Week 12

1. Union Organizing1. Voluntary Recognition

1. Corporate Campaigns: Bread and Roses

2. Bargaining to Organize1. Card Check2. Neutrality Agreements

2. Labor Law Reform1. Dunlop Commission2. EFCA

3. Union Transformation1. Change to Win2. New Organizing Models

The Organizing Process

Collective Bargaining cannot take place until a bargaining representative has been certified

To gain certification, unions pursue one of two paths

Path 1: Normally, a union must win an election to be certified as the exclusive representative of the employees

Face With Union Organization

Management tries to undercut support

Broad array of strategies and tactics

Bread and Roses number 6…

Start with 65%…but lose half of elections…

Year # of Elections % Won Union New Membs

1950 5619 74.5 -

1960 5428 62.8 -

1970 7543 55.1 -

1980 7021 49 -

1990 3423 47.6 77,689

1995 2716 48.2 66,753

The Organizing Process

Collective Bargaining cannot take place until a bargaining representative has been certified

To gain certification, unions pursue one of two paths

Path 2: An employer may voluntarily recognize a union if the union can demonstrate that it represents a majority of the employees

Bread and Roses number 8?

Sometimes Corporate Campaigns force Voluntary Recognition…

Cost to company finances, reputation, brand outweigh recognizing the costs of recognizing the union…

Corporate campaigns force voluntary recognition- efforts to bring public, financial, or political pressure

to bear on a company

Crash weddings, picket in front of homes, boycott related companies, try to use politics to create problems for firm, hold hearings with local clergy and politicians…

Bread and Roses number 7

Corporate Campaigns Are Tricky Business

So Smithfield has filed a racketeering lawsuit against the union, on the theory that speaking out about labor, environmental and safety issues in order to pressure the company to unionize amounts to extortion like that used by organized crime.

Smithfield says the union, the United Food and Commercial Workers International, and its officials violated RICO by issuing press releases, contacting civil rights and environmental groups, organizing protests and calling for boycotts.

But the most striking assertion in the suit, one Smithfield devotes five pages to, is that the union was engaged in racketeering when it urged local governments in New York, Boston and other cities to pass resolutions condemning the company. After meeting with the union in 2006, a dozen members of the New York City Council sponsored a resolution calling for the city to stop buying meat from Smithfield’s Tar Heel factory “until the company ends all forms of abuse, intimidation and violence against its workers,” citing a ruling by a federal appeals court in Washington that Smithfield had engaged in “intense and widespread coercion” in battling unionization at its Tar Heel plant.

Councilwoman Melissa Mark-Viverito was a sponsor of the resolution, and she said she had been happy to meet with representatives of labor and business groups to hear their concerns. The practice Smithfield calls racketeering is, Ms. Mark-Viverito said, what others call lobbying. The First Amendment has a name for it, too: the right to petition the government.

Smithfield’s lawsuit contains other nuggets. It complains, for instance, that the union interfered with its relationship with Paula Deen, “a celebrity chef” who has a contract to promote Smithfield products on her show on the Food Network. The union has demonstrated at Ms. Deen’s public appearances.

In a recent court filing, Smithfield added another complaint: the union “deprived Smithfield of an incomparable marketing opportunity” by persuading Oprah Winfrey not to allow Ms. Deen to promote Smithfield hams on Ms. Winfrey’s show.

The suit seeks more than $17 million, an order barring the union from publishing “reports or press releases designed to mislead the public,” another barring demonstrations “at Paula Deen events,” and a third barring the union “from participating in the drafting, encouraging, sponsorship and/or passage of public condemnations of plaintiffs by cities, townships or other organizations.”

Smithfield, UFCW Settle RICO Suit, Agree to Election Using 'Fair Process' Just before a trial was scheduled to begin, Smithfield Foods Inc. and the

United Food and Commercial Workers Oct. 27 agreed to settle the company's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act suit alleging that the union's “corporate campaign” in support of an organizing drive amounted to extortion (Smithfield Foods Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Int'l Union, E.D. Va., No. 3, order approving settlement 10/27/08).

