Suspensión del Servicio

When we turn our attention to the central theme of this thesis, namely where trade union learning intersects with global union solidarity, we find only a very limited literature. What exist is largely subsumed within a greater discourse on the impact of the processes of globalisation. In addition to this we need initially to briefly venture through the literature on how adults learn and how UK union education draws upon this to establish any distinctive pedagogical approach to fostering transformation in individuals. This portal must be travelled through as it is instrumental to understanding how trade union learning services approach the whole subject of not only global solidarity knowledge formation, but how grassroots members access and appropriate learning.

Today an extensive body of literature relating to how adults can be transformed through learning (OECD, 2003) particularly in the workplace (Illeris, 2010), is available, with Knowles (1973) pioneering the notion of distinctive approaches to adult learning methods. Knowles’ ‘andragogic’ understanding involves adult learners progressing best within groups and learning collectively and this collectiveness dovetails naturally with trade union value systems, with aspects of distinctly communal learning (Lave and

Wenger,1991) also being present. Some articles attempt to relate this to trade union education as a ‘community of practice’ (Ball, 2003). Andragogic approaches also emphasise self-directed and self-motivated learning with an element of personal goal setting and challenge through problem solving. Knowing ‘how to learn’ is also of importance for adults and this includes an element of self-reflective activity. Adult learning principles require learning to be contextually relevant and as such formal trade union learning attempts to relate much to the workplace and wider labour issues, drawing as it does on the experience of individuals and groups. Any difference however between specifically union learning and adult learning in general may for some commentators be indistinguishable. (Ross, C, personal communication, 21.12.11). The related idea of ‘life-wide’ learning as taken up by Ecclestone et al (2010) draws on all aspects of an individual’s life experience. These are complemented by the research literature relating to learning within an individual biography or ‘life-course’ and the association with concepts of personal agency (Biesta and Tedder, 2006). Material depicting adult learning journeys from the worker perspective (WLRI, 2009; Ross et al, 2011; Unionlearn, 2008) is limited yet available and of direct interest to this thesis. The lifelong learning debate for trade unions sits within this discourse, with the primary areas of discussion relating to vocational skills development and employability concerns resulting from government policy approaches, to the place of social justice and wider active democratic citizenship formation. Key questions relating to what exactly trade unions want from lifelong learning and how this informs any global strategy also resound within this discourse (Payne, 2001a; 2001b). Study visits as sites of informal learning remain little explored, although commentators outline the difficulties faced within notions of mutuality as cultural and political misunderstandings can prevail. Suggestions of ‘un-learning’ and re-learning are thus emphasised within this literature discourse (Martin, 2008, 2012).

In terms of its overall philosophy of learning, if we accept the TUC approach as typifying UK trade union learning principles in general, then it is clearly

indebted to the literature of Freire (1970) and Mezirow (1990, 2000), and acknowledges the transformative nature of this for both its learners and tutors (TUC, n.d). For both Freire and Mezirow the themes of personal experience, rational discourse and critical reflection appear salient within any transformative process. They are also inextricably associated with personal meaning-making through learning (Mezirow, 2000; Garvey-Berger, 2004). The value base expressed here is explicit and includes such concepts as fairness and justice, equality and equity, democracy and unity, with all these underpinning values being transformative and emancipatory in nature. Although unacknowledged, it also draws on the field of research literature relating to andragogic learning practices as described above, this understanding being primarily characterised by the TUC as ‘active learning’ or ‘experiential’ methodology (TUC, n.d.). The lesser theme of trade union education being of a distinctive nature is evident (Shelley and Calveley, 2007) and the ability of trade union education to access ‘hard to reach’ learners is available (Stuart and Robinson, 2007). It is perhaps true that andragogic principles bring with them particular challenges, especially when delivered in a complex and ever shifting workplace environment (Fenwick, 2010).

Any philosophy of education or distinctive approach that trade union learning may utilise within the UK and globally forms the backdrop to its attempts to facilitate and foster worker solidarity through personal development. In relation to trade union learning and issues of globalism, transnationalism, mobilisation and solidarity, the field of literature is more limited with a resultant narrower discourse, with any clear distinction between union learning and globalisation vis-à-vis union learning and solidarity being difficult to detect. Stirling, within a wider edited account, offers us his view of the position and requirements of labour education within a global context (Shelley and Calveley, 2007), whilst Bieler and Lindberg (2011) typify the small yet expanding discourse on how unions and labour organisations can learn from each others global initiatives and experiences. Most of the fragmented journal literature focuses upon specific country examples and/or case studies, perhaps relating primarily to regions such as India, Southern Africa, South

America, USA and Canada, and Asia-Pacific including Australia. (see for example, Babson, 2000; Bolsmann, 2010)

Lesser yet equally important themes of transnational difference occur within this literature and these may relate to cultural and/or ideational issues, that in- turn resonate with inherent Majority-minority world tensions that need addressing within global labour education. Shelley and Calverley (2007:221) identify trust building through trade union educational programmes as being crucial whilst also noting the Majority-minority world comparisons relating to the necessity or otherwise of skills based learning over political or classed based approaches to worker education (see also Hannah and Fischer, 1998). Educational worker exchanges that explore the understanding and development of democracy also enter into the body of empirical work and literature (Cooper and Walters, 2009). A small yet continually emerging literature relating to reciprocal learning from the perspective of the Majority World continues to develop (Mosoetsa and Williams, 2012).

As much trade union learning and development occurs within informal or incidental learning environments, such as labour conferences, the literature on learning outside of highly structured, classroom based, tutor led formal programmes is drawn upon here to assist us in progressing along a continuum from informal learning to formal. Foley (1999) is helpful here through recognising that ideological contestation is inherent within informal learning, as with formal learning, and is important to the cultural and social processes of reproduction or transformation. Colley et al (2002) assist us in understanding that rigid, formulaic divisions between ‘informal’ and ‘formal’ learning are of limited use and that any attempt to create distinctions have to focus primarily upon understanding the socio-political context of the learning before the technicalities of place or form. Freire (1970) reminds us that the iterative process of action followed by reflection, leading to further re-designed action, that is praxis, constitutes an educational experience in itself, whilst incidental learning is seen here as that which results from everyday human experiences (Marsick and Watkins, 2001). Notions of ‘informal’ learning, that

undertaken outside of the highly structured and organised learning environment, have also been influenced by Saljo (1979).