Union membership

Press, 9 May 1981, Page 14

Union membership

Sir, — In reply to B. S. Hall (May 7) it is very obvious that he has entirely missed the point regarding voluntary unionism. With voluntary unionism a worker will only join a union if he can benefit from doing so. If there are insufficient benefits the union will cease to attractmembers and die a natural death. Thus if a union is really helping its members it will survive. By having compulsory membership to ensure its survival it shows that it is not able to stand on its own merits and if left would probably die a natural death. This shows that unions must have other purposes that are more hidden, and by observing unions in key positions it is not hard to draw one’s own conclusions as to what these purposes are. Let us insist on a national referendum at the elections this year for voluntary unionism. — Yours, etc., DAVID J. READ.

May 8, 1981. Sir, — I cannot follow B. S. Hall’s logic (May 6). I am confused. He says that losing the right to choose whether to have unions or not is a small and insignificant price to pay in order to have them. I wonder if B. S. Hall would also agree that our over-all tax rate of 60 per cent (direct and indirect tax) is a small and insignificant price to pay for our massive array of bureaucrats, our social welfare handouts and inefficient railways. If unionism is such a wonderful institution and its benefits recognised by all, why .is it that it has to be compulsory in order for it to get and maintain its members? — Yours, etc.,

JAMES .R. FORRESTER. May 7, 1981.