By Morten Suhr Hansen
I grew up in a trade union reality.
For many years, my father served as a union representative in HK, so I was raised with a very clear understanding of what the labour movement was meant to be. Not a discount club. Not a peripheral service function. But something important. Something rooted in security, rights, community, and fair working conditions.
That is precisely why it is both fascinating – and honestly a bit brutal – to see how many young Danes view trade unions today. I was just reminded of this, as we at Subscrybe have recently completed an analysis in which we asked 300 Danes under the age of 40 about their perception of trade unions and published the results in the report ‘The New Reality for the Labour Movement.‘ [this report is published in Danish].
When we look at the analysis of young people’s attitudes towards trade unions and combine it with our experience from working with trade unions on member acquisition, relevance, and retention, a very clear picture emerges: Trade unions are increasingly perceived as a safety net. Not as a community. Not as an ongoing relationship. And not as a natural part of working life.
This is the new reality. And it must be taken very seriously.
The labour movement faces more than a communication challenge
Because this is not just a communication challenge. It is not simply a matter of sharper campaigns or a more modern tone of voice. It is a structural membership problem. Or, in my own professional language: a classic subscription problem.
When value is only experienced when something goes wrong, the membership becomes fragile.
That is exactly what the report shows. Many young people associate trade unions with help when problems arise, or with security and protection if something goes wrong. Very few associate them with a community. And almost half say they would only approach a trade union when facing a concrete problem. The engine of the relationship is therefore not ongoing relevance. It is acute need. That is a dangerous position to be in.
From the subscription world, we know that when the relationship is passive most of the time, members begin to look critically at the bill. Not necessarily because the product is bad, but because the value is not sufficiently visible in everyday life.
Here too, the report is clear. A large share say they have never had a concrete need for their trade union. Others feel the price does not match the value. Some are even unsure what they actually receive. It is almost the perfect recipe for churn.
Interestingly, the real problem does not arise when the trade union is finally used. Quite the opposite. Many experience high value when advice and support are actually activated. That is not where the battle is lost. The battle is lost in all the months when the member does not feel enough of the relationship.
This is exactly what we at Subscrybe see again and again in our work with trade unions and other membership organisations: most are actually far stronger than their members believe. But their value is too invisible, too generic, and too rarely documented.
Three important directions to strengthen the relationship with young people
My first point is that trade unions must stop promising value — and start documenting it.
Security, advice, and protection are good words. But they are also abstract words. They do not move the needle enough in a time when young people, in particular, rigorously measure their subscriptions based on tangible benefits. Value must be made visible. What have you gained access to? What have we created for you? What have we negotiated on your behalf? What would it have cost you without us?
My second point is that membership must be designed as a journey — not as a sign-up.
Too many trade unions still operate with a logic where the main battle is getting the member in the door. But the real work only begins afterwards. The report itself points out that many will stay if membership feels like a natural part of working life and if they are continuously reminded of the value. In reality, this is a recipe for better onboarding, better touchpoints, and better relationship design.
And here comes perhaps the most important realization: The biggest competitor is not necessarily other trade unions. It is passivity. Silence. Forgetfulness. A membership that gathers dust in the background until one day a young employee thinks: Do I actually need this?
My third point is therefore that trade unions must become much better at working with relevance throughout working life. Young careers today are not linear. They are filled with changes, uncertainty, detours, project employment, career shifts, parental leave, specialization, and new ambitions. A static membership fits poorly with a dynamic working life. Relevance is not only about what you offer. It is about when you offer it — and to whom.
Future membership must prove its value in everyday life
Yes, trade unions carry an important historical legacy. I know that from home. But they cannot live on that alone.
If they want to win the next generation, they must not only be important when something goes wrong. They must be relevant when everyday life is going completely right.
That is where the membership of the future will be tested.
