|
Union Infighting – Your Opportunity
You have to love it when the unions loose focus and can’t decide who what they want to be: organizers or a political force to overturn President Bush and his Administration’s agenda. Early in March, AFL-CIO’s John Sweeney prevailed in what was called “a major victory” over Service Employees International Union’s Andrew Stern and Teamster’s James P. Hoffa to increase spending on labor political activities. Stern and Hoffa had proposed to shift $35 million of union funds into union organizing. Instead AFL-CIO’s Executive Committer voted to nearly double spending on political and legislative activity to $90 million primarily to fight President Bush’s plans for Social Security and endorse Democratic candidates.
While it is obvious that one is dependent on the other since organizing brings in dues money and lots of it. Approximately $15 billion dollars of dues are collected each year from private sector members. Sweeney asserted “that it is essential to change the political climate before costly organizing can be successful”. Sweeney did agree to send a much smaller amount of money back to the unions for organizing but wants AFL-CIO’s focus to be on changing “anti-worker policies that are destroying good jobs and workers rights”. All of this sets the stage for the AFL-CIO’s July convention and Sweeney’s re-election bid.
Even with this renewed political focus, don’t look for unions to back down from their organizing strategies. One of the AFL-CIO reform proposals likely to be given consideration is to have unions to focus more on organizing workers in their core industries stopping unions for undercutting each other in recruiting workers and in negotiating contracts.
What You Should Do
As unions recommit themselves to organizing, organizations need to continue to talk openly about their union-free position and what that position has allowed them to accomplish for employees.
TBG works with employers to build effective positive employee relations programs. Some of the strategies that we know work in maintaining union-free environments are:
- Build employee commitment with effective employee communications. I’m not just talking about meetings, posters, and memos. I’m talking about a planned, purposeful, and effective communications strategy – one with action plans, timed execution, and follow-ups that support your key messages.
- Employers of Choice Campaigns should:
- Demonstrate your commitment to your existing employees
- Be able to articulate clearly and often:
- Who you are, mission and vision.
- Why you want to be union-free. Employees want to know that you have an opinion.
- Your organizations past deeds and accomplishments to reinforce your values.
- The ethical character of the organization’s leadership and employees.
- Demonstrate where we are going. Help employees see your vision with stories and examples of what it means to fulfill the organization’s mission.
- What makes you unique
- Where employees fit within your organization; where your healthcare organization fits within your industry; and where your industry fits within the economy.
- We have competitive wages and benefits. If you have a good compensation package, promote it. Highlight specific features that are competitive at your organization and geographic area.
- Rewards that are relevant and meaningful.
- Recognition of your heroes. Use role models to publicize good deeds, superior performance, and high levels of commitment.
- Change can be good. Share examples of how change has benefited employees and improved the work environment.
Frequent communications of these key messages will encourage your employees to fit in, fire up, and forge ahead. Not only will you improve your level of employee commitment, but your employees will be less likely to believe union promises of “how their representation will improve their work life”.
Susan Harris
President Healthcare Division
The Burke Group
back to top
United Nurses Association Takes on the CNA
Who They Are
Formed as a separate labor arm of the American Nurses Association in 1999, the United American Nurses (UAN), with a membership of 104,000, went on to become a member of the AFL-CIO. UAN promotes themselves as the largest union for nurses, by nurses in the federal, private and public sector:
“UAN brings the solidarity and strength of thousands of registered nurses from coast to coast working toward such common goals as an end to mandatory overtime and safe staffing….elected leadership, from the president down to local-level officers, that understand the needs of registered nurses because they are registered nurses….labor staff who are nationally recognized leaders in the field of collective bargaining and the professional expertise and stature of the American Nurses Association on issues of nursing practice. ”
UAN’s Agenda
“UAN nurses raise our voices in our hospitals through our union on the issues important to registered nurses-such as wages and benefits, job security, professional development, health and safety and overtime”.
