As Chris Williamson, ex Shadow Cabinet member explains, trade union leaders are jettisoning morality just to protect their member’s jobs. When those jobs create weapons of murder and mayhem, times have sadly changed.
It's time certain trade union leaders ditched the little Englander mentality and started living up to the trade union maxim that an injury to one is an injury to all. pic.twitter.com/SNqfRJKF81
— Chris Williamson (@DerbyChrisW) October 2, 2024
How Times Have Changed: How Trade Union Leaders Prioritise Jobs Over Morality in the Production of Weapons and Missiles
Trade unions have long been a cornerstone of the labour movement, advocating for better wages, working conditions, and rights for workers. Historically, union leaders often aligned their actions with broader moral concerns, supporting movements that sought social justice and peace. However, particularly in industries involved in the production of weapons and missiles, there has been a marked shift in union priorities. Today, many union leaders in these sectors prioritise safeguarding jobs over engaging with the moral implications of their work. This following explores how trade unions in the defence industry have navigated this tension between job protection and morality, examining historical changes and using key examples to demonstrate this evolution.
The British defence industry, encompassing the production of weapons, missiles, and military equipment, is a vital employer, contributing significantly to the economy. Major companies such as BAE Systems, Rolls-Royce, and MBDA employ thousands of workers, many of whom are represented by powerful unions like Unite the Union, GMB, and Prospect. These unions traditionally advocate for their members’ welfare, focusing on securing wages, improving safety conditions, and ensuring job security.
Yet, the defence sector poses a unique challenge for unions due to the ethical concerns surrounding the products manufactured. British-made weapons and military equipment are often sold to regimes with questionable human rights records or used in conflicts that result in civilian casualties. This raises significant questions about whether unions should prioritise these moral considerations or focus solely on protecting jobs.
In the mid-20th century, union leaders were more likely to align themselves with broader political movements that prioritised ethical considerations. For instance, during the Cold War, many British unions actively supported the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), taking a stand against nuclear weapons production. This can be seen in the case of the Vickers-Armstrong factory in Barrow-in-Furness, which built submarines. In the 1960s and 1970s, some union leaders at the factory voiced concerns about the moral implications of building nuclear submarines, even though the work provided significant employment. Similarly, trade unions in other sectors, such as aerospace and shipbuilding, often engaged with peace movements, recognising the moral questions associated with their work.
This willingness to consider moral concerns was rooted in the socialist ideals that shaped much of the labour movement at the time. Union leaders viewed their role not just as advocates for workers’ rights but as part of a larger mission for social justice. Over time, however, there has been a notable shift. In recent decades, unions in the defence industry have increasingly prioritised securing jobs over engaging with the ethical consequences of producing arms and military equipment. Several factors have contributed to this shift, including economic pressures, global competition, and the decline of traditional manufacturing industries in the UK.
One of the most striking examples of this shift occurred during the controversy surrounding BAE Systems’ arms sales to Saudi Arabia. BAE, one of the largest employers in the British defence sector, has supplied Saudi Arabia with weapons used in the conflict in Yemen. Human rights organisations, including Amnesty International, have condemned Saudi Arabia for committing war crimes in Yemen, with British-made weapons implicated in civilian casualties. Despite these ethical concerns, trade unions representing BAE workers largely supported the continuation of arms sales to Saudi Arabia, fearing that halting these sales would lead to massive job losses.
Unite the Union, which represents thousands of defence industry workers, including those at BAE Systems, prioritised job protection during the controversy. Len McCluskey, the former general secretary of Unite, argued that the economic interests of workers should be the union’s main concern. He emphasised the importance of the defence industry to the UK economy and the livelihoods of thousands of workers employed in this sector. While this stance is understandable from the perspective of job security, it underscores how economic considerations have come to outweigh moral concerns within trade unions in recent years.
The shift in union priorities can also be understood in the broader context of globalisation and the changing nature of industrial work in the UK. Since the 1980s, Britain has experienced significant deindustrialisation, with traditional manufacturing sectors like steel, coal, and shipbuilding in sharp decline. As a result, the defence industry remains one of the few sectors where high-skilled manufacturing jobs continue to thrive. This has prompted unions to focus more on preserving these jobs, even when the products manufactured raise ethical questions.
