TUC Anti-Racism Task Force evaluation

Gill Kirton, Professor of Employment Relations, Queen Mary University of London.

Report type

Research and reports

Issue date

10 Jan 2024

2. ARTF Framework

This section of the report describes the structure of the Anti-racism Task Force (ARTF) and begins to identify its strengths and weaknesses as a framework for the union movement’s anti-racism work, which is more fully discussed in the subsequent sections from the perspectives of the various Task Force participant groups.

The ARTF set out with the aim of leading the trade union movement’s renewed campaign against racism at work in its two-year tenure. To this end, between September 2020 and October 2022, it engaged with Black workers across the UK to hear about their experiences, and to provide a framework for affiliates on tackling structural racism in the UK, in workplaces and in unions themselves.

Central to the work of the ARTF was the aim to set a direction for the trade unions in a way that would transform the effectiveness of the union movement's work on anti-racism. Integral to this, it was recognised that there was a need for affiliates to engage with Black members and their senior activists to enable unions to formulate action plans that would produce a new impetus and result in substantive change. The ARTF’s intention was to focus on the implementation of concrete actions from a devised programme of work, with the aim of paving the way to make a positive difference for Black workers, members and staff in unions.

Terms of Reference and aims of Task Force

The TUC General Council set the Terms of Reference for ARTF and established an ambitious and comprehensive set of aims (see Appendix 1) focused on action to accelerate progress on race equality which to date senior TUC leadership acknowledges as slow whether looking at the external labour market or internally within the unions themselves.

The Main Task Force inaugural meeting in December 2020 noted that ARTF was not established to ‘reinvent the wheel’ (i.e. it was acknowledged that there is ongoing anti-racism work in some unions), but to get things done across the union movement. It was also noted as important to remember that the ARTF was set up to tackle the institutional racism in the labour market first identified by the landmark Macpherson Report (1999) (the outcome of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry), and to encourage dialogue amongst affiliated unions, their partners, and members about how to progress the longstanding anti-racism agenda.

At the inaugural meeting of the ARTF, members who had been on the Stephen Lawrence Task Group some 20 years earlier were given the opportunity to share their experiences and what they expected as outcomes for the current Task Force. Key points from that discussion were:

It was agreed that the Stephen Lawrence Task Group was a defining moment for the union movement which had secured commitment to tackling racism from senior union leaders.
The biennial TUC Equality Audit was one of the substantive outcomes of the Task Group which has been used to quantify what the unions are doing regarding race, a process which has held the individual unions to account as well as opening a dialogue between the unions. It was seen as a powerful and insightful tool/resource.
The Task Group had challenged the government which had denied there was institutional racism.

While the Stephen Lawrence Task Group was seen as a defining moment in setting a new agenda for anti-racism work in the union movement, there was now a sense in senior TUC leadership that thinking around how best to set about tackling racism had moved on over the last couple of decades and that ‘new’ thinking influenced the ARTF structure. It is noteworthy that while it was seen as important for white union leaders to be committed and involved, greater Black representation within the ranks of senior union leaders meant that it was deemed essential to ensure that that Black representation was reflected within the structure of ARTF. Therefore, senior TUC leadership proposed a new way of working, namely installing a senior black leader at the helm as well as aiming to have more black union officers and reps/activists involved in informing its agenda and actions.

The main lesson senior TUC leadership had drawn from the experience of the Stephen Lawrence Task Group was that ARTF needed to be more action focused and attentive to core areas of union activity including collective bargaining and organising. Equally, the ARTF Main Committee understood that it was time for unions ‘to get their own houses in order’ as regards internal black under-representation and this became an accepted refrain and leitmotif for ARTF within and beyond the Unions as Employers Workstream. Another frequently used phrase to define the overall aim of ARTF was ‘action not words’ with a strong sense among participants that not enough had been done or achieved within the union movement since the Stephen Lawrence Task Group.

Structure and composition of the Task Force

Membership of the ARTF Main Committee was decided by the TUC General Council. It was made up of General Council members, TUC Race Relations Committee members and members from civil society and academia (Appendix 2). As the Task Force proceeded, it was largely union-side members who steered the work while the relationships with external members did not seem to fully mature or translate into substantive contributions. How the union movement works with and alongside external ‘stakeholders’ (e.g. voluntary sector and community organisations) is a longstanding conversation and conundrum.

The Main Committee identified and co-opted additional members for the four Workstreams. The various tasks contained within the work of the ARTF were largely carried out by TUC staff who were highly praised by Task Force participants for their hard work and dedication.

