Labor Relations Striking a Balance John Budd 5e - Test Bank

TRUE

TRUE

FALSE

FALSE

TRUE

TRUE

FALSE

FALSE

TRUE

FALSE

TRUE

TRUE

FALSE

TRUE

TRUE

FALSE

TRUE

TRUE

TRUE

FALSE

FALSE

FALSE

FALSE

TRUE

FALSE

TRUE

FALSE

TRUE

FALSE

TRUE

FALSE

FALSE

TRUE

FALSE

TRUE

TRUE

TRUE

TRUE

FALSE

TRUE

FALSE

FALSE

FALSE

TRUE

TRUE

FALSE

FALSE

TRUE

TRUE

FALSE

TRUE

FALSE

FALSE

TRUE

TRUE

FALSE

business

Jungle or hold-up

servicing

job control

Craft or occupational

Industrial

Scope of representation

Soul of representation

organizing

Employee empowerment

social

social partnership

Social movement

amalgamated

executive committee

national union

Divisions or conferences

constitution

federation

Change-to-Win

democracy

procedural

behavioral

substantive

avoidance

owners

suppression or busting

substitution

Concession

Utilitarianism

Libertarianism

Kantian

U.S. labor unions have traditionally embraced a business unionism philosophy which sees collective bargaining as the key to achieving efficiency, equity and voice in the workplace. Collective bargaining allows unions to win gains in wages, benefits, grievance procedures, and protective work rules. The business unionism model does not question the legitimacy of capitalism and the employer’s need to make a profit and instead seeks to secure labor’s “fair share” of these profits.

The servicing model treats union members like customers and focuses on solving the problems for members, rather than involving them in the solution. It is a passive form of representation in that members don’t play a significant role in resolving their own workplace issues. The service model has represented worker interests through a focus on job control unionism or the creation of detailed union contracts that rigidly control what happens in the workplace through seniority systems, job descriptions, and wage and hour schedules. In addition, the union will take on the responsibility to recruit new members.

With the increase in foreign and nonunion competition, unions in the U.S. have been under a great deal of pressure to change their organizing and representation models. Management has been trying to renegotiate contracts that will reduce the rigidity of job control unionism so as to allow greater flexibility and better product quality control. At the same time, the union movement has internal critics who claim that the servicing model has led to an apathetic workforce and that much more member involvement is needed for a healthy labor movement. Consequently, many unions are moving away from the servicing model and toward an organizing model in which the union’s primary purpose is to help workers organize and advocate for themselves.

The scope of representation refers to the breadth of representation activities (i.e., whether union activity is generally confined to the workplace or whether it also extends to the social and political arenas). The soul of representation refers to the manner in which representation is achieved (i.e., with a passive or active union membership). Together, the scope and soul of representation determine the type of unionism in place. For example, workplace unions that focus on serving union members are typical of “job control” unionism. Unions that address social and political issues in addition to workplace issues and which have a union membership that participates extensively in these activities exemplify “social movement” unionism.

The organizing model views unions as institutions of active worker participation, empowerment, and mobilization while the serving model views workers as largely passive customers whose needs should be met by the union. In the organizing model, new membership drives are undertaken largely by the workers themselves, rather than union officials. Once unionized, the problems are not solved for the workers; the union is there to provide help and assistance only. The organizing model sees union relationships as a social exchange with the potential for strong social ties with leaders and among members. By contrast, the servicing model sees union leaders in a more hierarchical role.

Employee empowerment unionism does not focus on standardized outcomes for every worker, as is typical of the job control unionism model. Instead, employee empowerment unionism focuses on setting up a framework, or procedures, for ensuring fair guidelines for individual negotiations. This model is well-suited to professions where individuals have relatively greater individual bargaining power but still wish to maintain fair treatment and standardized process for negotiations. In addition, the employee empowerment model will establish minimum standards for things like wages, vacations, etc. and provisions for resolving disputes. The employee empowerment model may be less effective for other jobs where workers do not have a great deal of individual bargaining power.

A national union has the authority to establish (or charter) local unions that wish to belong to the same larger organization. For example, the Teamsters is a national union that charters locals all over the country. The local unions must follow certain policies, rules and procedures outlined by the national as well as pay a portion of their dues revenues to the national. However, in return they are able to draw on the national union’s strike fund, receive training and assistance in collective bargaining and representation, and benefit from the lobbying efforts of the national union in the political arena. In addition, the national union can help to gather and disseminate industry or job-specific information that will be helpful in negotiations and representation.

Competition between unions can hurt unionization efforts by dividing resources and wasting time in rivalry disputes, time and resources that could be spent helping workers. On the other hand, competition forces unions to do a better job of meeting the needs of their workers, much like competition in the product industry forces producers to meet the needs of consumers. Thus, it seems likely that some degree of competition is healthy.

A union federation is an association of labor unions that provides support and leadership to the labor movement. A federation has departments that specialize in meeting the needs of various industries or occupations. In addition, there are departments that focus on things like civil rights, international affairs, organizing, and union politics. The role of these departments is to conduct research, provide education, and inform policy both internally and externally, via political lobbying.

