Union representation with management for non union members

[Turtle]

I was about to ask that very question! An employer has no right, and should not have any reasonable way, of knowing who is a union member and who is not.

How would your employer know if the person being represented is a member or not?

Union members acting like it's a cabal never sits well with me.

How is it a cabal? An individual joins a union and pays contributions for the benefits the union offers. If you do not join a union you cannot expect entitlement to the benefits it provides. The comparison with insurance is valid

 

[Undiscovered]

Blimey, which union is that? I wouldn't have joined any where I knew there was a time limit on them representing me for a new grievance.

If you join, when you join the company, I would imagine representation starts immediately. The one month caveat would stop you having an error, joining up, it becoming known you had the error and, technically, being in the union when disciplinary processes started, and therefore entitled to assistance.

 

[dk1]

Reps have wrongly allowed people to "join" the union after an issue has happened much to the disgust of fellow reps (me included).......

Unsurprisingly mate. Very poor show if that’s the case. You’d think management would’ve advised the reps if not they’d pick it up through messroom gossip.

 

[KNN]

How is it a cabal? An individual joins a union and pays contributions for the benefits the union offers. If you do not join a union you cannot expect entitlement to the benefits it provides. The comparison with insurance is valid

I don't think a person can expect help, but from the union rep's side it's a question of conscience. Are they in it for protecting workers from injustice, or only people from inside the club?

Some people would exploit the generosity of the union, but is that worse than an injustice happening because a person has no representation? I think not. Other opinions are available.

 

[Horizon22]

I don't think a person can expect help, but from the union rep's side it's a question of conscience. Are they in it for protecting workers from injustice, or only people from inside the club?

Some people would exploit the generosity of the union, but is that worse than an injustice happening because a person has no representation? I think not. Other opinions are available.

A person doesn't have "no representation" - they are entitled to employee representation by law - and I've known union reps to act as the "workplace representative" in certain situations - it just may not be a union rep because they have not paid the subscriptions that allow that privilege.

 

[NSE]

I don't think a person can expect help, but from the union rep's side it's a question of conscience. Are they in it for protecting workers from injustice, or only people from inside the club?

Some people would exploit the generosity of the union, but is that worse than an injustice happening because a person has no representation? I think not. Other opinions are available.

Conscience, maybe. But it’s clearly set out. You join the Union, you get their support, you don't join, you don’t get the support. I think that’s fair. As DK1 says, that’s how it works.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m sure there are people who haven’t joined for legitimate reasons and Union Reps may be willing to help. Of course there will always be some exceptions.

But, I think it’s fair enough if a Union rep declines to help a non Union member.

 

[KNN]

A person doesn't have "no representation" - they are entitled to employee representation by law - and I've known union reps to act as the "workplace representative" in certain situations - it just may not be a union rep because they have not paid the subscriptions that allow that privilege.

They are entitled to representation, but realistically who outside a union rep is in a position to help?

 

[Horizon22]

They are entitled to representation, but realistically who outside a union rep is in a position to help?

Lots of people may be able to assist, depending on their role, any previous dealings they have had in such issues, their confidence and any past experiences from previous employment they may have had; plenty of ex-managers in certain grades. Sometimes, there is just someone there for moral support and to keep an eye on what the other side is doing.

 

[KNN]

Conscience, maybe. But it’s clearly set out. You join the Union, you get their support, you don't join, you don’t get the support. I think that’s fair. As DK1 says, that’s how it works.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m sure there are people who haven’t joined for legitimate reasons and Union Reps may be willing to help. Of course there will always be some exceptions.

But, I think it’s fair enough if a Union rep declines to help a non Union member.

I don't disagree about there being no right to representation, but the hardline view that a union shouldn't ever help a non member doesn't sit well with me.

 

[Port Road]

I don't think a person can expect help, but from the union rep's side it's a question of conscience. Are they in it for protecting workers from injustice, or only people from inside the club?

Some people would exploit the generosity of the union, but is that worse than an injustice happening because a person has no representation? I think not. Other opinions are available.

"I don't think a person can expect help, but from the union rep's side it's a question of conscience. Are they in it for protecting workers from injustice, or only people from inside the club?"

