I am not old enough to remember the Winter of Discontent. I was only alive during four of Margaret’s Thatcher’s years in power and whatever else I might have been doing before primary school, I am fairly confident railing against Tory rule was probably not on the agenda at the time. All of that is to say, I have not lived through – or been old enough to be concerned by – Britain’s most turbulent years of industrial action nor the most significant government efforts to curb “the power of the unions”.
Nevertheless, it can’t escape anybody’s notice that over recent years there has been an uptick in industrial action. Not anything quite on the scale of the Winter of Discontent and I don’t think we’re seeing any repeats of the Battle of Orgreave, but nevertheless more strikes. These have been particularly notable in the NHS, we are currently on the cusp of further strikes by resident (formerly, junior) doctors and other sectors seem set to join them.
I am not aiming here to discuss the whys and wherefores of any given strike. I am not going to offer an opinion on the credibility of union demands nor the reasonableness of government counter-offers. Each ballot for strike action no doubt has its relative merits and counterpoints. My aim here is really to get into an issue that inevitably troubles the conscience of some Christians every time industrial action rears its head: is it legitimate for Christians to go on strike? I will first look at whether it is acceptable to strike in principle and, secondly, if it is ever acceptable, what considerations need to be made when faced with a ballot for any given strike.
The legitimacy of striking in principle
There are typically two grounds cited against Christians going on strike. First, we are commanded to submit to authorities. Second, we have explicit commands about work. Let me deal with each in turn.
Commands on submitting to authorities
The commands concerning submitting to authorities in Western democratic nations is something of a red herring. The freedom to strike is protected under Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The UK constitution (it may not be codified, but we do have one) also provides certain immunities for participating in strike action subject to the statutory conditions being met that deem it lawful. These are set out in legislation such as the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and subsequent legislation setting other conditions such as the Trade Union Act 2016. Western democracies enshrine in law the freedom to strike. This is considered part and parcel of our democratic system and, therefore, industrial action is well within the bounds of submitting to government. Unless you consider lawfully voting for an alternative political party and thus actively voting against the sitting government to be unsubmissive, there is no reason to consider lawful industrial action to be a failure in our duty to submit. It is a lawful and legitimate thing to do within our democratic system.
Commands to workers
The commands to workers, on face value, appear more difficult. There are verses like Colossians 3:22-24:
22 Slaves, obey your human masters in everything. Don’t work only while being watched, as people-pleasers, but work wholeheartedly, fearing the Lord. 23 Whatever you do, do it from the heart, as something done for the Lord and not for people, 24 knowing that you will receive the reward of an inheritance from the Lord. You serve the Lord Christ.
And perhaps trickier still, 2 Thessalonians 3:10:
when we were with you, this is what we commanded you: ‘If anyone isn’t willing to work, he should not eat.’
These are just two of the harder verses on work among a raft of others. Don’t these imply that we shouldn’t go on strike? I think the context of these verses, and the broader points on work that the bible labours, don’t undermine the legitimacy of industrial action.
When we read the immediate context of 2 Thessalonians 3, for example, Paul is really talking about people being idle and lazy. The wider context of 2 Thessalonians, Paul is addressing a belief in Thessalonica that the second coming has happened and the Day of the Lord has arrived. Paul is effectively addressing the same kind of issues that come with cults who insist Jesus has returned and the end of the world is nigh. In that context, people were giving up their jobs, reckoning them to be pointless, because the end of the world is here. One imagines in Thessalonica – if they were going to discuss industrial action at all – the question wouldn’t be about the legitimacy of industrial action, but whether there is any point to it whatsoever!
These verses don’t undermine the legitimacy of striking as Paul is encouraging the Thessalonians to see the value of work. It is credible to argue that strikes, by their nature, stem from a desire to imbue your work with greater, not less, value. It also bears saying, when one strikes one is not paid so – even on face value – nobody striking is expecting to be paid for not working. This would be consistent with the face value statement Paul makes here too.
The verses from Colossians are doing two things in context. In the wider context, Paul is upholding normal social order; first in the home and then in the workplace both of which sit under the ultimate lordship of Christ. In light of the earlier point about submitting to authorities, this does not, then, preclude industrial action. The specific instructions about work concern – much like Thessalonians – the importance of working hard and having integrity. The issue of concern to Paul here is a lack of integrity in our working life that dishonours the Lord Jesus. If we do our work as unto Christ, this means we are to respect our boss, work to the best of our ability and do so in ways that are honourable. Paul’s concern is not really anything to do with industrial disputes and the principle – that we are to work hard and with integrity – does not preclude the ability to go on strike within the legal provisions we have. This is legitimate within the social order that Paul aims to uphold and, unless one is striking only because they cannot be bothered to work that day, the principle of working with integrity and working hard is not inherently undermined.
