CLICK to listen to the audio version of this Daily Paradox

Singapore is streets ahead of the rest of the world when it comes to workers’ unions. It always has been. That doesn’t mean that everything runs smoothly. Nor does it mean that the unions are necessarily compliant with ‘capital’. The history, size, culture and style of Singapore all contributed to the effectiveness of the unions but mostly it was the pressing need to survive at the time of independence that made working together essential. The custom has survived pretty well so far.

It came as something of a surprise, therefore, when recently reading the reports of meetings and conferences discussing the role of the unions to see little mention of their place in teaching and training their overseas brothers. Even the internet seems rather silent on the subject. You may think that unions in other countries are their business, unique to the problems they have inherited or developed. You would be wrong.

MNCs drive the union / management relationships for most of the world and as globalisation becomes an ever-pressing reality and corporate behaviour is increasingly scrutinised, the pace of convergence of those relationships between countries will speed up.  It hasn’t done so yet. Overseas unions have much to learn from Singapore’s effective harnessing of what originally was a social need turned so neatly into an important management tool.

We hear much of partnership between workers and managers these days. Nor are we short of helpful advice on human rights. In developing countries both of these are often dismissed as ‘not necessary yet’. Even when this is true, ‘yet’ is tomorrow, if not already today. The rapid advances in all sorts of relationships in the world are accelerating the rate of change. We are not prepared for the new work patterns they demand. My articles on The New Work Revolution develop one effect of this dramatic change.

The west is generally going steadily backwards in its worker / management relationships. Unions that accepted the principle of cooperation in the 70s and 80s have resented the outrageous wages now paid to bosses. People’s natural greed has led to envy when they should have been taught to aspire. Welfarism has demeaned the concept of an honest day’s work and the pride that should be taken from doing a job well. In time this will lead to a big shake-up in the union structures and practices. For the moment they are still stuck in a rut of antagonism. Don’t they understand that the old adversarial approach to worker / manager dealings is out of date? Singapore recognises this and has developed new structures to take account of it.

Is it working?

Clearly for much of the time, it is. Common objectives for both individual and company have shown a clear path to compromise. Human beings working together will always have occasional upsets and differences. Most of the issues that arise are resolved quickly and efficiently. But I wonder why it is that I get so many readers emails on the subjects of unfairness and disillusionment with jobs – often very soon after a job has been accepted. Are jobs and working conditions being over-sold? There will, of course, always be disgruntled workers and insatiable bosses. But so many?

Managers need training for partnership – I call it decent behaviour – but so do unions. While this involves understanding complex laws and interpreting tricky court decisions the lessons are more humanitarian than technical. Singapore has the opportunity to lead in this area and its centre of learning must surely be teaching others the road to success. Like all teaching, the best of it can be by example.