Evolution of Labor Management Relationships

Union Management Relations in Perspective
Unions are very important for fostering change both in the national and international societies. This is a judgment based on the consideration of the managerial features which helps to engender that crucial bond between an employee and his/her employer. Unions which run under management regularly pay attention to their output of work although sometimes they could wield significant influence on the political and social landscapes.
Trade Unions are generally beneficial to employees as its major objective is to protect the workers from any form of exploitation by the company. If for example, a worker finds his pay unfair, he could relate with his coworkers who will jointly demonstrate publicly so as to be given a more befitting pay. Trade unions also help the company management, as they are aware of what the workers need hence they have a better knowledge of their workers and are able to give them an enabling environment fostering efficient work and the maintaining of good standards (Bamber, 2013).
Trade unions have proved crucial in resolutions which are majorly reached via joint bargaining processes as well as talks between unions and employees. The connection existing between an employee and a trade union is known as industrial relations. Trade unions reach their objectives via peaceful negotiations, however, in some cases; they have to carry out tougher actions. Some of the actions include work to rule, picketing, strikes, overtime ban, go slow etc. In the case of strikes, the workers come to a consensus that they wouldn’t come to work. Work to rule means workers become very critical and dish out criticisms over minor occurrences. Go Slow means workers work at slower paces hence reducing production speed. In the case of picketing, workers organize demonstrations with banners and slogans. Overtime, however, means the workers decide not to work causing the company to miss important demand targets. Employers normally would do all they can to prevent any of these situations, as they have serious consequences for a firm such as huge losses or even the firm closing down.
Relations between the management and the unions take place following a process. First, identification of civil liberties and duties must be done. The legal restrictions and safeguards for the management and union representatives are those persons who actively work on this objective. Next is the labor agreement negotiation. In this case, the most effective strategies tactics as well as dispute resolution methods will be considered by the firm. Then the firm will take part in the establishment of the resolved labor agreement. The union checks for management compliance to the agreement’s terms.
Evolution of Labor-Management Relationships
The basic elements making up the medieval labor relations perspective were created in the three-decade long period after the Second World War. The United States came out of the World War with an untouched production base, the only industrialized country to achieve this. Due to this, it reigned supreme over the world’s economy and exerted dominance on important industries and markets. Very little sweat was lost on quality or cost. This led to mammoth managements which churned out standardized products in huge quantities. Well defined policies, practices and regulations as well as detailed labor resolutions guided workplace activities. The concepts of “Fordism” and “Taylorism” were refined and polished further, leading to an air of disengagement among the workforce. As the industries boomed, labor unions weren’t let and this became a general trend across the manufacturing world. Even though the managements were never fully happy with the union concept, they didn’t try to break up their actions and overtime, a tense peace developed between the managements of these mammoth firms and the labor unions. Irrespective of the hard bargaining process, final settlements turned out to be unselfish. Due to this, the managements were allowed to conduct business in whatever way they desire.
These days, the biggest steel manufacturers are not part of the union; automobile manufacturers located in Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio and any other place are nonunion. Even the American coal industry isn’t up to 40% organized. How the conventional U.S labor framework failed was due majorly to two internal flaws. The first was its inability to recognize and adapt to changes going on within the US and other countries. The second was its failure to realize that management and labor were both responsible for producing and spreading wealth.
At the end of the 1900s, the growth of labour unions was stiffly opposed by managements and government alike. Within this period, violent demonstrations and strikes took place between unions and managements. This was most pronounced in the steel works, autoplants and garment factories where the striking members of the union were engaged in bitter scuffle with nonunion workers, private security men and police officers. The AFL remained the biggest force in the organized labor movement. By year 1920, 75% of people who had joined unions were all members. However, all through its existence, the AFL hasn’t found the most beneficial way of working with semiskilled and unskilled workers (Sherk, 2009).
A large percentage of its members were skilled workers in defined trades and crafts. Nevertheless, the technological advancements during the First World War had created a sharp spike in the semiskilled and unskilled worker population within the workforce. These people wanted to become AFL members, but the move wasn’t appreciated by the core AFL members. Certain unions in the AFL, however, understood the importance of coordinating semiskilled and unskilled persons and started to make moves into the steel and auto industries. The resulting union was industrial in nature and comprised of the new unskilled workers as well as the skilled ones within one single industry. Overtime, the workers within the newspaper, rubber, communications and mining industries also got divided into unions. At the end of the day, all these unions separated from the AFL, later forming the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO).
