5 mistakes that can give unions a foothold in your company
November 6, 2009 by Jim GiulianoPosted in: In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, Money, Pay and benefits, policies
Yes, the pro-union Employee Free Choice Act is floundering in Congress. That’s given some businesses the idea that they’ll never see a unionizing effort. Those are exactly the businesses that are most vulnerable.
Consider that (a) the EFCA isn’t dead yet, (b) the White House is busy reorganizing the National Labor Relations Board to reflect the administration’s pro-labor stance and (c) labor leaders have set a goal of increasing union membership by 1.5 million a year for the next 15 years.
Those factors should lead to more vigilance about labor organizing.
Labor attorneys from the firm Fisher & Phillips say there are five major mistakes complacent companies make that lead to union organizing:
1. Favoritism. It’s the No. 1 reason employees cite for joining a union. The term can mean a lot of things, but here’s what it amounts to: inconsistent disciplinary action. When some employees feel they’ve been hit with discipline they didn’t deserve, while other employees got a break, expect to seen union sign-up cards floating around.
The solution is twofold: (a) clear policies and (b) managers who follow the policies. One without the other will lead to trouble.
2. Ignored complaints. A main union selling point is “giving employees a stronger voice.” Employees feel they need that voice when they perceive that no one is listening to them. The opposite of ignoring complaints: listening to them and acting on them. That doesn’t mean every complaint is valid, of course. Still, you have to give employees the feeling that at least someone is looking into it and taking some action if needed.
3. Lack of respect. Here’s the recipe for giving employees the idea they’re not respected: Disciplining them in front of others, assigning blame before reviewing the facts and playing favorites. Those traits give employees the feeling that their managers are enemies, not advocates.
4. Lack of concern about safety. Another weak spot that unions probe: “Your employer only cares about making money, even if it puts you in danger.” The employers’ antidote: safety training, appropriate equipment and clear, uncomplicated guidelines and procedures for responding to and reporting workplace accidents. An extra gold star for employers: Willingness to help employees through the complicated workers-comp process.
5. Noncompetitive pay and benefits. Many are aware of the union promise to “put more money in workers’ pockets.” True or not, it attracts workers who feel they’re being shortchanged.
Now, that doesn’t mean opening up the wallet to every employee who complains about pay and benefits. What you can do:
- Participate in wage-benefit surveys where you can and make sure you are competitive in your industry and your location.
- Be prepared to explain why you’re not at the top of the scale, including the tradeoffs of the other nonmonetary advantages of working at your company — flexible schedules and so on — which employees may not always focus on.
- Be honest with your employees. For instance, if business is down, explain that as the reason for flat wages. The first place a union will attack is perceived dishonesty about pay and benefits.
Tags: benefits, Employee Free Choice Act, National Labor Relations Board, pay, union
November 11th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
The practices that you decribe as “5 mistakes” are, unfortunately, the primary practices that most employers want to be able to establish and stick with. That is why unions exist and need to exist. If employers always avoided your “5 mistakes,” there would be very little need for unions.
November 12th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
I would have to disagree strongly with Gary. Any business that wants to recruit, hire and retain the top talent in their industry would not want to adhere to the “5″ mistakes, because good employees will leave, because they can and poor employees will stay because they cannot leave. I have worked in both union and non-union enviroments and I can say, unions exist to protect the employees that are not worth keeping. While top performers, individuals that are not absenteeism problems, not productivity problems and great quality are forced to pick up the slack for the other, often times “senior” members that don’t value their job and do the bare minimum to remain employed. Oh, and both members make the same pay scale, sometimes the junior higher performing employee makes less. At the turn of the century, unions definately had a place now, they only serve to drive business costs up and companies overseas.
November 16th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
I strongly agree with V.T. Hudson on this. I have also worked with Union and Non companies and can echo the sentiment. As of ten years ago I decided to not work wherever there is a union presence.
hau
November 17th, 2009 at 3:55 am
My personal opinion on Unions. They suck! Unions makes the job for management more difficult. Unions only promote underserving employees because of senority. Promotions in the company should be giving to employees that work hard and not because they are more senior. The union only makes it more difficult to get rid of bad employees without a long drag out process. Unions most definately drives the business costs up for companies.
January 19th, 2010 at 11:56 pm
It does seem like the 5 reasons listed above are covered by other laws – OSHA, EEOC, etc… I think that unions have outlived their original purpose and are now just making it more difficult for managers to manage according to company need and ability. Companies shouldn’t be forced to raise pay if it will put the company out of business – especially in these economic times. Companies also shouldn’t have to keep underperforming staff just because they are union members – where’s the personal accountability there?
January 29th, 2010 at 12:07 pm
Unions protect the incompetent and keep work standards and achievement low. Actual examples:
Employee sleeping on the job in front of a heat treat furnace could not be fired – Union standard
Employee threatened by the Union for doing more than others, becasue it sets the standard too high.
Employees laid off and notified by a list on the board, because that is how the Union wanted it.
Union tells employees they work for the UAW (not the company)
Changes are stopped by the Union, which ended up with part of the work outsourced to Mexico
Union leaders bring 45 cal pistols to a private meeting with management and put them on the table.
Why do you think GM is now Government Motors? Primarily because of the UAW.
I am not sure what else I can say. The evidence speaks for itself, don’t you think?