At their recent National Labor Assembly, UAN acknowledged that the competition to organize RNs will get stronger over the next several years. In response, UAN endorsed the concept of creating a mobilization fund to organize nurses as well as defend its existing units against raids by other unions. Raising $8 million over 3 years through member assessment, the fund would be used to build a staff of regionally positioned organizers and support staff dedicated to organizing nurses, defending raids and conducting regional union leader training.
In a report presented at the Assembly, UAN noted that nearly 2 million RNs are unorganized and they are a target of organizing drives by at least eight major unions. UAN won more elections during 2003 and the first half of 2004 than any other union, but it organized fewer nurses than the Service Employees International Union, the California Nurses Association and the American Federation of Teachers.
UAN President Cheryl Johnson charged that the UAN is under “attack” by the CNA, which is trying to expand beyond California. CNA has established a group called the National Nurses Organizing Committee, which is advertising for organizers in nearly a dozen states, contacting UAN members, and encouraging state nurses associations to disaffiliate from ANA. CNA failed at an earlier attempt to get the Hawaii Nurses Association to disaffiliate from ANA.
Going forward, the UAN announced intentions to pursue discussions with unions representing RNs premised on “maintaining and protecting existing UAN and UAN affiliate bargaining units from raiding and other interference or incursion”. These discussions may explore “joint organizing opportunities and possibilities of working in partnership and shall seek to facilitate an ongoing exchange of information between the organizations on a regular basis. Currently UAN is in talks with SEIU, AFT and CWA.
An important footnote as an example of future collaboration, in January of 2005, the Michigan Nurses Association and the United Auto Workers announced an alliance to work together on organizing, collective bargaining and legislative issues for health care workers in Michigan.
back to top
NLRB UPDATE
NLRB Adopts Alternative Procedure in Representation Election Cases
The National Labor Relations Board has revised its rules to create, effective March 1, 2005, a new representation case procedure: the “Full Consent Election” Agreement. Under the new procedure, parties can agree that disputed pre-election and post-election issues will be resolved with finality by a Regional Director with no appeal to the Board.
This new rule permits parties to enter into a voluntary agreement waiving their right to Board review and designating the Regional Director to serve as the final authority in their case to resolve disputes arising during the period from the filing of a representation petition to the issuance of a certification of representative or certification of results. After a hearing, the Regional Director issues a final decision and certification with the same force and effect, in that case, as if issued by the Board.
This new procedure presents a third voluntary method of informal adjustment for parties to choose. Previously, the Board made available to parties two types of consent procedures through which representation issues can be resolved without recourse to formal procedures – the “Stipulated Election” Agreement and the “Consent Election” Agreement.
In announcing the rules change, NLRB Chairman Robert J. Battista and General Counsel Arthur F. Rosenfeld stated:
The new procedure is designed to offer the parties the ability to have a secret ballot Board-conducted representation election and still be able to expedite the resolution of all questions concerning representation. This is accomplished by allowing the parties to call upon the Board’s Regional Directors to provide neutral, expert and prompt decision-making which follows settled representation case law and the National Labor Relations Act. For those who wish to waive their right to appeal to the Board, the procedure provides yet another option available to the parties to fairly determine the wishes of the employees as to whether or not they desire to be represented by a union.
back to top
NEUTRALITY AGREEMENTS/CARD CHECK AGREEMENTS COME UNDER INCREASING SCRUTINY: Bill Introduced to Protect Secret Ballot Elections
In the last ten years, neutrality agreements have been one of organized labor’s most potent and successful strategies for growth. The effect of such agreements is to have companies promise to stay neutral and not interfere in union attempts to organize. AFL-CIO boasts that they have organized over 3 million workers in 2003, and only a fifth of those workers joined as a result of a secret ballot election. Unions contend that elections supervised by the NLRB can be skewed by company tactics. The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation says the agreements coerce employees and trample their rights and free choice. Labor counters that to prohibit such arrangements is merely a “game plan to destroy labor”.
Definition of Neutrality Agreements
Neutrality Agreements are contracts between a union and an employer in which the employer agrees to support a union’s attempt to organize its workforce. The following is a list of common provisions:
- Gag Rule: Requires an employer to remain neutral, prohibits all managers and supervisors from unfavorable speech to the union from during an organizing drive. In essence, the employees only hear the union’s side of the story.