In a joint statement, the parties announced that they have agreed on “a fair election process” by which workers at Smithfield's pork processing plant in Tar Heel, N.C., can choose whether or not to be represented by UFCW. In return, UFCW agreed “to end its public campaign against Smithfield,” in which the union has employed a variety of tactics, including product boycotts, to pressure the company to agree to a card-check recognition process. Smithfield and UFCW also agreed to establish and jointly fund and administer a “feed the hungry program.”

http://emlawcenter.bna.com/pic2/em.nsf/id/BNAP-7KULHA?OpenDocument

Corporate Campaigns and RICO

SEIU targeting Private Security Firms

Private Security Firms are Hired by Building Owners

Empire State Building Becomes a Target Video of SEIU arrests SEIU targets Empire State Building…which does not

directly employ the security guards

UFCW Corporate Campaign Against Smithfield Examples of two tactics? Paula Deen and the UFCW

Extortion or Free Speech?

Sometimes Corporate Campaigns force Voluntary Recognition…

How do you feel about these campaigns? Do they pass your “smell” test? Move to yes or no corner?

Cost to company finances, reputation, brand outweigh recognizing the costs of recognizing the union…

Corporate campaigns force voluntary recognition- efforts to bring public, financial, or political pressure

to bear on a company

Another way to get Voluntary Recognition is Bargaining to Organize

Bargaining to organize negotiating language in collective bargaining agreement with employers

to enhance the union’s chances in future organizing.

AFSCME publication explains: Bargaining to organize means going beyond maintaining union

jobs, and reaching agreements to build the union. There are different approaches. Employers may promise to remain “neutral” and not oppose union organizing efforts. They may agree to recognize the union based on a card check rather than insisting on an election (http://www.afscme.org/publications/9719.cfm)

Example: HERE Local 226 and Vegas casinos agreed to contract language which called for card check recognition for future organizing drives

Ok…so what’s meant by “neutral” and “card check”?

Neutrality Agreements

Neutrality Agreements Situation where an employer neither supports nor opposes

the unions efforts to organize a workplace

Sometimes gained via “Bargaining to Organize” Contract specifies that firm will be neutral in future organizing

Sometimes legislated New hotel built with city money, city council declares

management must be neutral

Sometimes the result of different institutional rules Daimler-Benz was neutral when UAW organized plants in the

South…why? German law gives unions seats on corporate boards and they demanded this

Voluntary Recognition and Card Check

Card Check Neutral third party verifies that union has collected

union card from more than half of workers

No NLRB election, just card collectiong

70% of card check drives are successful…compared to 50% of elections

This is how unions form in parts of Canada Union Density in Canada is above 30%

4.Why do unions say card check is a good thing? Why do employers say card check is a bad thing?

Path 2: Voluntary Recognition

Card Check Neutral third party verifies that union has collected union card from

more than half of workers

Unions “With secret-ballot elections, unionization efforts can drag on for

months, often delayed by litigation. Unions also say that many corporations break the law during election campaigns by firing, intimidating and spying on union supporters” (Greenhouse 2007: 1)

Employers “Business lobbyists say the Employee Free Choice Act is antidemocratic

and would deprive workers of their right to a secret ballot. They say union organizers will bully workers into signing pro-union cards” (Greenhouse 2007: 2)

More on pros and cons in a moment…what does research find on impact?

Eaton and Kriesky 2009

.

