Today, 2026 May 3, marks the centenary of the onset of a general strike in the UK. In response to a dispute over the organisation and pay in British coal mines following the end of a fixed-term government subsidy, the Trades Union Congress called out many affiliated unions in sympathy. Between 1.7 million and 3 million workers came out, with some unions striking only after the general strike officially ended on the 12th.
Reactions to the strike shaped relationships between government and workers, unions and the Labour Party, the secret service and the unions, the secret service and the Labour Party, unions and the TUC, the government and the BBC, the BBC and the newspapers, and other organisations in ways that still impact British society today.
This is not that story. This is the story of the truism at the core of the general strike and the government’s response: in a dispute between you and your employer, you can’t rely on the government for help. Only your trade union can support you in that dispute, by providing resources, training, expertise, and solidarity, by intervening in your case and by representing you and others like you collectively to try to create a situation where your working conditions don’t lead to a grievance.
This isn’t to say that industrial disputes and politics are completely unrelated, nor that trades unions don’t get involved in political issues. This happens, and it happens in matters that are important to their members. It can change outcomes in important ways; if you didn’t work over the weekend, or on May 1st (or instead, if you’re in the UK, aren’t working tomorrow on Monday May 4th), you can thank the unions for that. However, having been a union branch committee member and a caseworker, I know that political representation doesn’t change employer attitudes or policies as rapidly as case support and direct involvement.
Additionally, only a trade union can represent the positions of you and me, and of people like you and me, in the workplace, by being democratically constituted bodies where everyone can submit and vote on motions to define their position. Employer-sponsored feedback groups or consultative committees are opportunities for employers to hear that everything is fine from people they trust to say everything is fine. Maybe they might stock more biscuits in the break room, if you work on site.
I’ve made the point before on this blog that technology doesn’t steal jobs; employers do. People worry about the effects of AI on employment for various reasons: the Taylorist argument that it increases productivity and reduces labour needs; the Captain Swing view that it replaces creativity and individual expression; the Weberian view that it centralises control and power.
All of these things can occur simultaneously, and other effects too. The point is that everybody is facing this. If your concern is inadequate training, or redundancy, or unfavourable contracts, the solution is to work together with others to address that. Industrial action, in the form of strikes or what UK law calls “action short of a strike”, is only the big tool at the bottom of the drawer that we workers use when negotiation and conciliation fail. But the negotiations, along with the other actions, succeed more when those doing the bargaining represent all of us.