Ever since the Second World War, the labor industry has experienced several changes. One of these was the reduction in public interest and opinion about unions during and in the years succeeding the war. A handful of strikes, which were actually very effective, led to a shift in public opinion against unionism. Arguably the most important event of all, though, was the consolidation of the CIO and the AFL. After several years at each other’s throats, both groups came to the realization that fighting one another was just a waste of resources and effort and merging will make both of them much stronger. On December 5, 1955, both groups merged and called the merger; the AFL-CIO. This group had over 16 million workers as members and became the globe’s largest labor organization. George Meant was its first executive president and he led the organization until 1979 (Schneider, & Stepp, 1999).
When the mid-1980s came, several companies, on realizing that the present changes were not necessarily representing the conventional atmosphere and vibe possessed by a business started experimenting a number of employee engagement techniques, with a number of these techniques having their basis on programs carried out during the ‘60s and ‘70s. Some of these techniques were modified to be parallel systems, in line with the conventional framework and order of hierarchy within companies. For the labor-management relationship, the bargaining procedure and the implementation of agreements were still objective and antagonistic. The massive changes during the early ‘80s didn’t produce any significant improvement. Management and labor both went on as though change wasn’t necessary in the policies, practices and institutions which had been created in the last few decades. It seemed they believed that the only necessary action was cuts and slight changes to the basic system and thus they kept up their peculiar behavior.
Labor Law: Background and Basic Principles
The Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932 was the very first legislation passed which gave rights to the unions and it was widely viewed as a milestone in labor-management relationships. After this act was passed, it became difficult for companies to secure court orders banning picketing, union membership events and strikes. Initially, the courts readily gave out these forms of orders to limit these activities. In 1935, the National Labor Relations Act, popular called the Wagner Act was passed. This act created processes via which workers are able to determine if they want union representation or not. If they decide in favor of union representation, then in line with the Wagner Act, the management of the company has to reach an agreement with the union representatives. Previously, the efforts of the Union were believed to be infringing on the Sherman Act (1980) as they were seen as efforts to monopolize. A number of unfair labor actions by managements were prohibited by The Wagner Act with a number of them being punishing and firing workers due to their support for the union, bribing workers to cast their votes against the union and monitoring union meetings.
The NLRB’s functions are (1) investigating any complaints from the employees or the unions and (2) supervising elections where workers decide if they want union representation or not. Of recent, the NLRB made a decree that a large percentage of U.S. workers can use company email network to talk about workplace occurrences such as union meetings during their leisure time, and these networks were seen as a “natural gathering place” (Schneider, & Stepp, 1999).
In year 1938, Congress passed the Fair Labor Standards Act. One of the main features of this new act is it gives the federal government the ability to fix a minimum wage. The first ever minimum wage, set in late 1930s, which didn’t consider retail employees and farm workers was $0.25 an hour. Presently, the minimum wage across the country is $7.25 per hour, even though several cities and states have set their special minimum wages due to disparities in the cost of living. The State of Washington boasts the highest minimum wage across the country and its set at $9.47 per hour. A number of employees, like farm workers and waitpersons are, however, still not included in the minimum wage agreement in several states. This act equally demands that any work done above 40 hours a week should attract overtime rates. Lastly, the act bans child labour.
In the early 1950s, Senate hearings and inquiries uncovered a massive crime ring within the unions as well as several cases of extortion, embezzlement and bribery among the union chiefs. It was revealed that a number of union leaders diverted the union funds to personal businesses and received bribes from firms’ management for protection from the union. A number of them were found guilty of murder, blackmail and arson. This news led to a widespread demand for reform which culminated in the Landrum-Griffin Act of 1959. The new Act was meant to guide the internal affairs of the labour unions. The Act’s demanded that unions had to submit their annual reports to the U.S. Department of Labor on issues like elections, finances and the various actions made by the union officials. Also, this Act made sure that all union members are accorded the right to contest, nominate and cast votes for every democratic position within their respective unions. Safeguards are provided for union funds and it demands that unions and management report any form of temporary disbursement of management resources to union members, officers or the local unions. The several laws we have considered here basically regulate a huge portion of the management-labor relations in the time after a union has been formed. The following section shows that the creation of a union also follows a very regulated procedure (Essays, UK. 2013)
Unions and Management: Key Participants in the Labor Relations Process
A number of the major players in the labor process are government, the union management, employers, human resource managers and the employees.