Hmmm...maybe. But the individual who has not joined the union will presumably be crossing picket lines if there was to be a strike, and happily take any benefits from said strike action. Where's their conscience? Does it only magically appear when they're in bother and want union assistance?

 

[Horizon22]

I don't disagree about there being no right to representation, but the hardline view that a union shouldn't ever help a non member doesn't sit well with me.

That's just an opinion; you'll see plenty of people even in this thread with examples that show that to have not always been the case

 

[dk1]

Lots of people may be able to assist, depending on their role, any previous dealings they have had in such issues, their confidence and any past experiences from previous employment they may have had; plenty of ex-managers in certain grades. Sometimes, there is just someone there for moral support and to keep an eye on what the other side is doing.

The time I sat in with a senior conductor for moral support i was half afraid to open my mouth on his incident hearing incase I incriminated him and his misdemeanour when asked a couple of questions. I think it was rather unfair that they tried to bring me in to it particularly as the statutory minute taker was present too.

 

[KNN]

That's just an opinion; you'll see plenty of people even in this thread with examples that show that to have not always been the case

I know, I've read the thread, there are some hardline responses and some saying they would represent non members. I'm coming out on one side of that.

It's always a matter of conscience, I personally don't like any sort of politics which is focussed on "we look after our own".

 

[Horizon22]

The time I sat in with a senior conductor for moral support i was half afraid to open my mouth on his incident hearing incase I incriminated him and his misdemeanour when asked a couple of questions. I think it was rather unfair that they tried to bring me in to it particularly as the statutory minute taker was present too.

Yes this is an issue, but when bringing in an workplace rep, some prep and understanding of the case - which partly comes down to the employee's willingness to not bury their head in the sand - is obviously key as well; just going in ad-hoc isn't going to be of much benefit.

Of course all this just highlights how important it is to be in the relevant union where an individual can get quality advice from people who have had - probably - had specific training and dealt with experience representing other individuals with similar issues in the past.

 

[KNN]

The time I sat in with a senior conductor for moral support i was half afraid to open my mouth on his incident hearing incase I incriminated him and his misdemeanour when asked a couple of questions. I think it was rather unfair that they tried to bring me in to it particularly as the statutory minute taker was present too.

And yes, without being properly trained you can do more harm than good, which is what I meant. Maybe some people can help, but not many outside union reps or ex union reps.

 

[dk1]

Of course all this just highlights how important it is to be in the relevant union where an individual can get quality advice from people who have had - probably - had specific training and dealt with experience representing other individuals with similar issues in the past.

Completely agree. I never once in over 40 years questioned being in the relevant union. I couldn't imagine it any other way and boy did they help me when I was in a serious situation 17 years into my career.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Jan 2026 ==

And yes, without being properly trained you can do more harm than good, which is what I meant. Maybe some people can help, but not many outside union reps or ex union reps.

They know exactly how to handle it and do much of the talking and know how to deal with management questioning on behalf of their union member. I just sat there mortified I was being asked questions from a drivers point of view. One of the more friendly managers did advise me that I was under no obligation to continue answering any further questions if I felt uncomfortable.

 

[Olivine]

The reality is, is that it depends on the union, it depends on the rep, it depends on the member, it depends on the situation.

If I’ve had someone slate the union (reps aren’t stupid, we know most of the members and their stance) and if it’s for something menial like sickness, then probably not, no. I, personally, would ask for their side of the story and if I was particularly aggrieved at the stance management took (on balance they aren’t a member) then I’d rep them - but on the assurance that I want to see their name on the membership list in five years, not dropping off in five months.

Source: ETA TU Rep, Unison

 

[riceuten]

I've been a union member, shop steward, and branch executive member since my late teens.

No, there's no compulsion for unions to represent non-members, and never has been. However, as outlined above, there may be circumstances where a union may do this, of their own choice.

In UNISON. we have a rule that states we will not (professionally) represent someone unless they've been a member for 3 months. This rule may be waived locally if the person joins the union. In the past a member paid 3 months "dues" in one fell swoop, and we were able to get the union to represent them at a tribunal (and we won)

 

[Falcon1200]

An individual joins a union and pays contributions for the benefits the union offers. If you do not join a union you cannot expect entitlement to the benefits it provides.

