This is something the TUC and unions have consistently campaigned for, over more than two decades. And union experience with indicative ballots means we have a lot of good practice to draw on as we extend the tactics to strike votes and leadership votes.

But there are also a number of areas where the move to new ballots means a difference in importance, scale and audience, and there will be complications with the changes, due to the limitations of the new legislation. 

Unions have work to do in updating their rulebooks, cleaning and building their member contact data, establishing the processes and suppliers they will want to use, and planning their approach to get-out-the-vote campaigns in a different situation. 

But the work will be worth it in terms of increasing turnout and engagement, speeding up processes, meeting modern member expectations, and in many cases reducing balloting costs. 

This guide aims to give unions some practical directions on how to prepare, so they can make the most of the new right once it becomes law. 

Download the full guide here

The post Preparing the union for online statutory balloting appeared first on TUC Digital Lab.

What’s different, and what’s the same?

We’ve looked across the whole tool to update the different stages of good practice for unions on tech and digital. It’s been interesting to see what’s held up well, but also where new ways of working with tech can be seen coming through.

Since the last update, we’ve seen a continued move to the cloud for tech services. There’s also been a particular emphasis on doing tech with a greater eye on security, as unions have faced an increasing level of cyber attacks. And as emerging technologies like AI start to embed into more tech tools, unions need to consider the longer term view in how we’re responding.

At the same time, we’ve tried to keep as much consistency in theming and levels as possible. So unions using it should still be able to identify clearly where they are making progress from previous iterations.

What is the digital healthcheck?

For those who’ve never used the digital healthcheck before, it’s a tool to help unions benchmark their digital and technical maturity. Working through questions in an interactive Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, you choose the best fit for where your union currently stands across a broad range of categories.

Its purpose is to help benchmark your union’s current position against potential best practice, to identify for yourself where you may want to direct the next steps of your tech journey, and to have a way to measure it over time.

The tool aims to help illustrate what these digital and technical best practice could look like in a union setting, reflecting the challenges and innovations in both the movement and the wider world.

As such, there are no right or wrong answers. And there’s no one-size-fits-all solution that is going to be relevant to every union’s very different situation and experience.

Rather, this benchmarking process is designed to help the union’s leadership make the best choices when viewed alongside your own union’s context, resources and strategy. Gaps identified don’t need to filled at a uniform rate, but instead can give you a better awareness of the potential opportunities the union could move towards by choosing different paths.

Benchmarking also gives managers across the union a common framework to discuss developments in digital and technology, understanding better why a focus is being placed on particular projects and how they fit into the whole.

As your union progresses along your digital journey, you should revisit the benchmark from time to time. It helps you evaluate the impact of work done and it may be that a different area becomes more important to focus on as your organisational priorities change.

How to use the TUC digital healthcheck

You can download the latest version of the digital healthcheck here. You’ll receive a zip file containing the interactive Excel sheet as well as a document with instructions and glossary.

It takes about 20 minutes to complete and ideally requires senior and specialist input from across the organisation. We’d suggest using it as an exercise for your union’s senior management team.

The results are entirely owned by your union – the data is not shared by default. However, unions that do choose to share their results with the TUC are much appreciated. This helps us build up a better understanding of where unions are and allows us to tailor our Digital labs resources and workshops around the needs of affiliates.

Download the new edition of the TUC digital healthcheck now.

The post TUC digital healthcheck v4 – A new version of our union benchmarking tool appeared first on TUC Digital Lab.

Back in November, we held a webinar with Cory and tech sector union activists from Prospect, UTAW and Unite, to explore how the concept of enshittification affects tech workers and users alike – and how unions have a big role in the fight back against Big Tech’s worst instincts.

It was a really interesting conversation, and you can watch the recording here.

Cory’s book “Enshittification: Why everything suddenly got worse and what to do about it” is available from all good bookshops (as well as giant, enshittified ones) and is published by Verso.

The post Tech unions vs enshittification appeared first on TUC Digital Lab.

Brian’s experience spans decades of union and political campaigns and organising, so when we found he was passing through the UK, we were keen to get him in front of a room of union campaigners and organisers. Here’s a bit of what he told us.

Engagement as a spectrum – from mass mobilising to deep organising

Brian opened with a challenge to the way we often talk about “engagement” in digital campaigning. The term is often thrown around as if it’s a single thing to measure. But engagement is best understood as a spectrum. It ranges from mass, low-impact communications at one end, to deep, high-impact organising at the other.