It is noteworthy that the Main Task Force on the union side consisted of a selection of the most senior union leaders – General Secretaries – most of whom are white. The thinking behind the TUC senior leadership’s and the General Council’s decision to assemble a Task Force comprising the most senior union leaders had been that it was essential to gain top-level commitment (and therefore the main holders of power) if ARTF was to have the desired impact and achieve the aim of becoming a new framework for union anti-racism work that would embed anti-racism across all aspects of union activity rather than leave it siloed in an equality space with which engagement is usually more or less voluntary and spasmodic (at best) on the part of mainstream union leaders, officers and committees. There was also concern that the Task Force should model an inclusive approach to anti-racism work whereby the work is not left to Black trade unionists and Black structures/networks but framed as a project that all trade unionists should be concerned with and from which all workers and union members would benefit. The inclusion of white union leaders symbolised this approach. Those who were invited were ‘delighted’, ‘honoured’ and generally it was seen as an invitation that was hard to refuse given the wider context outlined earlier.

One question raised by a few general secretaries and union officers as well as activists was where was the grassroots representation of Black workers and members? This became a recurrent theme in the evaluation exercise. One general secretary elaborated:

“I suppose my concern would be how much the TUC project was really rooted amongst rank- and-file Black workers in unions. Representation on the body seemed to me to be drawn from the TUC leadership, the TUC Executive Committee. So the question raised in my union from our Black workers was why aren’t we on it? I think we didn’t have strong enough links into those Black structures across our movement. I think that’s a weakness. It leaves you vulnerable to the charge that it’s all top-down and optically looks very appealing, but what is it achieving at grassroots level?”

The Main Task Force Committee met quarterly and was reasonably well attended throughout the two-year period. The first year of the Task Force concentrated on the establishment of structures and ways of working as well as a programme of research and evidence gathering, which added to extant evidence revealing the scale and impact of institutional racism and systemic race inequalities across the labour market and wider society. This work was carried out by the four Workstreams.

Task Force Workstreams

In addition to the Main Task Force Committee with overall oversight, the ARTF established four individual workstreams on (i) Collective Bargaining, (ii) Organising, (iii) Public Policy and (iv) Unions as Employers, to undertake its work. The Workstreams were each chaired by a union general secretary from the Main Task Force Committee. Other members included individuals representing a range of unions in different capacities, the TUC (including members of the Race Relations Committee) and other interested parties (academics, journalists) working in the anti-racism space. It is noteworthy that general secretaries of the larger unions were able to delegate much of the actual work of the Task Force Workstreams to equalities or HR staff. For the smaller unions with few officers and staff, it was much more difficult to get the practical work done although general secretaries were of the view that this was largely achieved.

The intention had been for Workstreams to meet monthly or bi-monthly. In practice, there was inconsistency among Workstreams around frequency of meetings, but all four met regularly through 2021 and 2022. Attendance at meetings was also inconsistent and uneven across Workstreams with the number of delegates from unions in each meeting being quite small (3-5) which was somewhat demoralising for the TUC officers tasked with supporting the ARTF and with executing most of the practical work arising from the Workstreams. The intention to gain not just commitment but active involvement of the most senior trade union leaders was laudable but given that they are very busy people (with somewhat unpredictable and necessarily responsive schedules), it seems hardly surprising that attendance among them was inconsistent. Some commented candidly in interview that they had been ‘honoured’, ‘delighted’ to take part in this important initiative, but that it had been challenging to make the necessary time available. While the general secretaries of the larger unions had the resources to nominate a substitute to attend Workstream meetings and participate actively in the work, such resources were more difficult to marshal for smaller resource-stretched unions. Nevertheless, despite the challenges most Task Force participants agreed that it was the right thing to do to involve smaller unions since they bring different perspectives to the table not least due to the often single occupational/industrial group they represent.

A lot of thought and discussion went into defining the four Workstreams which essentially comprised two externally facing areas of union activity – Collective Bargaining and Public Policy – and two internally facing areas – Unions as Employers and Organising. These are all core areas of union activity where it is undoubtably essential to inject a race/ethnicity lens, but where this has historically been lacking or inconsistent even if not entirely absent. The four Workstreams accounted to the Main Task Force Committee with regular progress updates at meetings, showcasing practical work accomplished as well as pinpointing future action items.

