Searchable article text
RMT helpline 0800 376 3706 :: march 2018 :: RMTnews
24
DISAPPOINTED
Dear editor,
I was rather disappointed to see the
RMT News letter’s page used as a
tool to personally attack our
president whose alleged crime was to
point out the unions boardroom
should reflect the members we
represent and for observing that it
currently does not.
As an RMT tutor who tutors
members from throughout the
country in all grades I am proud to
have met a broad-brush of members
in our union. Some have been
privileged enough not to have known
discrimination first hand whilst
others have had some heart breaking
experiences.
Bro. Shaw's letter (RMT News
Feb’18) is a slap on the face to all
those who have suffered and is
grossly out of touch with reality. He
has shown that he has no
appreciation of the barriers faced by
women, BEM, LGBTQ+ & disabled
workers or an idea of what systemic
discrimination in society is.
Of course I could never recreate the
learning experiences which takes
place at the Bob Crow education
centre and throughout the country in
this short letter therefore I would
encourage bro Shaw to attend an
equality course, to speak to fellow
brothers and sisters in our union
who have been covertly and overtly
discriminated against then with a
straight face try and suggest that
there are no barriers to entry into
that boardroom.
In Unity, Jayesh Patel,
RMT lay tutor
ELECTIONEERING
Dear editor,
Having read Brother Shaw's blatant
attack on President Hoyle last month
I felt compelled to double check that
we hadn't in fact entered an election
period for the Presidency.
It appears we haven't but I’m sure
there are others like me who thought
the letter was a feeble excuse at
electioneering. I know neither Mr
Hoyle or Mr Shaw, but I do realise
that both were candidates in the last
presidential election.
I'd be keen to ask Mr Shaw why if
his branch was so horrified by Mr
Hoyle's comments why didn’t the
branch raise the matter through the
machinery? Why has it taken the
person that stood against president
Hoyle to comment personally?
I say fair play to the president on
giving Sisters Mazur and Rodgers a
special mention in his column, yet
the paragraph prior to this Brother
Shaw gets a mention along with
others all of whom no doubt make
sacrifices to provide our union with
an executive that makes us what we
are.
On the diversity of candidates, the
president’s comments have started
the conversation, a conversation that
some would hide from rather than
discuss so openly. Instead, the
president is being taken to task for
starting the debate and the only
reason I can see for this is self-
interest on the part of Mr Shaw.
Before I get accused of electioneering
can I just highlight that I'm just a
member with no aspirations for
senior office in our great union, so
I'm sure I'm alright speaking like
this and I wish Brother Shaw all the
best in his aspirations, and President
Hoyle keep writing your columns as
we all enjoy reading them offshore.
Let's not hide from the issue, start
the conversation and let's be more
diverse and democratic in the future
Yours, Joe Kirby
RMT offshore energy branch
EQUALITY
Dear editor,
I write in response to Brother
Shaw’s letter in February issue of
RMT News.
This being the same issue that
launched the RMT's Charter for
Women which "is a tool to be used
by all members to acknowledge that
women still suffer discrimination”.
I am one of the 8.5 per cent of
women in our union that is a
workplace health and safety rep even
though we only make up 15 per cent
of the membership. This is not okay.
This does not fairly or reasonably
reflect our membership.
Brother Shaw’s letter largely
dismisses the importance of equality.
As a union we quite rightly uphold
the importance of educating
ourselves, agitating and organising
and that must include educating
ourselves about what it is like to be
someone who is not white, straight
or male. I am not male and I am not
straight but I am white and I have
much to learn about what it is to be
a person of colour. It is an
uncomfortable ride to stare your
privilege in the eye but a necessary
and important one.
I am disappointed and quite honestly
hurt to see our president attacked for
standing up for equality. The idea of
being elected on merit is naive at
best and ignorant at worst. The
barriers that Women, BEM, LGBTQ+
and disabled workers face are real
and should not be casually
dismissed.