At the “efficient but low-power” end, you have tools like email and mass texting. These can reach thousands at once. They can mobilise people at critical moments, keep members informed, and bring new supporters into the fold. But each individual interaction is relatively shallow.

At the “high-power but low-efficiency” end, you find the one-to-one conversations that are the lifeblood of organising – trusted contacts talking to colleagues in the workplace, building collective power and resilience one relationship at a time. These interactions are powerful, but by their nature, they’re not efficient or easily scalable.

Both ends of the spectrum are essential. The challenge for unions is to use digital tools to maximise both reach and depth, without mistaking one for the other.

Tools are just tools

A recurring theme in Brian’s talk was the need to see technology as a means, not an end. The real work of organising, building relationships, understanding what matters to members, developing leaders, can’t be automated or outsourced to technology.

Tech tools can help us move faster and further – to communicate, gather information, and coordinate action. But having them doesn’t automatically mean your campaigns will work. Their value depends entirely on how unions use them.

Brian illustrated his points with stories from the US.

1. The minor league baseball players’ union drive

One of the most striking stories was the successful unionisation of minor league baseball players, something that had been tried and failed for many years. This was a workforce of 5,500, scattered across 120 teams, many of them migrant workers living in precarious conditions and on casualised contracts.

The campaign began with digital forms to gather contact information and identify key issues. Organisers used the data to map out leaders on each team, then assigned tasks and follow-ups through Action Builder.

Over two playing seasons, they built relationships, held online events, including professional development opportunities, and kept in constant touch.

When the time came to go public, the overwhelming majority of players signed union cards, beating the threshold by a long way. The employers conceded and recognised the union, which was able to win a 300% pay rise and dramatically improved conditions.

The technology had enabled organisers to scale up relationship-building and track progress in real time, even with a fragmented and mobile workforce. But the heart of the campaign was still the traditional tactic of conversations and connections between people.

2. Minnesota Nurses Association

This nurses’ union faces a regular three-year contract cycle. To keep members engaged between negotiations, they used Action Network forms to gather feedback, educate members about the process, and organise events.

By combining mass communication with opportunities for deeper involvement, such as local meetings and one-to-one conversations, they built a sense of connection and ownership among members.

Brian emphasised that regular, authentic engagement is crucial. If we only reach out to members in times of crisis, trust and solidarity erode. Building the “muscles” of engagement in quieter times ensures that unions are ready to mobilise when it matters most.

3. Public Service Alliance of Canada

During a major strike by a 300,000 member union, PSAC used Action Network’s distributed events tool to help members find and join picket lines. Members could enter their postcode, find the nearest picket, and sign up to join in.

The tool made it easy for organisers to manage hundreds of events and for members to get involved. An unexpected bonus was that journalists started using the tool to find events they could go to for local broadcast, leading to positive media coverage.

But technology alone doesn’t drive turnout. Brian talked about the “myth of the motivated but directionless activist”. People get involved because they have built up a strong supporting identity for an issue, not simply because a new tool makes getting involved with any event easy, even if they don’t really care about it.

The best digital campaigns are those that complement, rather than replace, the hard work of organising.

Challenges for unions

In both the US and the UK, unions are operating in a context of rapid technological, political, and social change. Authoritarian movements are on the rise, social media is reshaping how people relate to each other, and traditional forms of collective action are under pressure. Brian outlined some big challenges for unions in how we approach our campaigns and organising.

Get past organisational inertia and securing buy-in

Large organisations, unions included, are by their nature built to continue to do what they’ve always done. Introducing new technology requires both top-down buy-in (to secure resources and political support) and bottom-up ownership (from those who will actually use the tools). Projects to adopt new tech will be as much about the people and processes as they are about the platforms.

Pilot projects are an invaluable to move towards change, but they need to be the right size. Too small and they aren’t seen as relevant in other situations, too big and they can be unmanageable.

Brian’s advice was to find a campaign with enough scale to matter, but not so much that new approaches get bogged down. Secure strong ownership from someone with implementation responsibility, often an organising director or campaign lead, and ensure leadership is on board to back the necessary investment.

Build up engagement levels before you need them

In many places there has been a long-term loss of connection between unions and their members. In the US this year, some unions have found themselves hollowed out by attacks from a hostile government, which left them struggling to quickly rebuild engagement channels and trust with members at the time they’ve needed it most.

That’s something we should consider too. Don’t wait for a crisis to start engaging members. Regular, meaningful communication based around member needs is essential. It powers mobilisation efforts and it helps retain the sense of community and solidarity that sustains unions over the long term. But it is also a vital channel for communication that the union may need to call on suddenly.