Labor Relations involve providing advice and assistance to workers as regards work laws, legal issues, employment laws or any other work contract problem. The HR should educate the workers on the concept of employment laws and these should be present across all company locations. In case there is some form of problem regarding the employment laws or the employee, the HR department will be in charge of this. The employees should be made aware of their options and also be provided with all the assistance needed by the HR managers (Walton, Cutcher-Gershenfeld, & McKersie,2000).
The job of the HR as regards labor and employee relations isn’t huge. The HR representative needs to possess excellent communication and writing skills, the ability to tackle difficult situations and to fully understand the processes and rules needed for anything employee-related as well as any situation which might affect the concerned employee. The roles of HR in labor and employee relations are; making sure the employees understand their rights and are appropriately represented on the existing unions and forums, ensuring that there is a system in place for taking employee concerns and a readiness to transmit these issues to the appropriate unions.
The employees are reserved the right to work and to stay away from strikes and demonstrations except in very necessary cases. Employees should follow company regulations and in-house rules. They should do productive work for the firm. They are permitted to take any action to ensure their fellow employees as well as they themselves are safe.
Business stakeholders and owners needs to develop progressive and realistic policies which are not domineering to employees nor have the possibility of causing a rebellion. They should provide standard salaries and job security. They should foster easy communication, career growth and provide a good working environment. The government needs to makes sure the workers are not being harassed or manipulated. There needs to be effective legislation so as to prevent go slows or violence (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014).
Labor & Employment Arbitration
Compulsory arbitration contracts are insisted upon by the courts as consumers and employees alike develop business relationships with full awareness of the arbitration agreement or due to the fact that the employee might have been aware that arbitration was needed due to a written certificate made available to him/her. In the same vein, compulsory arbitration is employed irrespective of the fact that an employee reports that the agreement wasn’t chosen.
The lower courts i.e. the state and federal courts, have both gradually supported compulsory employment arbitration. The Supreme Court reechoed its support for compulsory arbitration in this just concluded term during the “14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett” case where it stated that “a collective-bargaining agreement that clearly and unmistakably requires union members to arbitrate ADEA claims is enforceable as a matter of federal law.” With the general legal situation allowing employers to ask for mandatory arbitration of disputes regarding employment, several employers have established related programs. An examination of corporate lawyers conducted in 2008 by Fulbright and Jaworski discovered that out of the 251 persons who took part from the United States, 75 percent of them possessed company demanded arbitration of disputes related to employment, all outside the union. Several employers have integrated compulsory arbitration as a part of a wider alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process. It is widely known that a large number of large firms present within America employ a sort of ADR for solving employment disagreements.
A number of the main reasons for this are increased predictability, potential insurance discounts, greater privacy and improved settlement potential. The most common factors stated by employers to back compulsory arbitration up are its higher speed and lower cost in comparison to litigation. For several years, the general mindset has remained that arbitration is a much quicker and less costly substitute to litigation for the settling of employment disagreements. Researches using the comparatively old and restricted data have backed up this general mindset. These assumptions have caused several employers to employ compulsory employment arbitration. Employers have made this step due to the belief that they won’t be successful in procuring summary judgment or any other disposition verdict relief from arbitration and also because most times, arbitration decisions are not reviewed during appeals.
The companies in favor of compulsory employment arbitration pleads that it gives access for the resolution of employee claims who, outside this, will find it difficult to secure lawyers who will fight for their claims in the court. They also state that arbitration is, commonly, a less costly and faster method of solving disagreements. Proponents are of the opinion that arbitrators will be more predictable than juries. They also believe that whenever a plaintiff wins a case, arbitrators will allocate more justifiable amounts of money for damages. In the case of class actions, the proponents debate that these kind of cases both in the courts or in arbitration are not equipped enough to handle the variety of facts of each individual’s claim.
Employment arbitration procedures, mandatory cases inclusive, normally consist of a hearing which is similar to a trail for a civil disagreement, even though arbitration hearings don’t hold within a courtroom. Just like a civil case, the contributors to the arbitration will get set by taking part in discovery actions like the development of documents or depositions. The contributing parties could also file motions like motions for a summary judgment so that the case is resolved with no hearing taking place.
