Since it was established in 1987 the NZCTU has consistently failed to successfully oppose and defeat any of the major policy initiatives of the fourth Labour Government or the current National Government, even though these policies have clearly been detrimental to the interests of workers. In particular, during the period leading up to the passage of the ECA in May 1991 the NZCIV leadership failed to organise and lead the kind of generalised strike action that would, at the very least, have forced the National Government to substantially amend (if not withdraw) the legislation. In the industrial relations literature there have been remarkably few attempts (apart from the self-justifications of those involved) to address the key question which this raises: why has the NZCTU leadership acted in such a conservative and timid manner in response to economic, social and industrial relations policies which are essentially pro-capitalist and anti-worker? Explanatory accounts of the conservatism of the NZCTIJ leadership, if they are to be convincing, must combine theoretical analysis of the contingent bureaucratic conservatism of fulltime trade union officials in the industrial relations systems of advanced capitalism with systematic historical research which disentangles the concrete interplay of economic, class, ideological and political forces specific to any particular dispute. This paper outlines the theory of the contingent bureaucratic conservatism of fulltime trade union officials, considers some of the major criticisms of this theory, and then argues that a qualified version of this theory is essential to making sense of the role played by the NZCFU leadership in industrial relations.
Leading from the Rear? A Theoretical Analysis of the Contingent Bureaucratic Conservatism of the NZCTU Leadership