                                                                                                                                                                                                              

                                                                                     

Reversing the Tide…An uphill battle…

Recent Calculations & ChangesA Game of Numbers:

To stay even: labor must organize approximately 128,000 a year

To grow: unions must organize more than this…and they have not been able to do this

1995: typical national union devoted 5% of budget to organizing new members

1996: New AFL-CIO President John Sweeney challenged them to increase this to 30% SEIU, HERE and Carpenters did this Most others did not

New AFL-CIO leadership…Winning More

Year # of Elections % Won Union New Membs

1950 5619 74.5 -

1960 5428 62.8 -

1970 7543 55.1 -

1980 7021 49 -

1990 3423 47.6 77,689

1995 2716 48.2 66,753

1997 3307 50.4 86,325

2001 2378 53.6 67,796

But Not Enough…

Not enough organizing or victories to keep up with growth in the economy

Union density still fell

14.9% in 1995

13.5% in 2000

12.5% in 2004

12.1% in 2006

So what’s a labor movement to do?

You have been promoted from university student to:

A) President of the AFL-CIO

B) President of one of the unions that is organizing (SEIU, Carpenters, UNITE-HERE, UFCW)

Most unions don’t know how to change, or won’t change. The law does not seem to work for you anymore What, if anything, do you do to reverse the decline of organized labor?

So what’s a labor movement to do?

At present, there are two dominant trains of thought:

Focus should be on Internal Changes: Unions need to look in the mirror, change, and spend more money & resources on organizing the unorganized

Focus should be on External Changes: Unions need to focus on political action, in particular labor law reform to try and lift win rate

This is what the labor movement is currently split over…should focus be on organizing or politics?

External Solution: Labor Law Reform President Clinton appoints Presidential

Commission to investigate labor laws

Commission of the Future of Worker/Management Relations (1993-95)…for short the Dunlop Commission

Commission holds hearings across America and then recommends variety of changes to the law

Some of the Dunlop Commission’s Recommendations

(4) Prompt elections Providing for prompt elections after the NLRB determines

that sufficient employees have expressed a desire to be represented by a union. Such elections should generally be held within two weeks. To accomplish this objective we propose that challenges to bargaining units and other legal disputes be resolved after the elections are held.

Improve Union Access to Workers

Beyond the reversal of the Supreme Court's decision in Lechmere so that employees may have access to union organizers in privately-owned but publicly-used spaces such as shopping malls, access questions are best left to the NLRB. The Commission urges the Board to strive to afford employees the most equal and democratic dialogue possible.

Dunlop Commission Findings (5) Prompt Response to Ilegal Employer Behavior

Requiring by statute that the NLRB obtain prompt injunctions to remedy discriminatory actions against employees that occur during an organizing campaign or negotiations for a first contract.

(6) New System to Insure First Contract…more on this later

Assisting employers and newly certified unions in achieving first contracts through an upgraded dispute resolution system which provides for mediation and empowers a tripartite advisory board to use a variety of options to resolve disputes ranging from self-help (strike or lockout) to binding arbitration for relatively few disputes.

Dunlop Commission

What important political event occurred in 1994?

Hint:

Dunlop Commission, 1994

What important political event occurred in 1994?

Hint: Newt Gingrich

Republican’s Congressional victories change balance of power in Washington Contract for America

Labor law reform taken off of the table

Current Political Push for Labor Law Reform

Many Unions Are Aggressively Working for Passage of the Employee Free Choice Act

3.Take a look at the power point slides on the Employee Free Choice Act. In your own words, briefly explain how this bill would help strengthen the labor movement. Be sure to comment on at least TWO parts of the bill.

Employee Free Choice Act

Employee Free Choice Act

Many Unions Are Aggressively Working for Passage of the Employee Free Choice Act

If you were congressmen, would you vote for the bill? Why or why not? Move to yes or no.

Current Political Push

Brought to a vote March 1, 2007,

Won in the House of Representatives Vote Note the Pattern in the Republican Party

Procedurally stalled in the Senate

Unions worked hard on the 2008 elections with this bill in mind Obama supported and said it would be a priority…but

didn’t pursue it

Handful of Democrats would not support it in senate…nothing has happened yet.

