Download
1 / 26
320 likes | 561 Views
CHAPTER SEVEN. UNION ORGANIZING In the U.S. labor relations system, if a group of employees wants their employer to bargain with them collectively rather than individually, they typically will need to form a union and formally demonstrate that a majority of the employees support the union.
E N D
CHAPTER SEVEN • UNION ORGANIZING • In the U.S. labor relations system, if a group of employees wants their employer to bargain with them collectively rather than individually, they typically will need to form a union and formally demonstrate that a majority of the employees support the union. • This chapter discusses the behavioral, strategic, and legal aspects of this organizing process.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES • To understand….. • The basic procedural and legal standards for how new unions are formed in the United States. This is called the organizing process. • The determinants of whether individuals vote for or against a union in a representation election. • The tactics used by employers to weaken individual support for unions and why these tactics are controversial. • The traditional tactics used by unions to strengthen individual support for unions and the pressures for developing new strategies. • The pros and cons of the existing certification election process and options for reform.
Union Organizing Timeline • Initiation • Campaigning • Filing Election • Petition • Voting • Results
THE TYPICAL ORGANIZING TIMELINE • STEP ONE-INITIATION: There are three possible initiator of an organizing drive: One or more employees, a union, and the employer. • STEP TWO: Building Support: Generally involves meeting with interested employees outside the workplace and distributing information. • The most important method in U.S. labor relations for showing support is to sign an authorization card. • STEP THREE: Filing petition for a representation election with the NLRB. • STEP FOUR: Representation election.
NLRB REPRESENTATION ELECTIONS • There are several types of NLRB representation elections that correspond to different questions of representation. • Regardless of the election type, all have the same goal • To determine the wishes of the majority of employees • The most frequent type is a certification election which is used in a nonunion location to ascertain if a majority of employees want to become unionized. • The opposite of a certification election is a decertification election-used to determine if a majority of unionized employees no longer wish to be represented by their union.
HOW TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATION ELECTION • A group of employees (or a union) petition the NLRB to conduct a certification election. • Petitioner demonstrates sufficient interest when 30% of the employees sign authorization cards • Unions often wait until they collect 50% or more. • If more than 50% of the eligible employees sign authorization cards, the union can ask the employer to voluntarily recognize the union. • Recognition based on the authorization cards is also called a card-check election. Card-check elections are rare, as employers typically decline to recognize unions voluntarily.
APPROPRIATE BARGAINING UNITS • The set of occupations and geographical locations included in the certification election is called the appropriate bargaining unit • Employers want large, diverse bargaining units • Nurses, orderlies, janitors, parking lot attendants across multiple hospitals • Unions want small, homogeneous units • Nurses in a single hospital • When there is a dispute, the NLRB holds a hearing to decide the appropriate bargaining unit based on a shared community of interests
THE APPROPRIATE BARGAINING UNIT AT HARVARD UNIVERSITY • Employees petitioned for an election for all clerical and technical workers in the Medical Area in 1983 • Few employee transfers in/out of Medical Area; more technical and dangerous work • Harvard objected—wanted the unit to be all clerical and technical workers across the entire University • Common HR policies and similar duties across entire University • NLRB ruled in favor of the larger bargaining unit • The bargaining unit increased from 1,200 to 3,600 employees so the union no longer had 30% support. Took four more years to get 30%.
INDIVIDUAL VOTING DECISIONS • Whether individual workers vote “yes” to form a union, or “no” to remain nonunion is largely a practical decision based on the perceived costs and benefits of unionization. • Demographic factors such as age and gender are not important predictors of how people will vote. • Rather, job dissatisfaction and individual attitudes towards unions are key: • A belief that the union will be effective in improving things in their specific workplace (union instrumentality). • Positive attitudes towards unions in general. • Workplace-level employee solidarity and social identification supportive of collective rather than individual action.