Post ARTF Roadmap

The report to Congress in October 2022 included recommendations for the trade union movement as regards ongoing work to promote racial equality and encourage unions to continue building on the Task Force’s framework in their own unions utilising the new or refreshed resources, from the toolkits to the evidence base.

An Anti-Racism Manifesto covers pledges from each of the workstreams.3 Every trade union were expected to endorse this at their annual conference and put the ARTF report – Building an anti-racist trade union movement 4 – in front of their NECs plus formally endorse the manifesto as a motion. This was seen as a first step to securing the commitment of individual unions to take the principles of the manifesto forward in their unions.
TUC affiliated unions are also expected to develop an Action Plan 5 to contribute to building an anti-racist trade union movement. In the ARTF report (above) there are detailed actions/recommendations for the movement which cover ‘building our movement’; ‘fighting for our rights’; and ‘leading by example’.

A rolling discussion within the various ARTF committees and forums was around how best to facilitate wider union engagement with the Task Force and its work and in particular engagement with general secretaries (and unions) that were not Task Force members. This issue remained a theme and a concern for some (discussion later) throughout the two-year period and is an ongoing concern.

Implementation and Oversight Group

At the end of the two years in October 2022, there was commitment to sustaining the programme of work that ARTF had initiated and it was recognised that to do this a structure to support affiliates would be necessary. The TUC established an Implementation and Oversight Group to take the work forward over the next five years (Terms of Reference in Appendix 3). The purpose of the Implementation and Oversight group (IOG) is to continue the work of ARTF as set out in the Manifesto6 , to continue to champion the agenda of racial justice and equality, and to hold the trade union movement to account to deliver on the recommendations proposed and agreed from the ARTF. It is intended that this group will provide a strategic steer to the trade union movement, building on the ARTF work and additional anti-racism initiatives and programmes.

From 2023, the IOG is responsible for working with the Race Relations Committee and General Council to oversee and monitor the implementation of recommendations from the Task Force report to Congress (October 2022). Thus, through the IOG, the intention is for ARTF to act as an ongoing governance structure for the TUC’s (and affiliates’) anti-racism work. The IOG will report quarterly to the General Council and annually to TUC Congress on the progress being made in delivering the actions on collective bargaining, organising, public policy and unions as employers over the next five years.

The membership of the IOG is:

TUC General Secretary
TUC President
ARTF Chair
Race Relations Committee Chair

Summary

The ARTF was set up with many of the hallmarks of a good governance structure for unions’ anti-racism work comprising:

A clear and agreed vision as communicated through the Terms of Reference
A strategy for delivering on the aims through the Workstream set-up, each with its own discrete aims and objectives and committee
Appropriate leadership, in particular a senior Black leader at the helm, but inclusion in the Main Task Force Committee of other senior union leaders as well as some representation from the TUC Race Relations Committee which spread ownership beyond Black trade unionists
Accountability mechanisms to ensure progress, with Workstream committees reporting to the Main Task Force Committee, with links to the TUC Race Relations Committee and a final report to TUC Congress
A strategy for continuing and building the programme of work in the form of Action Plans that TUC affiliates were asked to sign up to at the end of two-year period and the Implementation and Oversight Group for a post-Task Force 5-year period at least working with a Manifesto

On governance, a question remains about to what extent and how the ARTF ensured it had adequate input from Black officers, members and activists to ensure its relevance for those groups. One criticism voiced by a few Task Force participants was around perceptions of the role the TUC’s Race Relations Committee had played in the ARTF. One participant described it as akin to a ‘junior partner’ and another said that while the Race Relations Committee had representation on the Task Force, it did not have much influence on the setting of the agenda. Some felt that this had been a missed opportunity to tap Black trade unionists’ existing ideas and knowledge that could have been avoided with more careful thought and a greater appetite for listening. This issue is returned to later in the report.

While overall, ARTF was functional as a framework, in practical terms it appears that the Task Force operated with greater resource constraints compared to the earlier Stephen Lawrence Task Group which reportedly had relatively large financial investment. The Workstream Chairs felt these constraints particularly keenly including the very practical need for additional administrative support for the activities of workstreams in order that agreed actions could be carried out in a timely and effective manner. Despite these constraints inevitably impacting upon outputs and delivery of actions, the range of information and evidence gathered to define and support future actions was impressive even if it left ARTF subject to criticism for spending too much time doing research. If this evidence base does not convince unions to prioritise action on racism, it would doubtless be a major blow to ARTF and the sustainability of the work that it has kick started (discussed later).