Democratic processes are a crucial feature to union success because the role of a union is to provide a mechanism through which employees can express their voice. Looking at three components of democracy, unions would appear to be democratic organizations. First, democratic procedures for election union officials and conducting union business are mandated by the Landrum-Griffin Act. Second, while participation of the workers in daily union administration is fairly low, union members do turn out in large numbers to vote on important decisions such as whether to ratify a contract and/or go out on strike. Finally, in looking at the substantive value of a union, research shows that between 70 and 80 percent of union members are at least “somewhat satisfied” with the degree to which their union leaders are responsive to their needs.

Unions are more democratic organizations than corporations. Union leaders are elected by union members while, by contrast, organizational leaders are appointed by those in power. Union members are guaranteed the right to express their opinions either verbally or by vote while, in corporations, employees may (or may not) be granted the privilege of expressing their opinions by those in authority. Conceptually, labor unions are bottom-up organizations that serve the interests of its members while corporations are top-down organizations that serve the interests of corporate owners. Finally, in unions major decisions such as whether to strike or approve a contract are made by majority vote of the members while, in corporations, major decisions are made unilaterally by those in authority.

As the HR Director, I would want to make a choice as to whether I would utilize a union substitution or a union suppression approach. In either case, I would need to ensure that the actions taken by the employer are legal. If I employ a union substitution strategy, I might start with a survey of employees to gauge their level of satisfaction with various components of the work environment. I would then try to target wages and benefits at above market rates, provide opportunities for training, development, and advancement, ensure supervisors treated employees with respect and dignity, implement a grievance process, provide greater employment security and security in the hours of work, encourage open and honest communication between the employer and the employees. If I employ legal union suppression tactics, I might put together an information campaign noting the downsides of unionization. This might include letters, brochures, videos, and captive audience meetings with employees to let them know the potential disadvantages of unionizing both for them and for the business. I might also try to keep the number of full-time employees low since I know that part-time employees are less likely to unionize than full-time employees. I might also hire more temporary workers.

Managerial attitudes toward unions are determined by the interaction between their general approach to labor and their labor relations strategy. The general approach to labor may be either autocratic (management sets and enforces rules), or paternalistic (management takes care of employees and focuses on rewarding, rather than punishing, behaviors). The labor relations strategy may be either to accept unions or to avoid unions. Companies that are paternalistic and accepting of unions will emphasize a participatory relationship with the union. Companies that are paternalistic but not accepting of unions will take actions to “substitute” for unions (e.g., involve workers, provide high wages to reduce the need for unionization). On the other hand, companies that are autocratic and pursue a union acceptance strategy will be likely to have an adversarial relationship with the union and workers. Companies that are autocratic and pursue a union avoidance strategy will work toward suppressing unions using legal, and sometimes illegal means.

The legal environment has a critical influence on labor relations in any country. In the U.S. the National Labor Relations Act (and its amendments) provide the framework for labor relations by outlining the rights and obligations of workers, unions, and management in the collective bargaining process. However, labor relations are also affected by several other laws that specify employee rights in the workplace. For example, wage and hour laws, such as the Fair Labor Standards Act establish standards such as minimum wage, child labor, and overtime. The Occupational Health and Safety Act establishes minimum workplace standards to ensure worker safety. The Family Medical Leave Act protects workers rights to unpaid leave in the event of a serious medical condition. Tax laws, bankruptcy code, and deregulation can either encourage or discourage certain practices affecting workers. Finally, common law is an important feature to the legal environment and influences labor relations through doctrines such as employment-at-will.

Labor demand is derived from product demand. Therefore, labor is strongest when product demand is high. The employer’s need to fill product demand means it is more dependent upon its employees. In addition, the more productive and profitable the employer is, the greater its ability to offer high pay and better benefits to its employees. On the other hand, when product demand declines, employers have less ability to pay and may look for ways to cut costs that include lay-offs, asking for wage cuts, or dropping certain benefits. Labor’s position in this situation is considerably weaker.

Financial markets have influence the labor relations environment in two ways. First, corporations have been under increasing pressure by executives and stockholders to increase stock prices. This encourages a focus on short-term profits over long-term profits. The emphasis on short term profits leads to decisions that can negatively affect labor (e.g., downsizing, relocating, outsourcing). Second, to meet the demands for profits, companies have been using financial tools, such as using corporate cash reserves to repurchase its stock, rather than investing in the businesses themselves (e.g., purchasing new equipment or hiring additional employees).

There are six different ethical perspectives that can be used to evaluate employer’s actions. Utilitarianism defines ethical actions as those that maximize aggregate welfare. From this perspective, aggregate profit or economic wealth is desirable as it will bring the greatest good to society overall. This may mean that some people have to suffer in the short run. Libertarianism sees actions that infringe on others’ freedoms as unethical. This perspective may be seen as emphasizing property rights and freedom from governmental interference. It can be argued, however, that from both perspectives the labor problem was a violation of the ethical standard. First, it is questionable whether employers’ actions were truly benefiting a majority or whether they were simply enriching themselves at the expense of the workers. Second, the libertarianism perspective would suggest that employers were obligated to respect the freedom of the workers. However, given the harsh working conditions, excessive hours, and, in some cases, employer control of stores, churches, and transportation, it is clear that workers often had very little freedom.