See digital tools as part of a broader strategy.

When resources are tight, it can be tempting to look for ways to replace time-intensive work in a cheaper and easier way. But we need to be sure we’re not using them in appropriate ways – complementing, rather than trying to replace, the hard work of organising.

Mass communications and mobilisation are valuable, but real power comes from organising, which needs deep, ongoing relationships.

Whether you’re using Action Network, Action Builder, WhatsApp, or a paper wall chart, the goal is the same – to build relationships, foster community, and turn that into collective power.

About Action Network

Action Network is a digital campaign platform, comprising campaign tools and campaign CRM. Launched in 2012 it provides a suite of tools for mass mobilisation, such as petitions, email actions and event management.

It holds data on all interactions and allows huge flexibility in segmenting and targeting communications through email or SMS. And it incorporates federated capability, to allow distributed organisations like unions to make use of it at many different levels.

Its structure as a cooperative, part-owned and governed by unions, ensures that the platform’s development is directly responsive to the movement’s needs, rather than external investors.

It’s been used by several unions in the UK, including Unite, Equity and NEU’s School Cuts campaign. The TUC integrate it with other tools to power the Megaphone campaign platform.

There is currently a project in development to improve the UK geographic and political localisation of Action Network, helping it work better for UK trade unions.

About Action Builder

Action Builder is a organising toolset, launched in 2019. It can either complement Action Network or stand alone.

While Action Network mobilises people at scale, Action Builder is designed for one-to-one relationship-building, tracking workplace conversations, mapping networks, and developing leaders.

The idea for a separate tool came from an understanding that conventional CRM type databases stored information on people, but couldn’t adequately understand or store data on relationships between people. Those relationships are the most vital units of organising, and it needed a reworking of the whole model in order to help organisers make use of that data.

Action Builder aims to provide intuitive and mobile-first tools for organisers and reps to complete their organising tasks with directly. As such it builds up the data directly as a product of the work, rather than needing people to input data retrospectively, which is where organising tools often fall down.

If you’re interested in learning more about Action Network, Action Builder, or options for similar tools, please get in touch with the TUC Digital Lab.

AI transparency: We used generative AI to make a first draft of this blog from an audio recording of Brian’s presentation to our event, which was then edited and expanded before publication.

The post Building union power in the digital age: Lessons from Action Network’s Brian Young appeared first on TUC Digital Lab.

Unions are particularly at risk. We have limited budgets and often operating on older tech. We have large caches of sensitive data. And as highly decentralised organisations, we’re uniquely exposed to the risks of shadow IT, with all the risks that brings.

One way to reduce your union’s risk from phishing is to improve the impact of cyber security training using simulation – giving users a clearer understanding of moments of risk.

For this webinar, we were joined by Nationwide Group Staff Union Operations Manager James McCrossan and TUC vCIO Simon Parry. They talked about their own experiences with two different models of phishing simulation.

These case studies also feature in our recent report “Email phishing to keep unions safe”, which examines the pros and cons of each model for different types of union, and looks at some wider recommendations on phishing. Download a copy here.

The post Video: Why and how unions should use phishing simulation appeared first on TUC Digital Lab.

Even with strong IT security systems, the weakest link is often in human mistakes made by staff and activists. People can be tricked into giving away access to systems and data. There is an ever-growing amount of scam email flowing into our unions at all levels, attempting to do that. This so-called “phishing” is the most common form of attack, but also the most common way for the most serious types of attacks to start out.

Phishing simulation is a technique that can help our users better spot the kind of attacks they might face – simulating real attacks to demonstrate the risk more clearly. It can be used to understand and measure where the union has vulnerabilities, and to strengthen our defences through training.

Some unions already employ the technique, but for many others it could be a quick win in the ongoing battle with hackers and scammers.

Cyber-crime is an issue that all union leaders should be engaging with directly, rather than leaving to unions’ often under-resourced IT teams or outsourced suppliers. But for areas like this, where changes to staff or reps’ behaviour are so critical, there is an additional need for leadership and support.

This new Digital Lab guide outlines some of the key concepts involved in phishing simulation. It outlines two case studies of approaches that might benefit smaller and larger unions. And it looks at choices and supplementary measures your union should consider.

Download the guide here

The post Email phishing simulation to keep unions safe appeared first on TUC Digital Lab.

But as technology moves on, so too does support. With Windows 11 having now been available for four years, Microsoft has confirmed that Windows 10 will reach end of support on 14 October 2025. 

