There
is growing concern about the failure to mount a serious national campaign in
defence of Mark Dunne, a prominent figure in Unite’s health sector who has been
removed from his job by East London Foundation Trust (ELFT).
Mark, a mental health
nurse of 25 years’ service and a prominent figure within Unite in Health, has
been subject to what his branch regards as a targeted and hostile redundancy by
East London Foundation Trust (ELFT), which removed him from post in July.
Mark has been Unite Branch
Secretary at ELFT for fifteen years and was elected Staff Side Chair in 2021.
He has become a prominent figure within Unite’s health sector, driving forward
an organising and campaigning agenda across London & Eastern. Mark drove
the ballot that saw ELFT members take strike action in the 2022/23 pay dispute
and has played a significant role in developing, coordinating and organising
health branches across the region. In 2025 he was elected Chair of the London
& Eastern Health RISC and also sits on Unite’s Regional Committee and
Health NISC.
Mark has also been a loud
voice against cuts to mental health services and was helping organise the
campaign against the further £25 million of cuts and around 330 job losses
planned at ELFT this year.
It is in this context that
his treatment should be a huge concern for Unite.
ELFT deleted Mark’s
substantive job despite his trade union role continuing to be needed. Mark
still had around 12 months remaining in his elected term as Staff Side Chair
when he was removed from post, The Trust refused calls to engage meaningfully over
the issue and rejected the dispute that was subsequently launched, putting them
in breach of their own recognition agreement.
His employment was
subsequently terminated despite repeated protests and representations from the
ELFT branch.
The branch regards this as
a clear case of a leading NHS trade union representative being victimised for
his trade union activity.
Unite needs to do more
The concern is that the
response from Unite nationally has so far not matched the seriousness of what
has happened.
There has been no major
national publicity campaign specifically around Mark’s treatment or
reinstatement and no prominent national statement condemning his treatment,
despite this being repeatedly requested by Mark and other ELFT representatives.
This is not to say Unite
has done nothing. Unite has supported the wider campaign against the cuts at
ELFT and the National Health Officer has commented publicly. But given that a
prominent Unite health activist, Branch Secretary, Staff Side Chair and Regional
Health RISC Chair has lost his employment in circumstances his branch regards
as trade union victimisation, it is reasonable to ask whether enough is being
done.
The ELFT branch has held
repeated protests over Mark’s treatment and is preparing to ballot over the
cuts and Mark’s termination. It has also secured significant publicity,
including national newspaper coverage and BBC radio. Much of this, however, has
been driven by Mark, the branch and its supporters rather than by a coordinated
national Unite campaign.
When Sharon Graham
commented to the Guardian about the situation at ELFT, she rightly highlighted
the cuts, but did not reference Mark’s termination.
That feels like a
significant omission.
If an employer can remove
a Branch Secretary of fifteen years, Staff Side Chair and prominent regional
health activist while he is actively campaigning against major cuts, it should
set alarm bells ringing across the union.
How much stronger could
this campaign be if Unite publicly threw its full weight and campaigning
resources behind Mark’s case?
Unite has set its own standard
Sharon Graham has
repeatedly taken strong and welcome positions against trade union
victimisation.
When Unite rep Pete Randle
faced victimisation, Sharon Graham said: “Unite will not allow Pete to be
victimised for carrying out his trade union duties” and pledged to “continue to
do whatever is necessary in defence of our rep.”
As recently as January
2026, when two Unite representatives were dismissed at the International
Transport Workers’ Federation, Unite demanded their immediate reinstatement,
promised its “complete support”, launched a strike ballot and pledged to
escalate the dispute.
Those were absolutely the
right responses.
They also establish an
important principle: when Unite representatives are targeted because of their
trade union activity, the union stands firmly behind them.
The concern is why the
same level of visible national support has not yet been brought behind Mark.
The branch is already
preparing a ballot and has built a significant campaign locally. National
backing, publicity and campaigning resources could transform the pressure on
ELFT.
Every Unite representative
should receive the same protection and solidarity regardless of political
views, internal alignment or position within the union. Reps must be free to
debate and disagree while knowing that when an employer attacks them for their
trade union activity, their union will stand behind them.
That principle only means
something if it is applied equally.
This is particularly
important at a time when the NHS is facing enormous cuts and restructuring.
Unite needs experienced workplace activists who are prepared to organise,
campaign and take on employers. The removal of one of the union’s prominent
health activists while leading opposition to cuts should therefore be treated
as a major issue for the whole union.
Unite and Sharon Graham
should now publicly reaffirm their full support for Mark; provide the necessary
regional, national and media resources; support continued campaigning and
demonstrations; pursue an appropriate remedy with ELFT; and give this case the
same determination shown when other Unite representatives have faced
victimisation.
This is not a request for
special treatment.
It is a demand for equal
treatment.
An injury to one is an
injury to all.


