2.2 Resistance through persistence
Second, Collinson posited ‘resistance through persistence’. This kind of resistance can be individual or collective but is always public. Resisters ‘seek to render managerial decisions more visible, transparent and accountable’ through persistence (Gagnon and Collinson, 2017, p. 1271). Such resistance can also consistently prioritise certain demands, such as better pay and conditions in workplaces, or policies and legislation in the political realm. In stark contrast to resistance through distance, resistance through persistence gets close to those in power, taking a keen interest in detail as well as broader principles.
Whether formal or otherwise, special interest groups within workplaces – such as groups of employees established to further equality, diversity and inclusion – may persistently scrutinise and request changes to organisational practices. Trade unions may consistently campaign for and take action over pay, working conditions and pensions. Social campaign groups can form to find flaws with proposals they oppose – such as airport expansions, plans for housing or other developments. Persistence usually requires some expertise to be effective – people able to interpret the technical details of what people in power are suggesting and capable of offering alternative proposals. But resistance through persistence can also rely on experience or willingness to learn.
Persistent resistance, of course, can backfire if it is persistent over issues that do not interest a wide enough group of people. In such instances resisters can appear irrelevant, exclusionary and even obsessive, and the effect can be to repel potential allies. A good example of this phenomenon of over-persistence were people at either extreme of the Brexit debate who doggedly pestered politicians outside Parliament for several months, even years.