Unions may still have machines that use Windows 10, and this could become a security risk. This blog looks at what the implications are for unions, and what their options could be. 

What does “end of support” mean? 

After 14 October 2025, Windows 10 will no longer receive security updates, bug fixes, or technical support. PCs won’t suddenly stop working, but they will become more vulnerable to cyber threats. Without regular updates, any new security flaws will remain unpatched, posing a risk to anyone using the system, especially for online tasks or handling sensitive data. 

Despite the looming deadline, Windows 10 remains in heavy use. Some estimates suggest that as much as 40% of Windows devices are still running it. There are major concerns that so many devices are potentially about to become at risk. 

Critics also argue that forcing upgrades could lead to the unnecessary disposal of perfectly functional hardware. This is not only a waste of resources for millions of people and organisations, but environmentally reckless as perfectly good hardware is thrown away and replaced. 

Under pressure, Microsoft has recently introduced a 12-month extension to Windows 10 support. But it’s not automatic. Your union or your activists will need to take action to enable it. 

Why the delays in upgrading to Windows 11? 

Despite Windows 11 being available, and free to upgrade for many, adoption has been slower than expected. A key reason is hardware compatibility: older machines often don’t meet the requirements for Windows 11.

Why this matters for trade unions 

Trade unions face particular challenges here. With tighter IT budgets than many private sector organisations, hardware upgrades can be slower to come about.  

Also some unions still rely on very customised software that was built more than four years ago and might only run on Windows 10. 

This is especially concerning given the sensitive nature of union data and the fact that unions have been targeted by cyberattacks in recent years. The risks are real and growing. 

For reps and branch officials without dedicated IT support, the end-of-life deadline might not even be on their radar. Also, many activists won’t have dedicated hardware from their union, instead relying on personal devices for their duties.  If these devices haven’t been updated, or can’t run Windows 11, they may be forced to risk working on insecure devices. 

It’s not just the union’s hardware and data that face risks. Unions would be exposed if outdated, unsupported devices are used to interact with employers. These machines, lacking security updates, could inadvertently introduce malware into workplace systems. That doesn’t just compromise data, it could damage relationships and harm the union’s reputation. 

Some employers already block unsupported devices from accessing key services like email clients or shared platforms. This means those devices could become effectively unusable in a professional setting, leaving reps unable to carry tasks on union-provided  PCs. 

What are your options? 

For those who can’t upgrade to Windows 11, Microsoft’s answer is their Extended Security Updates (ESU) programme, which offers a way to extend support until October 2026. There are two ways to activate it: 

• Free Option: Link your PC to a Microsoft account and sync settings via OneDrive (Settings > Accounts). This may already be set up by your union if you use Microsoft services. If unsure, check with your IT team. But be aware that this method nudges your users further into Microsoft’s ecosystem, and free accounts have data storage limits that will keep nagging users to take out monthly paid upgrades. 

• Paid Option: For around £22, you can manually activate the ESU. To do this, first ensure your system is fully updated via Settings > Update & Security > Windows Update. ESU options will only appear of updated devices. This is also where you need to activate the extended security update, but not everyone will see this option immediately. It’s being rolled out gradually. 

Other Paths Forward 

Of course, upgrading your compatible Windows 10 devices to Windows 11 is one solution, as is buying new Windows 11 devices. But those aren’t viable, there’s another route, but one best reserved for the most technically comfortable users.  

The End of 10 campaign group is encouraging users to adopt the Open-Source Linux system, which would allow older PCs to continue running securely without additional cost. You can learn more at endof10.org, but be aware that this option is only recommended for those who fully understand the implications of switching to Open Source. 

If you’re worried about your union’s preparedness for the end of Windows 10, here are some steps you can take: 

Audit your union’s internal hardware 

If your union maintains an IT asset register, you should already have a record of devices and their operating systems. If not, conduct a manual audit to assess the scale of the issue. Identify which devices are still running Windows 10. Of these, you need to find out which ones: 

• Can be upgraded to Windows 11 
• Can be retained if they have Extended Security Updates (ESU) activation 
• Can no longer be used and require replacement 

Pay particular attention to devices that lack key Windows 11 requirements such as TPM 2.0, Secure Boot, or supported CPUs. 

National unions often have access to automated auditing tools to streamline this process. For example: 

• IT Managed Service Providers (MSPs) may use endpoint management platforms like Acronis, Datto, or Heimdal to quickly identify all Windows 10 devices. Ask your provider for details if you don’t already have access to the automated reporting. 
• If your union has adopted Microsoft Cloud and you’ve got into the more advanced steps and deployed Microsoft Intune, this gives IT administrators visibility into all enrolled devices via Microsoft 365 admin controls. From here, potentially vulnerable devices can be identified. 

