Exclusive: 3/5 women working in Graham’s husband’s unit ‘left alleging bullying and abuse’

BDSU members are in industrial dispute with Unite over alleged bullying and abuse by management in unit run by Jack Clarke; new details contradict union’s sudden counter-claim workers were suspended for harassing women

The Unite union has been condemned by workers and their union representatives attacks on staff who are in an industrial dispute with the union over alleged bullying in the ‘BDSU’ unit run by Unite general secretary Sharon Graham’s husband, Jack Clarke – who was on a final warning for bullying and misogyny, including incidents recorded and transcribed by victims, before he was promoted to run it, outside the union’s usual procedures, soon after she became general secretary. Mr Clarke is among the managers included in the allegations leading to the workers’ dispute.

Unite has been accused of ‘union-busting’ tactics in the dispute, including the suspension of workers who lodged the dispute – but not Clarke or other managers alleged to be bullying workers – and some of the union’s senior management figures staged a counter-demonstration against the striking workers picketing outside Unite’s Holborn HQ.

But Skwawkbox has learned, from union sources, details of the dispute and its background that have not yet been made public. Just before the industrial action, Unite made claims that the workers had been suspended because of abuse toward female staff – a claim that the GMB has said is completely unfounded and had not been mentioned before in the suspension process. But according to union sources, out of the five women who were working in BDSU, at least three have left the unit complaining of bullying and abuse by Mr Clarke personally.

Skwawkbox was also told that Unite’s ‘director of organising’, Tayra Lopes-Lister, who was among the senior Unite figures who staged a counter-protest against the striking BDSU workers, is the investigating manager responsible for assessing the suspension of the workers.

Skwawkbox asked Unite:

Of only five women working initially in Unite BDSU, at least three have left – and left alleging bullying and abusive behaviour by the unit’s boss Jack Clarke, Sharon Graham’s husband. Given the ongoing industrial action, Ms Graham’s earlier attempts to have evidence against Clarke destroyed in similar complaints of bullying and misogyny and Mr Clarke being on a final warning from the union before she took over, does the union wish to put any comment on record about:

• the departure of the BDSU women
• Unite’s tactics in accusing striking workers of abuse toward women, an accusation that had not been made before the week prior to the beginning of the strike
• the apparent distribution of confidential disciplinary information to union officers for use in discrediting the striking workers, as evidenced in the case of the London and Eastern regional secretary, who subsequently apologised for smearing them
• the involvement of senior Unite staff in the counter-protest against the striking workers, including
• how Unite’s apparent union-busting behaviour fits with the general secretary’s claims to always put the needs of workers against bad employers first – including Unite’s director of organising, who was the manager investigating the alleged reasons for suspending two of the striking staff

Rather than a response from the Unite press office, Skwawkbox received a legal letter from a well-known law firm citing both Graham and Clarke personally as their clients as well as Unite, warning Skwawkbox of the ‘seriousness’ of the allegations and demanding that nothing be published until the lawyers have provided a ‘substantive’ response. Skwawkbox extended the deadline for a few hours.

It appears that the use of high-powered lawyers, at union members’ expense, against journalists making enquiries concerning the dispute is not limited to Skwawkbox. A GMB circular to members working at Unite, published on the ‘Unite Insider’ X account, notes Unite’s use of lawyers and also alleges that the union has been ‘monitoring’ GMB members’ meetings and making sinister approaches to those who attend them:

Dear GMB members at Unite,

Thank you to all of you who responded to the indicative ballot. We had responses coming in right up until the deadline at midnight last night and we are now assessing the results and feedback received in every Unite workplace where we have members. I will be in touch with you all before the Christmas break regarding the next steps once we have finished analysing the data.

In the meantime, I wanted to update you on several escalations in attempted union-busting behaviour that are understandably causing increasing concerns for our members.   Firstly we are aware that attendance at GMB@Unitebranch meetings is continuing to be monitored and that some members attending branch meetings are being put under pressure, including some members being contacted after meetings to be made aware that their presence and comments at the meeting have been noted.

We find it astonishing that anyone associated with the trade union movement would behave in this way and we will continue to defend the right of our members to organise independently as trade unionists within their workplace, regardless of who their employer is.

It has also been reported in the media that Unite is issuing legal letters to publications who make enquiries regarding the industrial dispute our BDSU members are involved in, warning of potential defamation proceedings. This is deeply concerning and the GMB believes this is nothing more than an attempt to suppress news coverage of a legitimate industrial dispute, which is not behaviour that we believe a trade union employer should engage in.

Media reports also show that Unite is continuing to claim that the two BDSU members suspended within 24 hours of a collective grievance being submitted were accused of harassment. I can only reiterate that at no point in their suspension letters or in their investigation meetings were these members accused of harassment and no evidence to support such a claim has ever been provided. Only recently has Unite started to claim these members are accused of harassment and we believe this is nothing more than an attempt to smear our members and justify the victimisation they have been subjected to for rightly challenging bullying from managers in their workplace.

Finally, we are aware that Unite is continuing to falsely claim that our BDSU members are somehow factionally motivated. Nothing could be further from the truth and there is nothing factional about raising concerns about pay and conditions, challenging bullying in the workplace and resisting attempts at victimisation when these legitimate concerns are raised. Unite should stop using these smoke and mirror tactics to divert attention from the serious workplace issues that have been uncovered in the BDSU and instead agree to meet with the GMB to resolve this industrial dispute, which has been caused by the unacceptable workplace culture and behaviour of managers that our BDSU members have been subjected to.

