Future of Unions in Labor Relations

Future of Unions in Labor Relations

Unions came about from the struggles and pain that individuals had to go through early on in history. Unions were something that did not spring up overnight, but rather took a great deal of time to develop as individuals began working out for themselves what types of organizations would be the best to protect their rights and ensure that they could not be treated cruelly or unfairly by those that they worked for (Kearney, 2001). The right to collective bargaining took almost 200 years in the United States but today these rights are held in almost every country (Kearney, 2001).

For many years unions were thought to be very important in labor relations. At least, employees have thought so. Much of the opinions had by those who have had to deal with unions in a dispute situation have been less than tolerant of unions and there appears to be no interest in a friendship between unions and employers (Kearney, 2001). However, union membership has been declining since early in the 1970s (Bell, 1999). Because of this there has been much debate among those that research labor relations. There does not appear to be any single factor that caused the recent decline in union membership, but most researchers feel that a change in industrial activity and in the nature of employment has something to do with the issue (Bell, 1999). Other considerations point to a decrease in the amount of legislative support that unions receive and changes that are being made in the regulatory environment (Bell, 1999).

The purpose of this paper is to discuss unions in the scope of whether they are still necessary in today's workforce. How much power unions have when their members go out on strike, who generally wins when an employer and a union square off against each other, and whether unions are changing to match the current economics of today's business environment are all important questions that should be addressed, and will be addressed throughout this paper as unions are discussed and explained.

The Role that Unions Play

The role of unions themselves has not been heavily researched. However, there is evidence that the importance of strikes and other tactics has been reduced and because of this union organization and membership in the workplace is not as strong as it used to be (Bell, 1999). This would indicate the possibility that unions are no longer strictly necessary in the workplace of today, but this is somewhat based on the industry involved and the employees relationship with their employers. Whether unions are effective has been studied greatly but there has not been any single model created that clearly shows union effectiveness in a way that it can be researched (Bell, 1999).

There is a good deal of confusion on many of the key points as to what makes a union actually successful. A successful union is one that does more than just support employees when there is a strike. Unions work to get better wages for employees, better benefits for employees, and ensure that strikes do not take place. Much of the difficulty in determining whether a union is effective comes in determining the criteria for effectiveness and creating a model that can be used across all industries and all unions. This is much more difficult than it sounds and is causing many who study this issue a great deal of trouble. There are two models that have been considered important by researchers into the subject, but neither one has been completely adopted (Bell, 1999).

The first one is a goal model and it assumes that there are specific objectives that the union must address. In this model, union effectiveness is determined based on whether the goals and objectives that have been spelled out by the union have actually been met successfully (Bell, 1999). The second model, the systems model, looks more at the effectiveness of organizations as specific systems and whether these organizations all are running the way that they should be. In this way, the systems model looks at the relationship that the union or the organization has to its environment and sees this as being much more important than whether the union achieved its goals (Bell, 1999).

For obvious reasons, there is much tension and discussion involved around these two models since they are very different from one another. There are some complementary issues, but each model looks at different facets of effectiveness and deals with it in specific ways. There is not necessarily a right or wrong to this issue, but those who take one side or the other in the debate often feel that there is.

Much of the literature that has been produced on industrial relations and the effectiveness of unions in helping the employee deals with these models. There is, however, a somewhat integrated approach to this literature which has been adapted because unions are rather different as organizations then what is considered a standard organization (Bell, 1999). This is largely due to the way that they gain members. While unions are seen as organizations, it must be remembered that they are made up of collective individuals who are working to provide the highest wages and best working conditions possible for the employees that they represent (Bell, 1999).

At the same time, however, these unions are made up of individuals that do not always have the same preferences and goals for where the union is now and where it should be going. Unions set objectives and have goals that they must pursue, and they put different priorities on each one of these. However, as organizations they are somewhat hard to pinpoint because the goals and objectives that they have made vary a great deal not only between unions but within the same union over the course of time (Bell, 1999).