THE INDIVIDUAL VOTING DECISION IN NLRB REPRESENTATON ELECTIONS • INSERT BOX 7.5
NLRB ELECTION STANDARDS • The key legal standard for NLRB representation elections is employee free choice. • Campaigning by employees and unions are permitted by the free speech provision [8(c)]: • “The expressing of any views, argument, or opinion, or the dissemination thereof, whether in written, printed, graphic, or visual form, shall not constitute or be evidence of an unfair labor practice under any of the provisions of the Act, if such expression contains no threat of reprisal or force or promise of benefit.” • This right is not unlimited-threats and promises are not allowed-they can interfere with employee free choice.
NLRB ELECTION STANDARDS • The NLRB evaluates election conduct using its laboratory conditions doctrine, also known as the General Shoe doctrine. • When the NLRB feels that the election campaigning or conduct causes employees to vote differently from their preference, the election results will be thrown out and a new election conducted. • The clearest violations of laboratory conditions are the NLRA’s employer and union unfair labor practices: • Interfering with or coercing employees [8(a)(1)] • Establishing a company dominated sham union [8(a)(2)] • Discriminating against employees on the basis of union support [8(b)(1)]
EMPLOYER CAMPAIGNING • Employer campaign tactics try to influence the four key determinants of individual voting decisions: • Job dissatisfaction • Union instrumentality • General union attitudes • Collective social identity • Employer tactics usually include providing pro-company and antiunion information and opinions to employees, including in captive audience meetings. • Some companies are more aggressive and supplement their campaign with the manipulation of wages, benefits, working conditions, job assignments as well as threats, promises, rumors, layoffs and firings. • Are illegal if they distort laboratory conditions.
NO SOLICITATION RULES • Employers’ private property rights are very important during organizing drives. • No solicitation rules can ban non-employee union organizers from the employers’ premises • This is a significant asymmetry in the organizing process • Employees can only talk about union issues in non-work areas during non-work times • All of these restrictions must be equally enforced • Otherwise, it is discriminating against union activity (8(a)(3)ULP)
UNION CAMPAIGNING • Like employers, unions campaign to influence the four key determinants of individual voting decisions. • The laboratory conditions doctrine applies to union campaigning. • If union threats or harassment distorts employee free choice, the election results can be invalidated and a new election held. • But because of employers’ power over their property and employees (recall captive audience speeches and no-solicitation rules), the tactics available to each side differ. • Unions must be provided with an Excelsior list and are allowed home visits.
THE FREQUENCY OF UNION CAMPAIGN TACTICS • The traditional union campaign tactics are mailings and handbilling. Tactics to create more personal contact with individual employees and to get them actively involved are starting to be used: • Made House Calls 58 % • Used Solidarity Days (Supporters Wear Buttons, etc.) 56 % • Held Union Rallies 41 % • Made House Calls to At Least Half of the Unit 39 % • Held Ten or More Small Group Meetings 39 % • Used Coalitions with Community Groups 30 % • Surveyed At Least 70 % • One-on-One 21 % • Used Ten or More Rank-and-File Volunteers 17 %
THE CERTIFICATION ELECTION PROCESS: HELP OR HINDRANCE? • The union certification process established by the NLRA in 1935 was initially a great victory for workers wanting union representation. • The firing of union supporters was made illegal. • Rather than having to strike for recognition, workers could petition the NLRB for a democratic determination of whether a majority of workers favored unionization. • Early NLRB decisions excluded employers from participating in the certification process.
THE CERTIFICATION ELECTION PROCESS: HELP OR HINDRANCE? • The Supreme Court and section 8(c) of the Taft-Hartley Act explicitly authorized (noncoercive) employer participation in the process. • The certification process has changed from a quick procedure with minimal employer involvement to a formal and often-lengthy election procedure with extensive employer participation. • Some argue that employer resistance, including campaigning during representation elections, is primarily responsible for the extended decline in U.S. union density. • Three criticisms of the NLRA certification process are therefore expressed most frequently: • Unequal access to employees • Lack of penalties for violators of the NLRA • The length of the election process