A number of members have also raised their own concerns in the indicative ballot about their experiences of workplace stress and bullying at Unite. Please do not hesitate to contact me at any time as your industrial officer if you require further support, as the GMB will always stand up for any members who request our help, whoever their employer is.

Insiders have also noted a sudden increase in Unite staff joining GMB – in some cases the new joiners have been workers looking to join the dispute, but in other cases insiders believe this has been an attempt to stack the voting process against any future industrial action, as those new members immediately signed a letter declaring their opposition to the workers’ dispute with BDSU and union management.

Eventually, the lawyers working for Graham, Clarke and Unite responded, accusing Skwawkbox of ‘onesidedness and [a] blithe disregard for fair and accurate reporting’ and of ‘dismiss[ing] serious allegations of bullying in the workplace made by a relatively junior, female member of Unite’s staff’, before claiming that:

• Unite had already investigated the striking workers’ complaints against Jack Clarke and other managers and these had been ‘dismissed in entirety’
• claiming that, despite the GMB union’s statements that there had been no allegations of bullying and intimidation in the process suspending two of the striking workers (all the rest of the workers in dispute were suspended later), a ‘relatively junior, female member of staff’ had lodged a grievance in June alleging bullying and intimidation – but that this had ‘had nothing to do with the collective grievance made at around the same time against BSDU managers, including Mr Clarke… other than the fact that two accused in the [woman’s complaint], were amongst the complainants in the latter. No information was provided on what ‘relatively junior’ means or any link between the female member of staff and Clarke or Graham. The lawyers said that Unite had upheld the female staff member’s complaint.

The law firm then went on to say the following in response to Skwawkbox’s enquiry listed above – including an admission that three out of five female staff members have left Clarke’s unit – but denying that this was because of abuse or bullying (emphases added by Skwawkbox):

[Skwawkbox’s enquiry] “Of only five women working initially in Unite BDSU, at least three have left – and left alleging bullying and abusive behaviour by the unit’s boss Jack Clarke, Sharon Graham’s husband.”

It is correct that three female employees have left the BDSU since its inception but it is denied, insofar as it is alleged, that their departures were attributable to “bullying and abusive behaviour” by Mr Clarke or, more generally, that Mr Clarke has ever engaged in such conduct towards these former Unite employees. As you will appreciate, you have failed to identify any examples of the alleged bullying and/or abusive behaviour by Mr Clarke and, in those circumstances, he is unable
to comment meaningfully. What we can say, however, is that:

1. none of the three female employees who left the BDSU made any direct allegations against Mr Clarke upon their departure (one, who resigned in May 2024, did subsequently file a statement in support of the collective grievance almost two months later); and
2. vague allegations of bullying by Mr Clarke and other managers were a feature of the collective grievance raised in June 2024, and Unite launched a full investigation of that grievance in line with its standard Grievance Policy and Procedure. The investigation’s outcome was scrutinised in two rounds of appeals, concluding on 15 November 2024. The investigation, and each appeal, was considered and determined by a different investigator. All three investigators reached the same conclusion, namely that the complainants had not demonstrated that Mr Clarke (or any other BDSU manager for that matter) had bullied or otherwise behaved inappropriately towards any member of staff. The final outcome also found that the allegations in the collective grievance had been made vexatiously, especially in view of the complainants’ inability to evidence any of the alleged wrongdoing. As above, Mr Clarke entirely rejects the allegations made against him as being without any foundation.

As noted in a separate article last night, the lawyers’ response then included a remarkable admission that the union did destroy evidence submitted by members of staff (before BDSU existed) in 2018 in support of a complaint against Clarke, before going on to claim that the GMB’s accusation – that confidential information regarding disciplinary processes had been shared around the union to discredit the striking workers – was in fact “the GMB put[ting] the fact of suspensions into the public domain, thereby forcing Unite to deny accusations of victimisation and union-busting, and make clear that they were in respect of unrelated complaints.”

To Skwawkbox’s question about “the involvement of senior Unite staff in the counter-protest against the striking workers” [including the union’s organising director, who was involved in deciding the disciplinary case Unite brought against two of the striking workers], the lawyers responded that:

Feelings within Unite, and particularly the BDSU, were understandably running high as a result, in particular, of what appeared to be an attempt to undermine (and certainly a complete disregard for) a female colleague’s complaint. Unite respected the decision to strike, and it respected the desire of some of its staff, senior or otherwise, to make their voices heard. We understand that Unite has recently written to all its employees making this position clear, and stressing, for the avoidance of doubt, that nobody involved either in the strike, or the counter demonstration, should have any concern.

This defence of ‘feelings running high’ should be measured against the fact that, as Skwawkbox has previously reported, that Unite’s official Holborn HQ displayed the anti-worker/GMB banners outside and inside the building after the counter-demo ended. They were removed at some point after Skwawkbox reported on it.

The lawyers closed by denying that Unite had used union-busting tactics – claiming that ‘Unite has fully recognised and respected the rights of all its staff throughout all the events described. Unite’s Director of Organising was
not, and is not, involved in the suspensions or disciplinary process’ -and with a threat of legal action.

However, their letter did not respond to a Skwawkbox question about the fact that the alleged union-busting tactics involved padding the GMB Unite branch with new members who then tried to have the strike called off:

I’ve also learned that a number of Unite staff joined GMB after the dispute began and immediately issued a letter condemning the dispute and calling for it to be shut down, which workers believe is an attempted disruption by Unite’s management. Please include a response to this by 3.30pm as discussed.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount as it has to be entered by us). Alternatively, if you prefer to make a one-off or recurring donation by simple card payment, please use the form below:

Thanks for your solidarity so Skwawkbox can keep doing its job of inconveniencing the right and helping to build the left!

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.