10-minute read
Dermot Feenan
LLB MA LLM Barrister-at-Law FRSA
.
On 5 September 2023, the RSA Union, made up of unionised members of staff at the Royal Society of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (RSA), London, England, announced that they would be going on strike—the first strike at the charity since it was founded almost 270 years ago.
The members are represented by the Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain (IWGB).
The strike started on 19 September 2023 and is scheduled to continue, subject to any resolution of the dispute with management, on 21 September 2023.
As a Fellow of the RSA, I support the strike action by staff members in the union. On 7 September 2023, I posted to that effect on the social media platform X.
The purpose of this essay is to elaborate on the reasons for that support and to do so in a place and format that is intended to be more accessible than on X.
Unionised staff turnout and vote
The vast majority of members voting in the ballot elected to strike, at 93.33%. There was a 78.95% turnout of members (a significant proportion of the RSA’s total staff). This provides an emphatic, very strong mandate for the industrial action.
A number of statements regarding this dispute have now been placed into the public domain by RSA management and by the union. I do not intend to repeat these here, still less seek to judge those statements. Readers can access these statements online.
The union members post on the social media platform X via their account @RsaUnion. Details of the union’s position have also been included in an online invitation to Fellows to send a letter to RSA management. In addition, the IWGB issued a statement online on 5 September 2023 following the vote by members of the union to strike.
In early September 2023, the RSA issued a response to statements in the media about its approach to the dispute—here and here. The RSA had previously posted statements regarding union recognition, here. On 18 September 2023, the Chief Executive of the RSA also addressed the dispute in his weekly email to Fellows. Given that this was sent to Fellows only, I will not, in the absence of any other countervailing considerations presently, share the content of that email here. A number of responses from others to that email are in the public domain.
One Fellow, Nairn McDonald, described the “tone” of the email as “unacceptable”, adding that “the language used was inflammatory”.
Another Fellow and former RSA employee, Josie Warden (who was Head of Regenerative Design, RSA), expressed shock at part of the email.
It is necessary to note that there is an ongoing industrial dispute which needs to be resolved satisfactorily for both parties in the interests of the RSA as a whole. Having read all of these relevant statements, I remain in support of the union’s request for improved pay and benefits.
Cost-of-living challenges for staff in London
It is clear there are concerns among unionised staff that pay and benefits are insufficient.
In an article on the eve of ballot result, The Guardian referred to a member of RSA staff who had decided to leave London because his pay at the RSA had not kept pace with rent rises.
The Office for National Statistics reports that London’s annual percentage change in private rental prices was 5.5% in the 12 months to July 2023, above the England average and its highest annual rate since the London data series began in January 2006.
Private renters on a median household income in London pay considerably more of their income on rent in London compared with other parts of the UK.
Inflation in the cost of living is exacerbating the strain on workers, with disproportionate strain on those earning relatively less than others in the capital (which includes a proportion of staff at the RSA)—as this ‘Cost of Living Tracker’ graph from Trust for London shows.
The increase in estimated spending from early 2020 is pronounced. There are numerous other sources of data, such as can be found on the London Datastore for the Greater London Authority, that confirm the distinctive challenges that workers face in the capital.
The Guardian article on the eve of the ballot added that the former member of staff at the RSA said that management had refused to budge in five rounds of negotiations and imposed what amounted to a real-term pay cut this year.
“The negotiations have been totally dismissive, anti-democratic and hypocritical. The RSA talks a lot about collaboration, openness, participation but they are failing to put this into practice,” he said.
Damage to reputation
I noted in my thread on 7 September that failure by management to resolve this dispute promptly would harm the RSA’s reputation, linking to the coverage in The Observer, BBC News, and The Guardian.
- ‘Hypocritical’ Royal Society of Arts faces its first strike in 270 years, The Observer, 2 September 2023
- Royal Society of Arts faces first strike action, BBC News, 6 September 2023
- Royal Society of Arts staff vote to strike for first time in its history, The Guardian, 5 September 2023.