Audit activists’ devices 

Auditing devices used by branches and representatives can be more complex, especially if your union does not directly provide hardware for reps, or if your reps use employer-provided hardware. Approaches vary significantly across organisations, so your audit strategy will need to reflect your union’s specific setup. 

For instance:  

• If all devices are enrolled in Microsoft Intune, IT administrators can easily audit and enforce controls using Microsoft 365 admin tools.  

• If your union only provides funding for hardware and reps are responsible for purchasing their own devices, then clear communications and guidance will be essential to ensure compliance and security. 

• Self-checking tools: Reps can use built-in tools like Windows Security, System Information, or Settings > About to check their device’s OS version and update status. 

• Questionnaire-based audit: Consider distributing a simple questionnaire to reps asking for details such as device type, operating system version, antivirus status, and update history. This can help identify at-risk devices and guide next steps. 

Upgrade, Extend or Decommission 

Once all potentially at-risk devices have been identified, determine the appropriate action for each:  

• Upgrade to a supported operating system (usually Windows 11) 
• Extend security updates via ESU (Extended Security Updates)  
• Remove the device from use if it cannot be secured 

Communications 

Regardless of your union’s hardware policy, effective communication is critical. Where the union does not directly manage activist devices, consider providing:  

• Briefings, FAQs, and safety checklists to help reps understand the risks associated with Windows 10 end-of-life. 
• Template letters for reps to send to employers requesting upgrade plans, especially where employer-provided equipment may be affected. 

The post Does your union still have Windows 10 PCs? Here’s what to do before Microsoft support ends  appeared first on TUC Digital Lab.

We were joined by Hannah O’Rourke of progressive digital network Campaign Lab to look at what unions had learned in the last year about whether and how they should develop internal usage of AI.

What do we mean by AI in unions?

When we think about a technology like AI, which has such far-reaching implications, we need to look at how it might impact unions at a number of levels. Our friends at the non-profit digitisation organisation CAST have developed a helpful framework for this (btw, CAST have lots of helpful resources on AI).

You can look at AI’s impact in layers like an onion. At the heart are ways that AI might help add productivity to existing tasks done in the union. This is where much of the consumer hype is, with tools like ChatGPT or Copilot marketed to automate or augment parts of regular workflows. That could include things like partially automating the production of minutes from union meetings, to reduce the time the job takes.

Next we looked at how having AI assistance might help extend existing work into other areas. For example, a rep might be better able to engage with a new group of migrant workers at their workplace if they are able to access machine translation on an ad-hoc basis. Are there potentially new ways of working for the union that might fit within our existing mission?

Then there are questions of how more widespread use of AI might change the union’s mission and demand a response from the union. For example, if a key part of the union’s offer is advice at work, and an AI assistant on a phone can produce convincing-sounding, highly tailored advice for workers (regardless of whether it’s actually the best option), how might that affect how prospective members see the value of joining?

And finally we need to consider responses to AI as it is affecting society. Even though the level of actual job displacement from AI is still unclear, AI is being used as an excuse by employers seeking to cut staff and deregulate. Creative sectors are suffering from the increasing use of AI in imagery and writing, where new tools have been based on workers’ intellectual property, without their agreement or compensation. And AI combined with data surveillance is increasing the information asymmetry between workers and their employers, with employers using this to extract a greater share of value from work. Each union will be facing a different set of challenges for their members and their industries, and will need to develop a policy response. For some this could mean not engaging at all – for others it might mean engaging only within strict guardrails.

Viewed in layers like this, it’s clearer that our how we make internal use of these tools has to fit within the framework of our own external policy. We’ll need internal policies or principles that make sure we’re in alignment. And we can also see that the more we learn about the potential of the technology through experimentation, the better we’ll understand how it works and what the bigger implications could be for the union or our sectors.

Where are unions at the moment?

Another helpful framework from CAST is their stages of AI adoption. At the time of last year’s workshop, most unions were at the Aware stage, where only a few people in the organisation were starting to look at how tools might be helpful in a practical sense.