Global competition has further complicated this issue. The international arms trade is fiercely competitive, with countries like the United States, Russia, and China vying for lucrative contracts with foreign governments. British defence companies, backed by their unions, argue that if the UK stops producing arms, it will fall behind in the global market, leading to economic decline and job losses. For example, in 2016, BAE Systems announced job cuts at its UK plants due to a slowdown in orders for fighter jets. Unions like Unite and GMB launched campaigns to protect these jobs, focusing on the economic impact of job losses rather than the ethical issues surrounding arms production.
The dilemma faced by unions is especially acute in a period of austerity. Over the last decade, successive UK governments have implemented significant cuts to public services, leading to widespread job losses in sectors such as healthcare, education, and local government. Amid these cuts, the defence industry remains one of the few areas of consistent government investment, providing a lifeline for thousands of workers. Consequently, unions have been even more reluctant to challenge the morality of arms production, fearing that doing so would only exacerbate job losses in an already precarious economic climate.
A similar situation unfolded in the context of the Scottish defence sector during the 2014 Scottish independence referendum. The Scottish National Party (SNP) proposed scrapping the UK’s Trident nuclear weapons programme, which is based at the Faslane naval base in Scotland. Although this move had strong support from peace campaigners, trade unions representing Faslane workers, including Unite and GMB, opposed it, arguing that it would result in significant job losses. This further highlights the prioritisation of economic concerns over ethical considerations in modern union practices.
While unions in the defence industry have generally focused on protecting jobs over addressing the moral implications of their work, there are signs of change. In recent years, there has been a growing recognition of the need to address the ethical dimensions of arms production, particularly in light of climate change and global human rights concerns. Some unions have begun exploring the possibility of transitioning defence workers into more ethical sectors, such as renewable energy. For instance, the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT) has collaborated with unions to promote the concept of a “just transition,” arguing that the skills used in defence manufacturing could be redirected toward industries like wind turbine production or other green technologies.
The idea of a “just transition” has gained traction in parts of the labour movement, especially as awareness of climate change has grown. This approach acknowledges the importance of protecting jobs while recognising that the future of employment should not come at the expense of ethical considerations or environmental sustainability. Nevertheless, achieving such a transition is challenging, particularly in the face of entrenched economic interests and the powerful lobbying efforts of the defence industry.
Trade union leaders in the British defence industry have increasingly prioritised the protection of jobs over moral considerations. This shift, driven by globalisation, economic pressures, and the decline of traditional industries, marks a departure from the more morally engaged stances of earlier union leaders. While unions once aligned themselves with movements like the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, contemporary union leaders have primarily focused on economic stability.
The cases of BAE Systems’ arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the controversy surrounding the Trident nuclear programme exemplify how unions have prioritised economic concerns over ethical ones. However, there are signs that the tide may be turning, with some unions beginning to explore more ethical pathways for their members, such as transitioning into renewable energy sectors.
The challenge for trade unions in the coming years will be balancing their responsibility to protect workers’ livelihoods with the need to engage with the moral implications of their work. As global awareness of ethical issues surrounding the arms trade grows, unions will likely face increasing pressure to address these concerns. In an increasingly interconnected world, the decisions made by union leaders will have far-reaching consequences, both for their members and for society as a whole.
If human rights and ethical practices are not front and centre, then there is danger that we will all become savages.
References
- Amnesty International, “UK Arms Sales to Saudi Arabia: Amnesty Condemns ‘Human Rights Catastrophe,’” Amnesty International, 2018.
- Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT), “Arms to Renewables: Defence Workers for a Just Transition,” CAAT, 2021.
- Len McCluskey, “The Importance of the Defence Industry to the UK Economy,” Unite the Union, 2017.
- BAE Systems, “UK Jobs at Risk Amid Slowdown in Orders,” The Guardian, 2016.
- Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), “Trade Unions and Nuclear Disarmament: A History,” CND, 2020.
KEEP US ALIVE and join us in helping to bring reality and decency back by SUBSCRIBING to our Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQ1Ll1ylCg8U19AhNl-NoTg AND SUPPORTING US where you can: Award Winning Independent Citizen Media Needs Your Help. PLEASE SUPPORT US FOR JUST £2 A MONTH https://dorseteye.com/donate/