Former RSA staff also refer to this harm. Tomas Wright, ex-Business Development and Partnerships Manager at the RSA, says the RSA is damaging its reputation “through refusing to support its workers and continually putting out false narratives”.
On the first day of the strike, Zack Polanski, the Deputy Leader of the Green Party in the UK, spoke in support of union members. He referred to having found on the RSA website its commitment to ‘world-changing ideas for world-changing actions’ before asking “well, how about paying your staff properly?” He posted that on X, so it’s now available globally.
The first day of the strike was covered by the media, with this headline in Civil Society: ‘Exploitation “all too common” in charity sector, says union as RSA staff strike’.
In addition, there have been public reports of censorship of a Fellow’s question on the RSA Fellowship platform ‘Circle’ about the dispute.
It is puzzling to me how a Fellow’s question on the RSA communication channel for Fellows about the dispute infringes the Community Guidelines governing communication on that channel. This raises serious questions not only about freedom of expression but also adherence to the RSA’s values.
The first value includes the statement that “we welcome new thinking and different perspectives.”
With each day that passes without resolution of this dispute, there is evidence that the RSA’s reputation may be further damaged.
Harm to staff
The dispute also harms current staff struggling in a cost-of-living crisis. A former employee at the RSA, who expresses solidarity with ex-union colleagues seeking resolution of the dispute, says “this saga has been gruelling and disheartening”.
Another former employee, Josie Warden, who was mentioned earlier, posted on X her concern: “It’s been devastating to see and hear how staff are being treated now and how badly the org is being let down by both management and trustees.”
Following the announcement of the strike, Abi Stephenson, former senior curator of the RSA’s events programme, posted on X: “Solidarity with the very few ex-colleagues who still remain at the RSA, and the many new staff who’ve been unlucky to experience this incredible org in its current incarnation. Hope the new stewards of this unique institution are able to chart a course closer to its core values”.
There are clearly concerns among some staff and former staff about management, and part of these concerns centre on the protracted and evidently at times fraught process of recognition of the union and subsequent attempts to resolve the current pay and benefits claim.
The RSA’s programme on ‘good work’ makes clear the importance of a positive relationship between management and staff, not only for productivity and quality of work but as well for—amongst other things—staff retention.
Indeed, at one of the programme’s panel discussions, the future Chief Executive of the RSA linked pay rises with productivity: “rises in pay may themselves also cause higher levels of productivity by building commitment and satisfaction among workers in their jobs.”
Another of the panellists, Tera Allas, Director of Research and Economics, McKinsey, said: “CBI surveys have consistently shown that if people are unhappy in their work, the number one reason is their boss.”
When asked for guidance on what ‘good work’ looks like, panellist Kate Bell, Head of Rights, TUC, replied: “If you want to know what good work is in your particular workplace, ask your workers.”
Language that unnecessarily divides staff and management will likely contribute to conflict, harming the RSA and its work.
Effect on Fellows
A number of former Fellows of the RSA responded to news of the imminent strike ballot by revealing that they had resigned from Fellowship (see post below, for example).
Another former Fellow resigned for several reasons, including management’s treatment of union members. Her first reason: ‘the way management have handled negotiations has been less than helpful.’ Other Fellows have resigned for similar reasons.
A former Fellow for 20 years and Deputy Chair of the RSA’s Fellowship Council posted on X: “Sadly there has been a fundamental shift in culture which feels very unhealthy.”
Some Fellows have indicated that they are considering their future relationship with the RSA because of management’s approach to the union (see post below, for example).
One Fellow says that management’s references to staff involved in the dispute in “such a patronising way makes me want to resign too.”
Other former Fellows say that they resigned because of the direction of the RSA (see post below, for example).
All this adds further reason to why RSA management should respond constructively with the union.
The RSA’s Chair of Trustees and its CEO note in the latest RSA annual report that Fellows “have provided the commitment and support, ideas and inspiration needed to take forward [the RSA’s] transformative programme of change”.