Relevance of the Anti-racism Task Force in the historical moment

The question of relevance concerns the extent to which the objectives of the Anti-racism Task Force (ARTF) were consistent with the needs of unions vis-à-vis their Black members at this point in time. This is an important question to consider in the evaluation of the Task Force.

As stated earlier, some 20 years after the TUC’s previous major campaign on anti-racism in the guise of the Stephen Lawrence Task Group 7 set up to tackle institutional racism in the name of the teenager murdered in a brutal racist street attack, there were once again several external factors that shone a light on racism and contributed to the birth of the ARTF in late 2020. These included the brutal police murder of George Floyd in the US that sent shock waves around the world; global protests organised by the Black Lives Matter movement; the Windrush debacle and the ‘hostile environment’ created for Black people born outside of the UK by the government; the disproportionate impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on Black workers. In addition to these high-profile events and issues, we continue to witness an avalanche of evidence of race inequalities in the labour market which the union movement continues to spotlight and fight against through media and workplace campaigns. One Black officer echoed others with the comment:

“When I heard about this [ARTF], I was filled with hope because I thought now at least we are talking about racism again and under the new language of anti-racism. And because of the way it was set up, the fact that it was everybody’s problem and it started at the top with all general secretaries obliged to play a key role in the Task Force and that said to me, this is something that’s not just going to be a two- or three-year programme, that there’s going to be some longevity to it.”

Each general secretary participating in ARTF could illustrate the current and ongoing relevance of an anti-racism programme of work for the sectors, industries and occupations their unions represented from education, probation, the civil service, healthcare in the public sector to the retail industry, transport, and other areas in the private sector. Wherever their location, senior union leaders spoke about the unequal labour market conditions still facing Black workers such as greater likelihood of lower pay and fewer prospects; recruitment discrimination; bullying and harassment; lack of voice in the workplace and in their unions. In short, senior union leaders did not need to be convinced that the institutional racism first named in the Macpherson report still exists today in wider society and the labour market.8

“I think society has changed in the UK in some respects around race, but as we’ve seen in recent years racism hasn’t gone away and of course it’s fuelled by events elsewhere in the world.”

Contextualising the establishment of ARTF, one general secretary put it as follows:

“The Task Force was born at a time with the Covid pandemic when Black workers were dying on the job and the TUC’s own evidence was pointing to Black workers not being confident about coming to unions to seek support. Why? Because they didn’t believe they would get that support.”

Task Force participants agreed that this historical moment with its constellation of high-profile events spotlighting racism, compelled the union movement “to step up to the plate” and break with conventional priorities and routines to do something new and different that would speak to the realities and concerns of Black workers. One general secretary described it as a ‘once in a generation’ opportunity for the union movement to play its part “in building the momentum of the worldwide outrage against racism”. Some Task Force participants detected an upsurge in interest in ‘doing something’; one equality officer said she had been inundated with emails from branches and individual members wanting to find out what the union was planning; she said it was hugely inspiring, “when was last time you had people banging on your door asking, what can I do to fight racism?”

Equality officers were of the view that a Task Force focused on racism was absolutely needed to counter the politicised narrative that we now live in a post-racial society where we may observe socio-economic disparities but not social inequalities. This was essentially the narrative posited by the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities in the report led by Dr Tony Sewell 9 , which was much criticised by the unions and other commentators for attempting to diminish the impact of structural and institutional discrimination on the everyday lives of Black people.10 To this extent, such reports threaten to undo the work initiated by the Macpherson Report and built by the TUC’s Stephen Lawrence Task Group.

Although the general secretaries highlighted their own union’s prior (to ARTF) and ongoing action and initiatives centred on anti-racism, there was consensus that the union movement needed to do better and that some of that work in individual unions had lapsed during the pandemic period when other imperatives had absorbed resources. Black union activists/members as well as some union officers described this moment as the union movement’s ‘last chance’ to act on racism in the labour market; they did not want this to be a ‘moment’ when it seemed right to act because of high-profile events globally, but that one that later gets consigned to history or ‘put back on the shelf’ as some Task Force participants as well as equality officers put it.

One union officer said that while it is very easy for unions to repeatedly say that ‘equality is at the heart of everything we do’, a lot of (white) trade unionists simply do not understand the systemic and structural nature of racism and still see it more in terms of acts of abuse or harassment perpetrated by individuals against individuals. Therefore, the issues do not get collectivised into calls for wider and deeper action. Echoing others, this union officer among others also felt that unions were particularly reluctant to confront racism within their own ranks and organisations, which made for an uncomfortable, yet necessary conversation.

