Sharon Graham: The Illusion of Change at Unite the Union

We have been observing Sharon Graham’s stewardship of Unite the Union with some amusement. She ascended to the position of General Secretary amidst a plethora of strikes across the country, presenting herself as a woman with socialist leanings and a no-nonsense approach to union work, ostensibly advocating for a return to the core principles of collective bargaining. However, her tenure has been far from straightforward.

The election itself was the usual bourgeois election with backhanded deals and private chats. There seemed to be a passing of the baton but the presumptuous behaviour of Len McCluskey’s chosen successor, Howard Beckett, failed to resonate with the membership. When Beckett’s campaign collapsed the decision to “step aside” for Steve Turner was hardly the seamless transition these bureaucratic dealmakers anticipated. Beckett’s lack of support within United Left should have served as a warning to these entitled union figures. Yet, all the manoeuvring with regional secretaries proved futile. In contrast, Graham’s direct and pragmatic campaigning seemed to strike a chord with Unite members. She positioned herself as an outsider to the old boys’ club of Unite — or so it appeared.

Another pivotal point for Graham was her stance against providing a “blank cheque” for Labour, a position she openly championed in her manifesto. She stated:

“I am not interested in the internal game-playing within a political party; my priority will be to build a movement within our workplaces and wider community. We need to do more than Westminster elections – we need to create and sustain support for an agenda based on the interests of working people.”

Interestingly, her rhetoric bore similarities to that of Gerard Coyne, often labelled as the “right-wing” opposition. Coyne’s manifesto declared:

“[Unite should be] more concerned with playing Westminster politics than the bread-and-butter issues affecting you. Our union needs cleaning up, and our General Secretary should be focused on the right job: protecting and defending Unite members.”

The parallels between their rhetoric are striking, yet Coyne was vilified as a figure of the right, while Graham was hailed as a champion of the people. The stark difference was Coyne’s pledge to open the books and audit Unite’s finances. Could Graham’s endorsement have been a means to prevent such scrutiny? Regardless, she secured the General Secretary position with 37.7% of the votes cast, representing a mere 4% of the membership. This raises the question: did the majority care at all?

Graham officially assumed her role on 25 August 2021.

Sharon Graham’s timing as General Secretary coincided with a wave of strikes in Britain. Unite played a significant role in this movement, with bus strikes, dock strikes, and actions involving some nurses within the union, among others. Just as the rail strikes elevated Mick Lynch to leftist stardom, Graham’s pro-worker drum beating and regular fist-waving at the Labour Party endeared her to certain segments of the left. However, this quickly became tedious when it proved to just be empty words. Her frequent threats towards Keir Starmer often amounted to little. When disaffiliation from Labour became a widely discussed possibility, Graham’s actions proved to be mere posturing.

Her loyalty to the party became evident when she followed the party line on Palestine and even banned the showing of Oh, Jeremy Corbyn: The Big Lie by Platform Films. The union’s justification—that Unite facilities should not be used for Labour issues unrelated to members’ interests—rings hollow. How can the conduct of a party funded by the union be deemed irrelevant to its members?

Furthermore, Graham suspended a Unite official for refusing to cancel a Palestine solidarity fringe event, again citing the need to focus on union issues rather than politics. Yet, this did not stop Unite and Graham from releasing a statement condemning Russia’s actions in Ukraine. It’s interesting that there was never any mention of the industrial working-class people of Donbas who have suffered attacks by the Kiev regime, the same people of the Donbas who’s miners sent funds and supplies to striking Welsh miners in 1984, nor the 48 individuals killed in the Trade Union House fire in Odessa.

More recently, Graham’s leadership has been further scrutinised following allegations of bullying against her husband, Jack Clarke. Clarke, who was on a final warning for such behaviour, was promoted to a senior position by Graham outside normal procedures after her election. Accusations surfaced that she requested evidence of his misconduct be destroyed, a claim substantiated by Skwawkbox. The destruction of this evidence and Graham’s subsequent actions to suppress the allegations demonstrate a blatant disregard for accountability. Her management-style tactics, including victimisation and suspensions of those who spoke out, even prompted the staff of Clarke’s unit, represented by GMB, to threaten a counter-strike in December 2024.

Then there was the infamous New Year me, me, me letter where Graham goes onto talk about her victories, not the unions, the things that she has done on behalf of the union. Even going so far as talk about she is investigating the corruption of the previous leadership. Oh the hypocrisy!

From her election campaign to the present day, Sharon Graham has painted a false picture of herself. She was portrayed as the workers’ choice, distinct from McCluskey’s inner circle, but acting in similar unscrupulous manner. Posing as a left-wing candidate but her rhetoric mirrored that of her so-called right-wing opponent. Her promises to hold Labour to account have resulted in little more than symbolic gestures. Meanwhile, her attempts to present herself as different from past backroom dealmakers are undermined by her own actions to shield her husband from scrutiny.

This saga underscores the the political manoeuvring required to ascend to the top of a union’s bureaucratic structure. It is clear that the priorities of such leaders are far removed from the interests of ordinary workers.

Working class people must not be guided by the words of such frauds like Sharon Graham. Bureaucrats the likes of her are only interested in helping the ruling class in managing the capitalist sytem, not getting rid of it which is what our class needs.  If we are to go forward our class must be guided by the kind of revolutionary discipline only communist organisation can provide. As the great revolutionary Ho Chi Minh once said:

If one possesses the moral qualities of a revolutionary one will remain straightforward and modest under favourable conditions too, after having achieved success; one will not forget the difficulties they have gone through. “Worry before others, rejoice after others”, think how to perform your duty in the best way without caring for remuneration, do not give way to self-conceit, red-tape, do not put on airs, do not fall prey to depravity. These are also manifestations of revolutionary morality.
Ho Chi Min – On Revolutionary Morality