It is perhaps important here to recall the Open Letter to the RSA signed by over 200 Fellows of the RSA, including some of my colleagues in law, in support of the request by RSA staff to gain union recognition at the RSA, which states, in part:
“Trade unions are not the enemy in the workplace, they are a vital part of ensuring positive workplace relations between staff and management. When properly supported, trade unions are a force for good.”
Exercising a lawful, democratic vote to take industrial action is not incompatible with the interests of a charity. In a society that values the rule of law and democracy, it is essential and important.
These are now serious issues which have been brought into the public domain on foot of a lawful, democratic dispute, which, whether we like it or not, involves RSA management.
RSA Values
Collective action
It would be tragic if management cannot resolve this dispute with the union given that one of the RSA’s commitments is to ‘collective action’ to help it achieve its goals. Unionisation and union action such as the strike, are perhaps among the most obvious examples of collective action. Their importance is reflected in the fact they are expressly protected in UK law (and elsewhere).
One of the RSA’s five ‘values’ states: “We are confident that together, we can regenerate our world through collective action” (see below)
This reference to ‘collective action’ is also used as a leading statement on the RSA webpage explaining why someone might wish to apply to become a Fellow.
The webpage states: “Together, we are committed to regenerating our world through collective action.”
Valuing collective action includes respecting unionisation and seeking to resolve in good faith a lawful and democratically mandated union demand for better pay.
Generosity, respect and collaboration
One of the RSA’s other values includes the following statement: “Through generosity, respect and collaboration, we help others succeed.”
Some have questioned, on the basis of what has been stated in the public domain regarding the dispute, whether this value has been honoured.
These values, and the RSA’s other three values, are vital to the organisation. They are lodestars, guiding the direction and activities of the organisation.
They are also representations to the public, potential fellows, and others—such as funders and partners.
RSA Strategy
In addition, the RSA’s agreed ‘Strategy’ has been designed around two principles, the first of which states: ‘Our mission will only be realised as ONE RSA, comprising staff, Fellows, and partners, working collaboratively and with common purpose.’
This Strategy makes clear that the RSA’s mission requires staff, which includes the Senior Leadership Team and unionised staff, to work collaboratively.
The Strategy’s reference to ‘working collaboratively’ echoes the reference to ‘collaboration’ in the RSA’s Values.
RSA’s Vision
The RSA states that its vision is “a world where everyone can fulfil their potential and contribute to more resilient, rebalanced and regenerative futures” (see relevant text below, which I have highlighted in royal blue).
The ability of individuals to fulfil their potential and contribute in such ways is fundamentally linked to their material circumstances. When people can no longer afford to work for an organisation because their pay falls below fairly basic living costs, where their aspirations to flourish within an organisation are frustrated by management, when they become so disillusioned that they leave, it cannot be said that they are being enabled to fulfil their potential and make such contributions. Any organisation that makes universal claims about a vision for potential and contribution yet does not enable the potential and contribution of its own workers is not meeting its vision.
RSA’s Royal Charter, education and the strike
The Charter which governs the Society states, in part, that one of the purposes of the Society is the “advancement of education in and the encouragement and conduct of research into the sustainable context within which the […] Arts Manufactures and Commerce may prosper and be managed efficiently.”
That purpose is also one of the ‘objects’ of the society as a charity governed by law.
The reference to ‘education’ and ‘research’ in this context carries a broad set of associated obligations. As was noted by Aarti Thakor, Director of Legal Services at the Charity Commission, regarding free speech and charities: “Education and learning cannot move forward unless ideas are open to rigorous challenge and healthy debate.”
The RSA has historically played an important role in such debate. One of the earliest instances was the Conference on Strikes and Lock-outs held at the Society on 30 January 1854. That conference was prompted in large part by the Preston strike of 1853-54 which saw widespread withdrawal of labour among cotton weavers in the north east of England for an increase in their pay.
