Britain's Labour Party and the working class

Last week, Britain's young Labour Party leader, Ed Miliband, angered his union backers when he said he could not promise that a future Labour government would reverse the cuts to public-sector employment and pay that the current government is making. This would be akin to a PNP government following through on a JLP pledge to lay off civil servants - in short, a pretty serious break with tradition.

Although for now, Labour and the unions seem to have smoothed over their differences, the scale of the development cannot be underestimated. Bear in mind, first, that the UK's Labour Party was largely born from Britain's union movement. Add to that mix that Ed Miliband won the leadership of the party largely thanks to union backing. Add to that an ever-weakening labour movement, and a government that is friendly to the banks, wants to cut workers' pay and benefits, all while giving the Queen a new yacht to lounge on, and one can see why union leaders are a bit miffed.

The rule of thumb

And it goes even further than that. Because in Britain, as in many other developed countries, public-sector unions have become the backbone of the Left. The rule of thumb has long been that you look after your own first, then worry about non-union workers. But whereas a half-century ago, half of British workers belonged to unions, and most of those were in the private sector, today, the situation is the mirror image. Union membership has been halved since the heyday of organised labour, and most union members now work for the government.

That has given rise to political challenges with which the Left is struggling. The stereotypical image of the traditional constituency of the Labour Party is of men - and they are men - in cveralls and brogues, looking for a fair shake and protection in an unforgiving economic environment. The Labour Party was once the party of coal miners, dockers and industrial workers. Today, it is largely the party of teachers, nurses and lecturers.

Contrary to the dogmatic imagery of the Right, most public employees are not particularly coddled, earning only slightly more than the national median salary. Nonetheless, they have jobs. And in a time of rising unemployment, it is just good politics for Mr Miliband to say he will prioritise spending on people who are currently unemployed.

That creates a real dilemma. The British working class is no longer a hard-hatted crowd. It comprises ever more hoodies and estate youths - unemployed, marginalised, with grim prospects. It is understandable that Labour leaders would like to reach out to them. It may also be the ethical thing to do.

But the poorest are an unformed constituency. Unionised workers, though they may have more ink than coal dust on their hands, are the ones who show up at party conventions and vote in elections. It may look bad just now to cosy up too much to the unions. But it is also risky to turn on your friends. Something's gotta give.

It's not unlike the dilemma facing the new Jamaican Government, which is trying to create work for the unemployed, preserve public-sector jobs, and balance the Budget all at once. It is an extraordinarily delicate balancing act.

Criticising unions

In the UK, the public appetite is not necessarily anti-union; but nor is it strongly supportive of union militancy right now. The Conservative-led government has no difficulty criticising unions. Labour does not want to be seen to be simply retreating to its corner, but that is exactly where the Tories would like to place it.

Ed Miliband is not considered the strongest or most capable of leaders. But it is to his credit that he is trying to tackle this very thorny dilemma head-on. Socialist and liberal politicians in other countries will have to follow suit in time. No doubt they will watch Mr Miliband's experiment closely.

John Rapley is a research associate at the International Growth Centre, London School of Economics and Political Science. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and rapley.john@gmail.com.