For example, the union may be very concerned about the wages that the employees are getting paid and they may work to see those wages raised. Whether the wages are raised or not, five years later, or even one year later, the union may realize that the terrible working conditions that the employees are dealing with is superseding the employees concern as to whether their wages are higher. The priorities and focus of the union would then change because the union would realize that improving the conditions that the employees work under is much more significant in the lives of those employees than raising their wages, whether by a large or by a small amount.

This is one of the many reasons why it is so difficult to determine the true of effectiveness in a union when it is treated as an organization. There are many difficulties in defining the processes that these unions deal with and the goals that they have in order to create criteria with which to measure their effectiveness. Generally speaking, if a union has done what it has set out to do it is usually considered to be effective (Bell, 1999). However, if the goals that the union has set do not actually help the employees in any significant way then the union does not logically appear to be effective even if it has met the goals that it has set out to meet (Bell, 1999). Being effective, therefore, does not actually relate to whether goals are accomplished, but rather relates to whether the goals that are accomplished are significant in the lives of the members of the union.

The Importance of Strikes

One of the main things that unions will do when they feel that things need to be improved is stage a strike. This can be done to work toward higher wages or better working conditions, and can also be utilized for a combination of the two or for other reasons (Bell, 1999). By going on a strike they force the company to recognize the union and its employees and they also cost many companies a great deal of money because these companies must either shut down or hire other people to replace those that have gone on strike. Quite often they must pay these people a much higher wage, especially if these individuals are required to cross picket lines or any other form of demonstration which could potentially be dangerous. Most unions strike peacefully and there are no actual problems, but it is not impossible for this issue to turn violent when words are exchanged between those that are trying to make money and those who have left their job to go on strike for the union (Bell, 1999).

When unions go on strike it shows support for their members and indicates that the union has a high capacity to be able to meet its objectives. Sometimes, strikes are also organized as a grievance procedure and also to find ways to expedite ongoing arbitration. However, some argue that the organization of working environments is currently changing and that unions must become more cooperative and develop better arrangements with businesses if they wish to continue to be important in the business world today (Bell, 1999). This is indicative of the fact that past strategies like those that included traditional strikes are likely to be less effective in the future.

There is also a very negative connotation that goes along with the union strikes and this helps to undermine both the support and the legitimacy of unions (Bell, 1999). There are other ways that unions can show their displeasure and try to make changes, but strikes are by far the most popular. However, research into the issue and feeling about the issue as a strategy for change is indicating that trends are shifting away from strikes and more towards arbitration and other polite ways of finding an agreement (Bell, 1999). However, this does not mean that strikes no longer occur.

The recent supermarket strike in California is only one of the many strikes that have occurred over the years. Longshoremen have gone on strike, baseball players have gone on strike and entire seasons have been missed. There have been others as well that have chosen to strike rather than deal with the working conditions and wages that they currently have. Some of these specific strikes will be discussed later in this paper.

How Unions Get Their Members

Unions get members not so much by active recruiting but by simply making employees aware of what the union is willing to do for the employee if the employee needs assistance. However, there have been recent declines in union membership and recruitment by unions is once again becoming important (Bell, 1999). Many unions are working to create recruitment strategies in order to bring more members on board. The governments in some countries have even allocated money for national recruitment programs in order to bring more individuals into unions and show them what unions are able to do for them (Bell, 1999).

Another reason for the decline in union membership has to do with "associate membership" programs in which the benefits of union membership are a great deal different than they used to be. Many of the unions now have benefits such as credit and banking facilities, legal services, discount travel services, health care, and others (Bell, 1999). These are important for those who would be interested in using them, but they are much different than unions were in the past.

This is indicative of the fact that unions are changing to some degree to meet current business trends and what they feel members and employees will want at this point in time. It would seem that this would be extremely helpful and unions would be doing a booming business, but many unions are still not doing well. It is beginning to look as though unions are not going to be greatly needed in this country or any other for much longer. Even though unions have done much to help many employees throughout the world, their usefulness is drawing to a close and it is quite possible that unions will not be needed in the future because businesses have changed so much that the goals and interests of unions no longer meet with what their members want and need (Bell, 1999).