Indeed. I joined BR when it was a closed shop, but would have joined a Union anyway, both for the protection and assistance offered (which thankfully I never needed) and for its negotiating and representation power.

Are they in it for protecting workers from injustice, or only people from inside the club?

Trade Unions are not clubs, anyone in the relevant role is entitled to join and can make that choice. If they choose not to they should be aware of the potential consequences.

They are entitled to representation, but realistically who outside a union rep is in a position to help?

In which case.... Join the Union!

 

[Starmill]

No, that’s not how it works. A union representative would shrug their shoulders at a non-member wanting help. Nobody would pay their subscriptions if they could wait until they are facing disciplinary action before joining.

That may be the way your Aslef rep saw things yes, but there are a lot of reps who are with unions other than Aslef. This isn't a universal approach, it's just theirs, others may agree or differ.

 

[dk1]

That may be the way your Aslef rep saw things yes, but there are a lot of reps who are with unions other than Aslef. This isn't a universal approach, it's just theirs, others may agree or differ.

The person I assisted was in RMT and as expected got no assistance.

 

[Starmill]

The person I assisted was in RMT and as expected got no assistance.

Which was the choice of that union and that rep.

 

[NSE]

I don't disagree about there being no right to representation, but the hardline view that a union shouldn't ever help a non member doesn't sit well with me.

I’m not saying it’s a hardline stance that has to exist. Just that it’s the Union Rep’s right to say yes or no. And I think that’s perfectly acceptable. I generally have the stance that if you wish to do something against the rules in life, whatever it may be, you can always ask the person in charge, but be prepared to accept it may be a no.

 

[dk1]

Which was the choice of that union and that rep.

I should have said would have been in RMT. Even though he was a nice chap the reps reply was that they “wouldn’t assist him”.

 

[riceuten]

I don't disagree about there being no right to representation, but the hardline view that a union shouldn't ever help a non member doesn't sit well with me.

So, on that basis, I should expect the AA or RAC to rescue my car on the basis that I might join ?

I am surmising you're not a fan of unions (which is your choice, of course) but expecting unions to help non-members and a refusal to do so as "hardline" I think goes above and beyond the normal level of debate.

 

[Horizon22]

Which was the choice of that union and that rep.

Yes but unfortunately not all reps are of equal quality, each circumstance is not the same, there may be history etc. There are so many factors and this has I feel been best stated in the line above:

The reality is, is that it depends on the union, it depends on the rep, it depends on the member, it depends on the situation.

 

[NSE]

I think the problem is the OP is hoping for a ‘black and white, yes or no’ answer. Which in reality, isn’t the case. Ignoring the Union part of the question, it’s like saying, ‘Hey, would you help a bloke?’, well, maybe. I need more information! Who? Why?

 

[bluegoblin7]

I think the problem is the OP is hoping for a ‘black and white, yes or no’ answer. Which in reality, isn’t the case. Ignoring the Union part of the question, it’s like saying, ‘Hey, would you help a bloke?’, well, maybe. I need more information! Who? Why?

Well no, the two questions as asked has got a black and white, yes or no answer. "does a union rep have to support said individual [a non member]?": no. "Is there a legal obligation to treat every worker the same?": yes (albeit perhaps not in the way the OP phrases).

 

[Gloster]

Is the OP asking in the second part of #1 whether the union has a legal obligation to treat every worker the same, regardless of whether they are a member or not, or is it the management has this obligation? My understanding, and I left while it was still (almost) a closed shop, is that the union only has an obligation to its members and does not have any obligation to non-members, other than than the general one of not actively and unfairly disadvantaging them, e.g. by pushing the blame for another’s fault on to them.

 

[NSE]

Well no, the two questions as asked has got a black and white, yes or no answer. "does a union rep have to support said individual [a non member]?": no. "Is there a legal obligation to treat every worker the same?": yes (albeit perhaps not in the way the OP phrases).

True, sorry, I was referring to the following on discussions about whether or not some would help.