Finally, during the hearing, witnesses give testimonies during direct and cross-examinations, arguments are made and exhibits are offered to the arbitrator. In several cases, word-for-word transcripts of the hearing are created. After the presentation of evidence, the advocates regularly give post-hearing briefs so as to sum up the facts as well as any associated legislation for the use of the arbitrator.
Economic Issues
On the average, a union worker makes more earnings than the non-union worker. Nevertheless, this doesn’t necessarily mean that new members joining the union will have a rise in wages, in fact, in reality; just a small number of workers that become part of the union today enjoy pay raises. How can these clearly contradictory discoveries be explained? Over the last generation, the competitiveness of the economy has increased. Companies are no longer able to increase the prices of their goods without risking total business failure. Due to this, unions have stopped bargaining improved wages for several new members. Today, the unions only negotiate improved wages for workers in firms with competitive edges which enable them to approve higher wages. Examples of such firms are capital investments or profitable research and development (R&D) projects. The unions are able to properly levy these businesses by bargaining for improved wages for their affiliated employees, and this causes a reduction in profits. The unionized firms react to this concept of union tax by lowering investment. Reduced investment caused unionized companies to become less competitive (Milgrim,, & Bensen, 2016).
This phenomenon, as well as the reality that unions work as labor associations with an aim to lower job opportunities, has led to the failure of unionized firms. Economists regularly discover that the amount of jobs present within the economy is lower due to the action of the union. The majority of jobs in manufacturing firms which were lost in the last 30 years involved union members and currently non-union employment in manufacturing firms have risen. Research equally proves that extensive unionization impedes the revival from an economic downturn (Coleman, C. D. (2010)..
Unions increase their members’ wages in two major ways which are; compelling customers to shell out more money for regular products that can do without which ultimately leads to job losses. Unions have similar adverse effects on the general economy as the other associations, even though they benefit a number of workers rather then stock owners. This is the reason why the national anti-trust laws do not cover labour unions, if they did, anti-monopoly laws would equally ban union activities.
The nature of the unions as monopoly associations clarifies their resistance to competition to trade. An association can only demand for higher prices when it is a monopoly. As soon as an alternative source is created, the firm must reduce prices or suffer business failure. Reduced investments clearly obstruct the competitive ability of unionized companies. The carmakers in Detroit have suffered losses within the current economic recession partly due to their relatively lower investments in the study and creation of fuel-efficient cars as compared to the non-union counterparts. When gas prices increased to $4 per gallon, the consumers started going for hybrids instead of SUVs and the Detroit automakers found themselves unable to stem this tide leading to several UAW members losing their jobs. Economists expect lower investments as well as the deliberate actions of the unions associations to lower employment and to cause the unions to lower the number of jobs present within the companies they exist in. Economic research has shown specifically that; with time, unionized jobs vanish.




References
Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S. (2014). Armstrong's handbook of human resource management practice. Kogan Page Publishers.
Bamber, G. J. (2013). New Technology (Routledge Revivals): International Perspectives on Human Resources and Industrial Relations. Routledge.
Brewster, C., & Hegewisch, A. (Eds.). (2017). Policy and Practice in European Huma n Resource Management: The Price Waterhouse Cranfield Survey. Taylor & Francis.
Coleman, C. D. (2010). Is Mandatory Employment Arbitration Living Up to Its Expectations? A View from the Employer's Perspective. ABA Journal of labor & Employment law, 227-239.
Essays, UK. (November 2013). Importance Of Trade Union In Modern Workplace Management Essay. Retrieved from https://www.ukessays.com/essays/management/importance-of-trade-union-in- modern-workplace-management-essay.php?cref=1
Milgrim, R. M., & Bensen, E. E. (2016). Use of agreements to protect trade secrets in the employment relationship (Vol. 2). Milgrim on Trade Secrets.
Sherk, J. (2009). What unions do: How labor unions affect jobs and the economy. The Heritage Foundation.
Schneider, T. J., & Stepp, J. R. (1999). The evolution of US labor-management relations. REPORT-NATIONAL POLICY ASSOCIATION NPA, 1-6.
Walton, R. E., Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., & McKersie, R. B. (2000). Strategic negotiations: A theory of change in labor-management relations. Cornell University Press.