- No Secret Ballot Election: Most agreements include what is called a “card check” agreement. Instead of a secret ballot election, the employer promises to recognize the union automatically if a certain number of signed union authorization cards are collected.
- Access to Premises: These agreements usually allow the union to come on company property during work hours for the purpose of collecting union authorization cards. This differs from the guidelines set by the NLRB and the courts under which the employer has no such obligation.
- Disclosure of Personal Information: Such agreements more often require that the company provide personal information about employees to the union including home addresses providing unions quicker access to conduct home visits to pressure employees to sign authorization cards.
- Captive Audience Speeches: In these instances, the union and the company join together to promote employees signing up for the union, usually called a "captive audience speech."
NLRB General Counsel Arthur Rosenfield has issued a complaint that seeks to prevent companies from agreeing to card check/neutrality agreements that are binding on facilities that may be later acquired buy another company. The case that triggered the complaint was issued against Heartland Investment partners and the United Steelworkers for trying to extend the agreement to all later acquisitions by Heartland. The law prohibits attempts to impose agreements on third parties. It is anticipated that the case will be litigated before the NLRB.
Legislative Intervention
On another note, House Workforce Committee leaders have introduced the Secret Ballot Protection Act (H.R. 874) to safeguard worker rights to a secret ballot election on decisions about whether to form a union. The bill addresses the increasing pressure faced by employers to recognize unions based on a “card check” system and forego the customary secret ballot election supervised by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that gives workers the ability to vote their conscience without fear of reprisals.
“It’s no secret that corporate campaigns to discredit employers publicly have become a key organizing tactic used by union bosses across the country,” said Workforce Protections Subcommittee Chairman Charlie Norwood (R-GA) and lead sponsor of the bill. “It’s outrageous that union bosses are using these types of tactics at the expense of secret ballot elections and depriving rank-and-file workers of the ability to freely vote their conscience without fear of retaliation” .
“This important bill ensures workers have the right to a secret ballot election, protects workers from intimidation, threats, misinformation, or coercion by union organizers, and eliminates a union’s ability to pressure an employer to agree to card check recognition,” Norwood added.
“There’s no question that card checks leave employees open to harassment, intimidation, and union pressure,” said Employer-Employee Relations Subcommittee Chairman Sam Johnson (R-TX), an original cosponsor of the measure. “This important measure would guarantee workers the right to an anonymous, secret ballot election conducted by the NLRB and eliminate the use of intimidation and threats by organizers to coerce workers into joining a union.”
Under current law, employers may voluntarily recognize unions based on card checks, but they are not required to do so – they may insist upon an election administered by the NLRB. The Secret Ballot Protection Act (H.R. 874) would, insist that a union may only be recognized by an employer and certified by the NLRB if it has won majority support in a secret ballot election conducted by the NLRB, and secure the right of every worker to a secret-ballot vote on whether to unionize.
“Our examination of this issue has clearly highlighted a number of problems that threaten union democracy and undermine the democratic rights of workers,” said Committee Chairman John Boehner (R-OH). “Workers’ democratic rights should be protected, and this bill will make sure that happens by preserving the secret ballot election process.”
Last year, the Employer-Employee Relations Subcommittee heard testimony from witnesses about emerging trends and tactics in labor organizing campaigns, including heightened pressure on employers to recognize unions based on a “card check” system instead of the customary secret ballot election supervised by the NLRB.
“These corporate campaigns and other pressure tactics are often designed to hurt employers, their workers, and the economy, unless the demands of union leaders are met,” said Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (R-CA), chairman of the 21st Century Competitiveness Subcommittee and an original cosponsor of the bill. “Passing the Secret Ballot Protection Act will help put a stop to these practices and preserve the democratic rights of workers.”
Notably, evidence suggests that secret ballot elections are more accurate indicators than authorization cards of whether employees actually wish to be recognized by a union. Charles Cohen, former member of the NLRB under President Clinton, cited numerous court decisions that echoed this fact. (Source Press Release H.R.874)
|
