DO black workers want special treatment? It is a question guaranteed to make me bristle.

It is a lot like the “where are you really from” question of recent infamy which, sadly, is nothing new to many black people.

The question of special treatment often raises its ugly head as a reaction to whatever the latest report is on the conditions facing black workers and the newly found intention to do something about the racism we face.

We must call it out for what it is — racism. It is not some kind of accident. Like someone’s tripped over and — oh there we go — black people have come out bottom of the heap again.

I chaired the beginning of one of the strands of the latest TUC Anti-Racism Taskforce (ARTF) which reported to congress earlier this year.

I was a member of the TUC general council at the time but left after moving on from my previous employer.

The work of the ARTF was expertly chaired by Patrick Roache, the general secretary of the NASUWT.

If you are serious about anti-racism, it is impossible to do anything other than wholeheartedly endorse the ARTF action plan agreed upon by congress — and I do.

Suggestions such as mandatory anti-racism training for union staff, training caseworkers to understand strategic litigation, identifying and supporting more black activists and reps, removing barriers to participation in unions and developing organising strategies in places where black workers are more likely to be employed are all very sensible.

These are all very important suggestions. As is the idea that trade unions should “listen to their black members to identify key bargaining issues and take steps to ensure that black workers are represented at the negotiating table.”

There are many other action points that are noteworthy, such as the long-overdue suggestion that unions establish black leadership programmes.

Many of the suggestions felt eerily familiar to me — because they are. The fact is many of these suggestions could easily have been lifted directly from the pages of the excellent first two TUC workbooks on racism.

The first of these groundbreaking publications was written in the early 1980s. One of the major contributors was the legendary communist, anti-racist trade union educator and organiser Avtar Singh Jouhl.

Jouhl left us to enrich the ancestors earlier this year, but his visionary work, embodied in these publications from around 40 years ago which linked the theory of racism to practical action, has many lessons for those wondering what to do next with the solid recommendations of the ARTF.

The fact that Jouhl, the TUC Black Workers Conference, the TUC Race Relations Committee and countless black activists over the years have previously suggested many of the action points from the ARTF shows that what needs to be done is far from a surprise.

Unions already know what should be done. The real question is whether they will take the steps voluntarily.

Unions need to put the resources in place to deal with the gut-wrenching racism that many black workers face in their workplaces, as well as take seriously the proposition that racism is also a real problem within the trade union movement itself.

In what seems like a lifetime ago, I was the secretary of the TUC Stephen Lawrence taskforce to examine institutional racism within the trade union movement and many of the same issues this latest work from the ARTF has addressed about the workplace.

One key change that emerged from the earlier taskforce was a change of TUC rules to make it a condition of affiliation for unions to demonstrate a commitment to all forms of equality.

This rule is monitored every two years by an equality audit which unions are “encouraged” to complete.

The reality that everyone knows — but never says — is that no union is ever going to be kicked out of the TUC for failing to fully meet this. That is just not how the TUC works.

The TUC, rightly in my view, guides and supports the work of unions, rather than telling them what to do. Anything else would be a gross interference in the democracy of trade unions and could be used to undermine grassroots militancy.

The action points from the ARTF are also likely to be monitored through the equality audit process.

But if the TUC is not in a position to tell unions what to do to deepen anti-racism within the movement, members certainly are.

In the end, it will be the success — or otherwise — of grassroots organising that will determine what happens to the ARTF’s action plan. A top-down process will not be the difference between business as usual and real change.

The pressure that is applied by members of unions will be the decisive factor in deciding whether race equality is genuinely integral to the work of their union or whether we are once again driven by events — such as another high-profile death like that of Lawrence or George Floyd.

For that to happen we must not assume that activists within unions are all anti-racist. They are not.

Essential to progress will be more than just the proposition that unions should merely “listen” to black members. The anti-racist struggle must be led by black workers with the active collaboration of white workers.

I suggest that the success of the ARTF should also be judged on the ability of the left to build strong, active official or unofficial black self-organised groups across the trade union movement to bring about real change.

So the answer to the vexing question at the beginning of this article is no we don’t want special treatment — what we want is the long-awaited action against racism you all keep saying you believe in.

Follow Roger McKenzie on Twitter @RogerAMck.