It is likely that unions will still be around for some time to come, but it is not as important for an employee to belong to a union as it used to be many years ago. Whether unions will completely cease to exist is unlikely but remains to be seen. However, it is important that unions be thoroughly understood and move with the times and the changing business trends if they are going to continue to exist in today's society and provide employees with what they want and need.

Specific Strikes

California Super Market Strike

In October 2003 grocery clerks in Southern California went on strike. More than 70,000 workers rejected an offer of a contract from three different supermarket chains and authorized a walk-out (Viega, 2003). A federal mediator was hoping to find a compromise between Kroger's, Safeway, and Albertson's, and the United Food and Commercial Workers union. However, no compromise could be found and the strike went ahead. The contract was not to the liking of the union and over 98% of the union members rejected the contract. The president of the union believed that the union would win the strike provided the Teamsters and the consumers continue to support them.

The union was only planning on targeting one of the supermarket chains and had specifically asked the companies not to lock out workers for the other two, but the union did not want to reveal before the strike which chain they would target (Viega, 2003). Union officials, however, believed that the supermarket chains would lock out all of the union workers if there was a strike and this was in fact what happened.

While a strike of supermarket workers may not seem all that terribly significant, the three supermarket chains operate almost 900 stores between Santa Barbara and San Diego and make up 60% of the market in Southern California. The last time that workers went on strike in this area was in 1978, and that strike lasted less than one week. A spokesman for one of the grocery chains did not believe that the strike was necessary and accused the union of misleading those employees that were members into voting on a contract given to the members for their opinion. The contract was not necessarily a final offer (Viega, 2003).

Reasons behind the strike include the fact that many of the companies want the workers to accept a larger share of the cost for the health-care benefits that they receive (Viega, 2003). This is based on the sluggishness of the economy, the fact that health-care costs are rising rapidly, and the increasing competition that many of these supermarkets are facing from companies such as Wal-Mart, which is non-union and moving into the grocery and supermarket business in a large way with the superstores that they are placing across the country (Viega, 2003).

Most of the grocery workers who are going on strike work at least 24 hours a week, but 70% of them are only part-time workers (Viega, 2003). The average wage, however, is approximately $15 per hour (Viega, 2003). As a counter offer against what the companies are asking for, the union is asking the companies to maintain the health-care plans the way they are and not ask the workers to pay anything extra. They also want raises of 50 cents per hour the first year and 45 cents an hour per year for the next two years (Viega, 2003). Most who are involved with the strike, however, do not believe that it will last a long time, as consumers and others will support those that are striking and this will quickly put an end to the difficulties. Those who are striking feel confident that they will win.

The grocery worker's strike made news as far away as England. Becoming the longest running grocery strike in United States history, it finally came to an end with an agreement that union members would not the making contributions to their health-care plans for the first two years (BBC, 2004). After this, they would pay between $5 and $15 for the cost of these health-care plans (BBC, 2004).

This agreement, however, is not without concessions on the part of the striking workers. Fewer benefits and wages will be paid to workers who are new to the grocery chains and these workers will also have to pay 9 dollars per week if they want a basic health care plan (BBC, 2004). The average wage of $12 to $14 an hour earned by employees who have already joined the union will not be made by new employees (BBC, 2004). Pensions will also be changed, as the previous contribution to company pension plans from the supermarkets was 100%. It will now be 65% for veteran employees and 35% for new workers (BBC, 2004). Many of the grocery workers were disappointed by the terms that they received with this new deal, but since they had been on strike for five months they were ready to make a deal and return to work, even if they knew that they would not receive everything that they had originally asked for when they went on strike.

Longshoremen's Strike

The Longshoremen's strike in 2002 was another large problem for the economy. It was estimated that the dispute could possibly cost the United States economy over $1 billion per day (Pritchard, 2002). Everything from presents to produce was just sitting in West Coast ports while the strike was going on because dockworkers were locked out. The contract expired and the Longshoremen continued to work because they did not think a lockout or a strike would benefit anyone (Pritchard, 2002). However, when they could not reach an agreement eventually for a new contract, they chose to strike instead.