lawyer with McGrade Employment Solicitors in Glasgow, said: “I can confirm that our firm acts for three women who are pursuing claims of gender-critical or sex realist discrimination against their unions in the employment tribunal.
“Peggie v RCN will proceed to a seven-day hearing in Dundee commencing on September 23, 2026. Proceedings have also been raised on behalf of Fiona Macdonald against the PCS union and by Stephanie Pratt against the Unite union and final hearing dates in both those cases are awaited.”

thank you! Fantastic article. Margaret Gribbon is very impressive.

Thanks for the link, I wish all the woman the best of luck, I hope they win. 👍✊😁
I'd really like the Unions to be the one's to suffer because of their women members instead of the woman members suffering because of the Unions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Union_of_Women_Teachers

The women teachers formed their own union here as the NUT wouldn’t support them.

Always worth remembering that TUs have a lengthy history of shafting female members to protect men.

The series of cases of female workers whose pay discrimination claims were dismissed out of hand by unions keen to protect the superior status and wages of their male members is seared on my memory. Low-paid women were belittled, disrespected and subjected to bullying and intimidation tactics by the unions. Eventually a no-win no-fee solicitor won substantial settlements for multiple groups of low-paid women, starting with the Cleveland dinner ladies.

Some of these women eventually sued their union successfully. The Court of Appeal ruled that the GMB had indirectly discriminated against female union members by recommending acceptance of a 'single status' pay deal which grossly underestimated the compensation which should be due to female equal pay Claimants. Although the objective of securing a fair single status pay deal was legitimate, the means used by the union to secure the deal (including grossly misleading the female back-pay claimants) meant that they had not pursued proportionate means of achieving that pay deal.

Cross, the solicitor who brought the claims, became a QC and the MoJ citation included the following: 'Stefan fought for equal pay rights for women who had not been heard by unions, on a no-win no-fee basis. He brought about substantial changes for several hundred thousand women, some of which received tens of thousands of pounds owed to them.' The Graun had a story about the court cases.

As late as 2020 women in Scotland were lodging claims against Unison, Unite and the GMB.