From this, non-profits that CAST work with typically follow a path of deeper stages. There’s Testing, where more people experiment, but work is in silos and starts to highlight potential risks and ethical concerns. The Aligning stage helps bring experimentation together, developing guardrails for the organisation. At the Integrating stage, the organisation more consistently thinks about supporting use cases which have been proven. And at the Transforming stage, the organisation’s use of AI has moved into deeper areas of changing services offered or the wider mission

Unions in the workshop mostly felt that they were at the Testing stage. Some still felt that they hadn’t moved on from the beginning of the process, but more believed that staff and reps were already experimenting in silos, with or without organisational approval and oversight. A handful of unions were working towards Aligning, by developing pilot projects or principles and guidance to align experimentation better across the union.  

What’s been happening in the last year?

We had a recap of work that’s happened since the last workshop, across the TUC, our affiliates and around the international movement.

Within the Digital Lab

At our workshop, we picked up a number of projects in the TUC Digital Lab, based on the requests we received:

• We published a context guide for unions to use in explaining basic aspects of Generative AI around their organisations.
• We supported PCS to experiment with AI in training.
• We worked with tech law experts AWO to develop a resource exploring the legal and regulatory implications of Generative AI, to support unions in developing policies or reps in understanding the implications of new systems being introduced by employers.

Policy work

More broadly, the TUC’s policy team and AI working group drawn from across affiliates have expanded our shared policy work to include:

• A draft Bill for regulating AI, which has formed a central plank of our lobbying in this area.
• A manifesto for creative workers, on how we could address some of the harms in the ways this technology is being developed.
• A toolkit for reps in conducting and using algorithmic impact assessments for AI systems in the workplace.
• Setting out the building blocks for a wider pro-worker AI innovation strategy for the UK.

Union case studies

In the workshop, we looked in more depth at three AI projects, and the learning from them.

• PCS: Using AI chat in union education.
  PCS worked with us, Campaign Lab and developer Poteris to pilot an AI conversation practice tool to support their organising training for reps. It simulates a workplace conversation about joining the union. Used by reps as a follow up to training, it offers custom feedback, based on the learning objectives from the course. The aim is to augment rather than replace or dilute the union’s learning offer. It’s been written up as a case study here. Next steps for PCS are to look at other potential scenarios where conversation practice is useful. Poteris have released the work as open source for other unions to use, or are developing a supported service for unions based on it, and expanding the tool to allow quicker scenario creation, member login integrations and data dashboards for union education teams.
  
• NASUWT: AI chat for member advice.
  NASUWT have piloted offering tailored information on one the advice pages of their website, using an option for chatbot support. This isn’t designed to offer casework advice, which needs to come from a trained source in the union, but it can help answer informational questions on work conditions. These are often tricky in teaching, due to the fragmented nature of contracts and regulations, but by restricting a chatbot to generate replies based only on the pre-approved page content, the union can be more sure that it can only give accurate responses. As teachers are limited in the times they can contact NASUWT advisors during the day, there are peak loads at lunchtimes and at school closing. Answering more basic questions automatically in this way can free up the union’s limited advisor time for more complicated or urgent member questions. This project involved a lot of time in building a chatbot that could match member intents behind questions, and in working with contact centre staff to build in awareness of some issues that a trained advisor would pick up, such as safeguarding signposting for members who might be feeling bullied. There is a more in-depth case study on developer EBM’s website.
  
• Prospect: Trialing generative AI for productivity
  Like several other unions, Prospect have established a formal pilot process to help evaluate whether there is potential for the union in using generative AI assistants, and to do it in a potentially safer and more controlled way. A cross-departmental AI working group of staff has been set up to support each other in trialling Copilot 365. The decision was taken to use Copilot only, to protect Prospect data from being shared outside the union’s own cloud provision, or being used to train suppliers’ models. Use cases being tested include generating Excel or PowerBI formulas to help staff use the tools at a more advanced level, and reducing the time taken to make minutes from recorded meetings. It is not being used in any member-facing activity at least until the union knows more about it. The experiment is running over a defined period and will help the union to devise ongoing internal policies about how AI use might be permitted internally.

We also looked at wider union and social sector innovations from other countries, such as a contract bot that helps reps compare an offer from the employer against the union’s standard recommended agreements, an email prioritisation system that reads and categorises incoming member email to help advisors work with it more effectively, or revising union websites to be more likely to be reflected in generative AI search answers. We also looked at other NGO examples, such as Citizens’ Advice’s tool for advisors to generate case notes quickly from video calls.

Potential transferable useful use cases for AI across unions

After looking at examples and discussing participants’ own experiences, including what had gone well so far, and where we knew AI had particular risks or shortcomings, we did some exercises to ideate and prioritise potential use cases.

