Company Unions or Employee Representation

¶ … company unions or employee representation plans inferior to worker-Controlled unions?

Company unions, by definition, represent the interests of the company, not simply the workers. With employee representation plans, although workers can discuss issues they are having with their employer, they do not have the formal protections that labor unions possess under the law, such as collective bargaining. There are legal protections binding the negotiations of labor and management that prevent managers from changing policies when they happen to be advantageous to the company. Labor unions also (depending on the state and circumstance) may be located in 'closed shop' states that ensure that all members within a particular segment of the workforce must be unionized. Worker-controlled labor unions can engage in collective strikes and collectively lobby for higher wages and benefits. Employees cannot ignore the demands of such unions for collective bargaining or try to bully or control worker-controlled unions under the law. Worker-controlled unions are completely independent entities.

Q2. In what ways are traditional union models under pressure to change in the 21st century and what are some of the changes taking place?

Unions have been pressured to change and to take into consideration the needs of employers in a manner that is not purely adversarial. During the negotiations of the auto unions with the 'big three' American car manufacturers, unions were forced to make critical concessions to ensure the future health of the industry, acknowledging that if the companies were brought down by the long-term cost of pensions and benefits, everyone would suffer, including current workers and retirees. Even white collar unions like teachers' unions have been criticized for making unreasonable demands in eras of scarce public funds. Unions have had to work harder to 'sell' their benefits to members and to thrive, particularly given the rise of 'right to work' states and the general decline of the influence of the American labor movement.

Part C: Essay

Even though the workers at the company gained some notable concessions from the organization because of the organization's fear they would unionize, this still does not mean the company actions were legal. In fact, it is illegal to promise benefits and pay raises to workers if they do not unionize. The actions of the company seem to constitute an implied quid-pro-quo regarding employee actions. Although the no-solicitation rule posted is within the legal rights of the employer, the company must also ensure that it is compliant with the law, which means the union still has access to employees in other areas outside the workforce and that the non-solicitation policy is not enforced in a discriminatory fashion only against unions. It is also illegal to threaten employees with losing their jobs if they join a union. While this threat was not directly made, the statement that employees would be fired if they did not enforce the no-solicitation policy seems to contain that implication. It is also illegal to threaten to close stores if workers join the union, which the company did explicitly do.