Some Unions Conclude Politics is not enough…Internal Change is Key

26% 52 smallest unions

SEIU 10.6%

AFSCME 9.8%

Teamsters 9.3%

UFCW 8.3% AFT 7.6%

UAW 5.0%

IBEW 4.9%

CWA 4.8%

IAM 2.8%USWA 2.7%

UNITE HERE 3.4%

Laborers 2.7%IUOE 2.1%

4th Union Quits A.F.L.-C.I.O. in a Dispute Over Organizing September

15, 2005

Deepening the split in organized labor, Unite Here, a union that represents apparel, hotel, casino and restaurant workers, announced yesterday that it was quitting the A.F.L.-C.I.O., becoming the fourth union to do so this summer.

Bruce Raynor, president of Unite Here, said his union's board had voted unanimously to quit because the A.F.L.-C.I.O. had not done enough to spur union organizing to reverse the decline of the labor movement.

We believe that American workers are facing a historical crisis," Mr. Raynor said in a telephone news conference from St. Paul, where his union's board was meeting. "There are 28 million Americans that went to work this morning who made less than the poverty level."

This summer, three other major unions quit the labor federation: the Service Employees International Union, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and the United Food and Commercial Workers. The four departing unions represented about 4.5 million workers out of the A.F.L.-C.I.O.'s membership of 13 million.

In 2005, 6 Key Unions (and one minor union) Bolted from the AFL-CIO

AFL-CIO

AFL-CIO Change to Win

56 National Unions

10.5 million workers

7 Unions

6 million workers

Outline

1. New Organizing Tactics 2. Changing the Target

Hot Shop Organizing 3. New Organizing Strategies

Industry Industry with Trigger

Next Week Readings

45 minute class

In 2005, 6 Key Unions (and one minor union) Bolted from the AFL-CIO

AFL-CIO

AFL-CIO Change to Win

56 National Unions

10.5 million workers

7 Unions

6 million workers

So What Was the Beef…

Bruce Raynor, president of Unite Here, said his union's board had voted unanimously to quit because the A.F.L.-C.I.O. had not done enough to spur union organizing to reverse the decline of the labor movement.

Different Organizing Models

Servicing Model Clawson: Worst Case Scenario Union Organizing

Organizing Model Clawson: Union Building

Different Union Models

Servicing Model or what Clawson Calls “Worst Case Scenario Union Organizing”

Traditional model of union representation that focuses on contract negotiation, contract administration and the provision of services to union members (Katz & Kochan, p. 465, 2004)

Organizing as secondary function of union…if even that Modest resources directed at organizing Members play limited role in organizing

Servicing Model

Worst Case Scenario Union Organizing

Get a union as quickly and cheaply as possible

Communication with workers Handed leaflets and occasional meetings

Paid organizers make all the decisions

Professional Staff does things for workers instead of helping to develop power of workers

In contrast to Servicing Model is the Organizing Model

Organizing Model or what Clawson labels “Union Building” model

A model of union representation which focuses on a substantial share of the union’s activity and resources on organizing through actively involving union members in the organizing process and in the internal life of the union. (Katch and

Kochan, p.464, 2004)

Organizing as primary: Substantial share of unions resources spent on organizing

Clawson Union Building

Organizer as teacher not leader Empower, Teach, Assist “The Union is You” …meaning what?

Clawson Union Building

Paid Organizer Creates Organizing Committee

Identify “Worker Leaders” and recruit to campaign

“Worker Leaders” become Organizing Committee Members & become backbone of drive Organize their department…Maya vs. Sam

Recruit and Train Rank and File workers already in existing bargaining units to be organizers Put them on staff… Organize on “Lost time”…temporary leave

Union Building Approach

When organizers are drawn from the workplace, they have roots in community & familiarity with workplace

Facilitates Trust Allows coalition building & longer term

campaigns Think of the Clergy we saw in the Smithfield/UFCW

video

Testing the Models…

So two organizing models…both can and do work…but which one works better?

You are a sociologist interested in studying this matter…how might you test to see which strategy works best?