We then plotted them on charts as to which offered potentially high impact (whether dealing with difficult tasks or easy but very frequent tasks), and whether it would be easier or harder to implement. The idea was that rather than look at some of the biggest and most ambitious targets, or the most widely hyped but maybe less useful, we could devise a number of short term ideas for unions to test that would help us understand the tech better, its organisational implications, and its potential for value.

Here are a selection of use case ideas which participants thought would be both impactful and achievable.  

• Transcribing meetings and producing minutes.
• Summarising governance conversations to generate reports appropriate to different groups of stakeholders.
• Planning or drafting longer papers and internal reports informed by existing union content.
• Information chatbots to help users answer questions from extensive content sections on union websites.
• Simulating conversations for training activists.
• Providing custom recommendations and learning journey support for activists.
• Data analysis to spot patterns in density, or for organising resource allocation.
• Analysing background information and suggesting questions to prepare better design briefs for union comms teams.
• First drafts of briefings for different internal stakeholders from new policy or campaign documents.
• Internal upskilling and customised IT help across an increasing range of tech tools.

What might stop us?

We looked at some of the factors that could block this kind of experimentation in the union, and whether they could be mitigated satisfactorily.

What could the TUC Digital Lab do to help?

We asked the group where they would like the TUC to take this work next and got a few helpful suggestions that we could investigate.

• Shared work on supporting unions to develop their own internal AI usage policies.
• Networking together union HR managers to discuss what’s happening in recruitment, as more job candidates make use of AI in applications and tests.
• Supporting unions to make use of the work from PCS’ Repcoach pilot, either as Open Source or a more developed SaaS product.
• Developing shared supplier references for unions in procurement around AI.
• Increasing the Digital Lab’s case studies resource to feature more potentially transferable AI ideas.
• Publishing guidance and case studies around internal Gen AI adoption pilots for unions.
• Looking into union experiences and recommendations around Generative Engine Optimisation for websites.
• Offer exploration sessions for leadership groups within affiliates to develop their own understanding in a similar way to these two cross-union workshops.

If you or your union would be interested in getting involved in projects around any of these ideas, please get in touch.

The post How are unions using AI? What should our next steps be? appeared first on TUC Digital Lab.

Unions have lots of data, but it may be trapped in systems that few people can access. Sometimes data is paper based, in files held by individuals, or not networked. Where we do have reports, these can be siloed, too brief, too rigidly formatted, and unable to tell us the full picture. Or the raw data can be too complex for staff and reps with more limited data skills to be able to work with.

That’s where data visualisation comes in. By creating visual representations of the data, intuitive and interactive, sharing them with those who need to see them, staff and reps more widely around the union can understand what the data is telling us and explore it further themselves.

This guide aims to introduce some of the ways in which unions might introduce data visualisation more widely to their work. Based on learning from a project we ran with a group of unions earlier this year, it covers some potential use cases, as well as tools and skills that will be needed.

Download the guide here

The post Data visualisation for trade unions appeared first on TUC Digital Lab.

But unions have so far been held back from using it by legislation. The Trade Union Act 1984 and 1992’s Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act mandated postal voting for strike votes, general secretary elections, union merger ballots and political fund ballots.

Many, do, however, frequently use online balloting for other votes not restricted by the law, such as whether to accept pay offers.

The 1999 Employment Relations Act added a power for the Secretary of State to issue regulations to permit alternative voting methods, rather than requiring a new Act of Parliament. But no such statutory instrument was ever issued.

That is about to come to an end, with the current government’s Make Work Pay programme, which promised:

“Labour will allow modern, secure, electronic balloting and workplace ballots, as political parties and listed companies use, while ensuring we maintain high standards of engagement and participation.”

Online balloting is not a part of the Employment Rights Bill itself but is closely tied to it. The last government’s Trade Union Act 2016 added complications by mandating a slow process of official trials before anything could change, as a result of its Knight Review.

However, when the Employment Rights Bill passes, it will strike out those provisions in the Trade Union Act. That means that online voting for unions can again become a matter purely for secondary legislation.

The Secretary of State will be able to issue an Order, with an accompanying code of practice. That’s something the current SoS, Jonathan Reynolds, has promised to bring forward. As he said in a ministerial statement in March:

“… we are committed to making balloting more accessible by delivering e-balloting, which we anticipate will increase participation in statutory ballots and demonstrate clear mandates.”

As things stand, the government has committed to consulting on online balloting towards the end of 2025, and implementing new measures in Spring 2026.

What difference could online balloting make for unions?

We talked to balloting officers from several unions that had already tried online or hybrid voting (posted ballot papers with an optional online return) in non-statutory ballots. They were hoping for a range of benefits from the introduction of online balloting for statutory ballots too.