Peter Le Neve Foster, the Secretary to the RSA, opened the conference. He exemplifies just some of the qualities evident among the RSA’s diverse Fellowship. A barrister and mathematician, he was known as an innovator during his time as Secretary.
He was also one of the pioneers of photography, helping to found the Photographic Society of London (now, Royal Photographic Society)—among the world’s first photographic societies.
As Secretary of the RSA, he played a significant role in the Society’s organisation of the Great Exhibition of 1851 and its successor 1862 International Exhibition.
The Chair of the conference, Lord Robert Grosvenor MP, referred to the Preston strike, and added:
“whatever may be the right or wrong of this question, one thing is sufficiently obvious—that loss, privation, and suffering, have been endured; heart-burnings, and feelings of irritation have been engendered between parties, whose true interests, if well understood, are identical, and whose welfare is bound up one with the other […] [L]et us always remember that we are all of us members of the same community, and that no damage can be received by any portion of that community without being felt sooner or later, or more remotely or more immediately by all the remainder of it.”
Those words surely have some resonance in relation to the current dispute?
The RSA is a non-partisan charity. Its various events and growing Fellowship comprise ideas and individuals from across the political spectrum. As the historian of the RSA Anton Howes notes: “Its members have included Adam Smith, Edmund Burke, and Karl Marx, founding fathers of liberalism, conservatism, and communism [respectively].” It’s a society that has been granted a Royal Charter, yet it includes Fellows who are republicans. It is a broad church. This is one of the RSA’s strengths.
Acknowledgement of the RSA’s valuable work
The achievements of the RSA throughout its history are clear, not least as noted by Howes in his book Arts and Minds: How the Royal Society of Arts Changed a Nation.
There are numerous examples of such achievements in recent years.
Securing, supporting and delivering on these achievements depends in significant part on retaining well-qualified, well-paid and well-motivated staff at the RSA.
In September 2021, the RSA launched the Good Work Guild to reimagine a modern guild, focused on community and social innovation aimed at engaging future of work practitioners, advocates, and social entrepreneurs working together to ensure that everyone can pursue good work in an age of technological change. One of the five principles of the Guild is that everyone should enjoy work that “provides enough economic security for people to be able to participate equally in society.” In September 2022, the RSA published a Guild document which elaborated on this concept of economic security: “Economic security for a better planet is the capacity of individuals, households, and communities to provide for, contribute to, and flourish within an environment where human security and the security of the planet and eco-system are paramount” (emphasis added). That document illustrated this approach with reference to “housing, health, income, and dignified work, ensuring that economic activities […] contribute to wellbeing”.
The RSA is undertaking exciting work with profoundly important potential globally. This includes a tilt towards thinking about systems. One of the RSA’s themes addresses regeneration. The Head of Regenerative Design at the RSA, Andy Thornton, writes in the latest issue of the RSA Journal:
“With traditional 20th-century management models coming under increasing scrutiny, as much for the values they don’t espouse as those they do, a more humane and adaptable form of regenerative leadership will be required.” He refers to the increasing demand for “[s]ofter skills and attitudinal characteristics, such as flexibility, self-awareness, collaboration and empathy.”
I have urged management at the RSA to enter fresh negotiations with the union to resolve this dispute promptly, not least to avoid further harm to the work and reputation of the RSA, the livelihoods of its staff, and the goodwill of its Fellows.
I hope that management will resolve this dispute.
In his first interview in the RSA Journal, the RSA’s Chief Executive, a former economist at the Bank of England, said: “The RSA should be helping to paint a picture of how society could be”. He noted that “economics needs to change […] [p]art of that reformation will involve economists engaging far more expansively than in the past.”
I am confident that there is sufficient ability and commitment for this to happen if all parties bring their best to seeking to resolve the dispute.
I will continue to show support to the RSA in doing so, including to its unionised staff.
______________________
The content of this blog draws from my thread on X on 7 September, but is significantly developed here through the addition of several stylistic, grammatical, substantive, and structural amendments.
© Dermot Feenan 2023