The wider picture of labour market inequalities for Black workers also now permeates the conversation about unions as employers. As regards internal equality, the landscape within unions is still subject to and deserving of criticism on grounds of under-representation and treatment of Black union officers/staff and leaders. Some participants referred to the “concrete ceiling” for Black staff in unions that reaches from the TUC – where there is only one Black officer in the senior management team – to individual unions where Black general secretaries are scarce and Black officials are lacking even though not entirely absent. Some participants also observed that the Black union officers/staff that do exist are most likely to have the equalities brief. While it was accepted that there will always be Black workers who choose to work in the equalities space, this area should not seem like the only viable union career option. This under-representation gap creates a lot of pressure for Black officers/senior staff (who can feel alone and sometimes literally be the lone Black person) in terms of trying to do their jobs in ways that feel authentic (e.g. speaking up as and for Black workers) and yet sustaining and progressing careers without coming up against the ‘concrete ceiling’. For this reason, the ‘Unions as Employers’ Workstream was seen as a necessary element of ARTF by all those interviewed including the largely white group of general secretaries. Inclusion of this Workstream creates a structure for the conversation about racism and the needs for an anti-racism agenda within unions to take place.

Equally, Black activists who participated in the evaluation spoke about the racism they had encountered within union structures, particularly at branch level but also involving full-time regional/national officers. Black officers and activists stated things like, “I’m the first [Black person in this role]”; “there’s no one who looks like me [around]”. One Black activist told the story of how he had tried to get his union branch to acknowledge the rule book requirement for an equality rep, but his proposition had been rejected by the branch committee. There were accounts of bullying, of complaints or experiences related to workplace racism being dismissed or doubted by other lay or paid union officers, of feeling marginalised and isolated within the union that was meant to be there to defend and protect them.

The Black activists who participated in the evaluation were longstanding in their unions and although they felt to some extent let down and disillusioned, they were also resilient and determined to have their voices heard on behalf of Black workers/members. They were also optimistic; most had not yet given up on unions. One striking account was from a Black activist who had been a member of the same union for 40 years but had not felt supported or encouraged to get involved until a few years ago when a senior Black officer appeared in her region. Other activists had witnessed micro aggressions against Black people in union meetings and training events and heard Black people objectified with phrases like ‘these people’ prefacing gross generalisations about how Black people are, how they behave, etc. The demand was for the people who run meetings or tutor training events to have the confidence and awareness to call out such behaviours which would signal inclusivity to Black activists.

Other Task Force participants as well as equality officers echoed the view that an anti-racism agenda is most likely pursued where there are Black activists and officers championing the cause, but sometimes at some cost to themselves in terms of stress and wellbeing mentioned by several Task Force participants. It was a palpable source of disappointment that this conclusion is reached in 2023 when it has been talked about for so long:

“I’m not saying that it’s the role of Black people to be taking the issue of race equality forward. But I am saying that if we’re not in the room, it’s not even discussed. It’s what I’m saying my members are saying, we don’t see anyone who looks like us.” (Black activist)

Thinking about how the TUC, unions and the ARTF engaged with this context of relative scarcity of Black offers and activists, one fundamental question raised by several Task Force participants, including general secretaries, was the extent to which the ARTF programme was rooted among Black workers and activists including whether there were sufficient links to, consultation with and input from Black activists. Although the TUC Race Relations Committee was represented quite well in the Task Force, as several Task Force participants commented, being there and being listened to are not necessarily the same thing and there was certainly a degree of discontent among Black participants about the degree to which Black voices were heard. Similarly, workshops were held at the TUC Black Workers Conference to discuss ARTF and views were fed back into the Task Force, but again there was some scepticism around whether those views influenced the agenda. One message that some participants felt was not heard was the plea from Black members/activists for more action rather than research. Clearly there is more work to do in building not just links, but also trust between Black structures and the Task Force.

Summary

The purpose of this section has been to show through the insights and perspectives of those who took part in the evaluation that a renewed push on an anti-racism agenda for the union movement is something that is very much needed, desired and demanded. Distributing ownership of that agenda beyond Black activists and officers is also something that is both necessary and desired, but equally it must endure beyond this historical moment with its constellation of high-profile events spotlighting racism. While this context has compelled the union movement “to step up to the plate”, it is clear that there are high expectations that action will follow and be sustained.

Single page view

Stay Updated

Want to hear about our latest news and blogs?
Sign up now to get it straight to your inbox

Join a union