Let’s talk about it, let’s educate
ourselves and let’s do all we can do
ensure the highest positions in our
union are not eternally held by one
type of person.
In Solidarity,
Cat Cray Workplace H&S rep
DIVERSITY
Dear editor,
Our national black and ethnic
minority members’ advisory
committee represents over 14,000
black and ethnic minority members
in RMT.
We have always maintained a
concern with how lack of diversity in
senior RMT union decision-making
roles fails to accurately reflect our
whole membership.
Unsurprisingly our RMT president,
being the type of person he is and
having joined us at our last two
annual conferences, shares our
concerns.
In 2018 we celebrate 25 years of our
national black and ethnic minority
members’ conferences. Yet we are
still constantly battling head office
for resources and the ability to be
allowed to make our own decisions.
So, while Bro Steve Shaw (RMT
News, February edition) may take
exception with the RMT president
highlighting a disparity in how all
senior decision-making RMT roles
are filled by white, middle-aged
males, the problem is real and
supported by a need for our equality
groups so should not be dismissed by
persons with their own ulterior
motives.
Yours fraternally, Glen Hart
NB&EMMAC conference chair
RESERVED SEATS
Dear Editor,
As a member of the Black Ethnic
Minority Members advisory
Committee, I welcome the president's
thoughts on addressing a very real
issue and at the same time I am
frankly quite perturbed to put it
mildly at the approach taken by
Steve Shaw in his response.
We have enough struggle gaining
equality within our workplaces
attempting to have the mind-set
changed to employ and promote
more BME LGBT and women
without a RMT officer compounding
this problem.
It is unhelpful that we have former
NEC officers holding these views. It
epitomises why we need equality
groups. As a union we should be
striving for equality of
representation.
If the RMT president can be
condemned for stating the obvious,
imagine what it is like for the rest of
us saying the same.
It is high time that avenues were
explored and discussions take place
by the NEC with the relevant
advisory committees for suggestions
to address this issue.
An obvious and simple method,
without going into the intricacies of
rules, would be to have reserved
places for chairs of the committees
on to the NEC and then from the
NEC body for election of, for
example, president.
This is just a suggestion, I am sure
that if the commitment was made to
address the under representation a
solution would come into fruition.
And Steve, no the President was not
'blatantly electioneering’ Sean was
stating the blatantly obvious.
However by the tone of your letter it
seems that you are 'blatantly
electioneering.'
It may help to understand the work
we do if Wigan branch sent
delegates to our advisory committee
or conference!
Mo Malik, Liverpool
DISAPPOINTING LETTER
Dear editor,
As an active member for nearly 40
years, I have always been proud to
belong to a union that is held in the
highest regard by other trade unions
and the labour movement, for its
debates on the principle of an issue,
not one that stoops to personal
attacks and rhetoric. Those attitudes
really do belong in the smoke-filled
rooms and back bars of pubs.
Disappointingly, however, there was
a letter in last month’s RMT News
that was exactly that. Even more
surprising from an ex-member of our
NEC who I thought would uphold
that proud reputation.
I appreciate our union has differing
points of view and letters should
reflect that, but I would like to think
letters should create principled
debate, not unquantified opinion and
rhetoric.
Perhaps it would have been more
acceptable, if our brother’s letter had
explained his reasoning about the
subject of the president’s column,
(lack of representation of our
women, black and ethnic members),
rather than this uncomradely
attempt at trying to belittle the
presidents character.
I do hope that this isn’t an attempt
to affect any up coming elections
that they themselves might be
contemplating running in?
Presidents are not just there to
uphold our constitution but should
also act as a guide to our
memberships moral compass. Giving
a more balanced and democratic
approach to our outlook as a union.
Personally, I am proud to belong to a
union that promotes equality and
diversity and that we have a
president who recognises that due
reflection is needed in considering
our future nominees in elections.
Unfortunately, the only thing that
has been devalued here is our
reputation as a forward thinking
principled trade union.
Yours fraternally, Greg Hewitt
Brighton
LETTERS