Member experience

Moving away from postal-only could have a big benefit for member experience – making the process closer to members’ modern expectations.

Unions haven’t encountered problems for members in using online non-statutory votes. One told us that the number of members who contact the union to ask why voting has to be by post is actually a greater problem than the online system.

Members expect to be able to vote online and can find it anachronistic that they cannot do so, which they often blame on the union, not the law.

We heard that younger workers are much less likely to regularly use the postal system and convincing them to work out how to do it adds significant complication to a vote.

Raising turnout

Making it harder to use any process inevitably means a fall in the number of people who engage with it. Unions want to remove even small barriers to people taking part in our internal democracy – such as elections for general secretary or committees. These often get very low response levels, so moving to an easier system could make for a significant proportional increase in the level of participation.

Strike votes generally get a significantly higher turnout, so eballoting for them may be less urgent in that regard. However, unions still want to get as many people as possible to take part in big decisions.

Turnout will differ according to the method used and the electorate, but unions consistently reported increases in non-statutory ballot turnout with hybrid or online-only voting, as the process becomes quicker and simpler for the member.

Providing access

Some unions have significant numbers of mobile workers. This could include people working away from home for extended periods of time, for example those posted internationally with an employer, or who work in international transportation. Often they are not at home to receive post and can become disenfranchised.

One union told us of their initial concerns about the accessibility of online systems before their first online vote. They recruited volunteers to visit members who might have issues and help them. But these were not called upon, as the system provided by the scrutineer had a high degree of accessibility, especially for visually impaired workers. This made the default system more accessible for those workers than a postal alternative.

Liberalising the technologies permitted for voting would also allow unions to offer multiple routes to vote, depending on the access needs of members. For example, an online-first ballot with alternative methods such as telephone or postal voting for those who need it.

Improving processes

Lost postal ballots are always a problem, and unions have to contend with votes going missing or getting delayed in the post. Having the option of sending online ballot papers out where postal ones had been lost or mislaid would also be a lot easier for both the union and the member. This is especially important where members contact the union close to the end of the ballot, and it is hard to arrange replacement postal votes.

With online balloting, it’s possible to tell in many cases where members didn’t receive their voting pack, due to email bouncebacks. This data for successful receipt doesn’t exist in postal ballots, so online gives the union new information and a chance to rectify the problem.

Shorter balloting periods

The ability to conduct online-only votes in some situations could be valuable. Many strike ballots are only conducted with a few dozen members in the affected workplace. It is a much easier task to clean member data and ensure buy-in and participation of all members who want to do so, when the electorate is that small. In such cases, an online-only vote could be quicker and easier for the affected voters, compared to a postal ballot.

Ballots under current systems can take weeks, or even months from planning to result. That can make industrial disputes drag out unnecessarily, further damaging industrial relations. Negotiations may make progress, but can get stuck in a long term balloting process that becomes less relevant. Getting through the balloting process quickly would avoid energy lost in the dispute on both sides.

Cost savings

The costs of running a ballot can be very significant. Getting caught up in a national dispute can bring a high cost in balloting. And a general secretary or political fund ballot is always a major expense.

Postal voting with an online return would reduce costs for larger electorates, where the postage savings will outweigh the additional licensing costs for new balloting technology.

Moving to online-only, or online-first balloting would likely reduce costs significantly more, as the outward post is even more expensive than the return post. It needs a supporting pack of information to be printed and included, which adds a lot to the weight (and cost) for complex votes.

Deepening engagement

In Ireland, where online union ballots are legal, we heard from one union that online balloting has meant non-union workers engage significantly more with campaigns around strike votes and consultative pay ballots.

Digital systems mean it’s possible for a worker to join the union, receive a ballot and vote very quickly – sometimes even on the same day. This increase in engagement would often not be possible with the time lag caused by offline processes.

And once a member has been convinced to vote for the first time, they often feel more connected to union democracy and will be more likely to continue to exercise their vote in future elections. This effect could help compound turnout over time.

Reducing waste

Some unions are keen to reduce the production of printed packs that most people won’t use if they have the option. A lot of members are environmentally engaged and currently complain about the waste of resources in conducting postal ballots.

What’s next?

At the TUC, we’re engaging with the government over their plans, as they move into consultation and implementation.

If you’ve got any evidence you’d like us to include, or ideas for how you would like to be using online balloting after the changes, please do get in touch.

The post Online balloting moves closer for unions appeared first on TUC Digital Lab.