There is much more we might say. I don’t want to suggest these verses in no way inform whether we might vote to strike (more on which below), but there is no biblical reason that stops Christians engaging in industrial action in principle. There are, however, some positive biblical reasons why we might view industrial action as a good thing at least some of the time.
Positive commands on justice and fairness
The bible has much to say about fairness, justice and defending the oppressed (cf. Is 1:17; Jam 5:1-6, etc). Whilst I wouldn’t want to defend the argument that every strike is a matter of oppression and justice, it is surely the case that they are at least some of the time. For example, it does not seem unjustified if a group of workers were appointed on particular terms and conditions which are subsequently broken through incremental changes e.g. below inflation pay rises. It could be considered a matter of legitimate fairness to expect your salary to at least remain static in real terms and an grounds to withdraw your labour en masse where consistent real terms pay cuts have been awarded across the board. This might be one outworking to solidarity in seeking justice in the workplace. Likewise, it may be valid to organise with other workers to seek safe working conditions where bosses are unwilling to implement credible working practices.
You may have different views on the specific grounds, you may not be convinced the particular situations I outline legitimately warrant industrial action on the grounds of seeking justice and fairness, and that’s okay. You don’t need to agree with where to apply these things, but I am highlighting that the bible does speak about justice and calls us collectively to seek it. It seems reasonable to consider this applies to the workplace. Indeed, scripture sets expectations on Christian employers putting some markers on what a just and fair workplace might look like. For workers to organise together in order to seek these things – not least as scripture doesn’t preclude them from doing so – offers a positive case, at least in some circumstances, for the legitimacy of industrial action.
Considerations when faced with industrial action
The bible being what it is, there are less a set of hard and fast laws and more a series of principles that must be applied thoughtfully in each particular context and situation. Given there is no specific prohibition on industrial action in scripture, we must turn to the question of whether to join in this industrial action. It is all very well saying industrial action is permissible, but that doesn’t mean every strike is helpful or godly. What considerations might be necessary before deciding in favour of any given industrial action?
What is the aim of the industrial action?
Perhaps this is the most important consideration – what is this strike aiming for? There can be no doubt there are godly reasons to strike and there are overtly sinful reasons to strike too. Striking for the right to harm other people in our workplace would be a clear example of a bad reason to agree to industrial action. There is a good case for seeking fair pay, particularly across the board for other workers too, but there are times where we may simply be striking out of greed. It is not about fair pay, just more and more pay because I want it. I don’t want to labour the specific too much here, but clearly the aim of the industrial action matters in determining whether it is something we want to support and help to achieve.
Does the action serve justice or cause oppression?
There are clearly times where industrial action will lead to outcomes that are just and fair. There can be no denying some industrial action causes serious harm. Most situations are tricky and if the aims of the action are not met we might perceive it to be a matter of oppression whilst the act of striking itself might cause harm; these need to be weighed carefully. Strike action, by its very nature, is disruptive (therein lies its leverage) and we cannot simply ask, ‘will this put other people out?’ because the answer is an inevitable ‘yes’. We have to weigh the aims of the action against the potential damage/disruption it may cause. A multitude of factors must be weighed here, and these will differ in every particular case. But we need to at least be thinking about whether this serves justice and fairness or whether it causes more oppression and harm. We need to weigh the respective merits of action and non-action carefully.
the golden rule
Jesus said the golden rule was, ‘Do to others as you would have them do to you’. Elsewhere it is put, ‘love your neighbour as yourself’. How do we apply this to industrial action?
On one level, we might think that nobody likes being disrupted so we should never take any disruptive industrial action. This, I think, would be a poor interpretation of the golden rule specifically because most people want fair pay and conditions in the workplace and believe they should be able to agitate for it. If we know that is what we want, we should support those seeking it even if it causes us some disruption just as we would be expected to be permitted to do the same.
However, most people do not believe in disruptive industrial action at all costs. If the entirety of the medical profession – doctors at every level, nurses, administrators, literally everybody – all took industrial actions for months together, most people would rightly object that the human cost is not a legitimate price to pay even if we are sympathetic to the aims of the action. Nobody thinks it is legitimate for their family members to be allowed to die in order for a set of workers to get better pay. As it happens, this is an example that won’t happen in our country because we have legislated against such action. Emergency and necessary public services are unable to go on a total shutdown legally. However, there are occasions where harms will be caused by industrial action and we have to weigh – particularly in light of the golden rule – would that be a cost we were willing to pay for the aims of the industrial action if the shoe were on the other foot?
Conclusion
I do not believe the bible precludes industrial action. Indeed, I think there is no prohibition on striking and there are some good biblical grounds we might cite for choosing to do so. Industrial action is both legitimate biblically and may be a helpful way of battling oppression and obtaining justice and fairness in the workplace.
However, clearly not every strike is biblically legitimate. We must weigh the aims of the action, the costs of the action and consider the golden rule and whether we would be willing to bear the costs if others were taking the same action.