Across local government £ millions are spent on funding full-time representatives for the principle public sector unions - Unite, Unison, GMB, NUT et al.Given the relatively small % of union membership in many parts of the public sector is it fair that the tax payer subsidises employees who pay a subscription to their chosen union (presumably so that union can provide representation) when many colleagues who choose not to join a union do not benefit from the same advantages.It seems we may be hearing of moves to abolish full time union organisers funded by the public purse in central government in Manchester over the next few days.Surely it is reasonable to expect unions who receive considerable sums of money from the salaries of public sector workers to fund their own staff arrangements from those same subscriptions?