Kate Bronfenbrenner, Cornell University

“The Role of Union Strategies in NLRB Certification Elections.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review January

1997

Studied 261 union elections from 1986 and 1987

Surveyed unions involved about tactics and other matters

Tested for correlation between tactics and outcome of election

Bronfenbrenner

Hypothesis 1: Organizing Campaigns with rank and file intensive strategies are more successful than those without such strategies

Yes. Unions win between 12% and 26% more when they use rank & file intensive strategies

Representative Committees (62% vs. 36%)

Rank and file doing house calls (52% vs. 40%) Maya vs. Sam

Solidarity Days of Action (53% vs. 41%)

Kate Bronfenbrenner, The Role of Union Strategies in NLRB Certification Elections

“Unions are more likely to win certification elections when they run campaigns using a rank and file intensive organizing strategy, including a reliance on person to person contact; an emphasis on union democracy and representative participation…and an emphasis on dignity, justice and fairness rather than solely bread and butter issues.” (p.209)

Less than 33% of the campaigns used these tactics

Kate Bronfenbrenner, The Role of Union Strategies in NLRB Certification Elections

“Perhaps the most important finding in this study is that union tactic variables as a group explain a greater part of the variance in election outcome than any other elements of the certification election model. That is, not only do union tactics matter, but as a group they matter more than employer tactics, bargaining unit demographics, organizer background, or organizing climate (p. 205)

Translation?

Kate Bronfenbrenner, The Role of Union Strategies in NLRB Certification Elections

“Perhaps the most important finding in this study is that union tactic variables as a group explain a greater part of the variance in election outcome than any other elements of the certification election model. That is, not ony do union tactics matter, but as a group they matter more than employer tactics, bargaining unit demographics, organizer background, or organizing climate (p. 205)

Translation: How unions organize matters a great deal… Message to Union Leaders: “Change Your Tactics!”

Strategy and Tactics Matter

So research shows that the kind of tactics used matter.

What about the strategy? Which workplaces should unions be trying to organize?

Hot Shop Organizing???

“Hot Shop” Organizing

Hot Shop Organizing Union waits for workers to call them, meets

with a group of workers, and if they are angry enough launches an organizing campaign (Bruskin Labor Notes July 2002)

Billboards “Need a Union? Call 1-800-Local 99

Many organizing drives start this way

Many are very critical of relying on this as the primary method of organizing…why?

Problems with “Hot Shop” Organizing

Shop might be in industry unrelated to unions primary industry I have met Dental Hygienists who were in the Steelworkers

Union Unions may lose focus; Solidarity may be thin

No overarching strategy designed to increase union’s ability to deliver better wages, hours and working conditions Ability to win better wages, hours and working conditions is

limited if union density in industry is negligible

Steelworkers represent 10 hygienists in one office in Milwaukee, but no other offices are unionized…they risk putting union dentist at competitive disadvantage

Stephen Lerner and Others

5. Lerner argues that unions need to stop organizing workplace by workplace, and begin organizing entire industries at once in order to “takes wages out of competition.” Try to explain how organizing an entire industry at once “takes wages out of competition,” being sure to discuss how this changes employer behavior toward unions.

Stephen Lerner and Others

Organized labor needs to adopt a more strategic approach to organizing

Organizing targets should be chosen based on sound research, not on random phone calls

Research departments collect data and analyze potential targets

Targets should not be individual shops…organizing needs to target entire industries, regions and/or markets

Let’s explore…

Multi-Employer Organizing

Target multiple employers based on industry, region or market Perhaps some combination of the three

United Autoworkes (UAW and Casinos) Industry=Gaming Industry Region/Market=Atlantic City Target= All of the casinos in AC

Multi-Employer Organizing

SEIU Justice for Janitors Campaign

Industry = Cleaning Services

Region/Market=Houston, Texas

Target = 5 Largest Cleaning Contractors

Multi-Employer Organizing Goal To take wages out of competition…

Master Agreement A collective bargaining agreement covering a

number of companies and one or more unions or covering several plants of a single employer.

The master agreement is often supplemented by local agreements covering conditions that vary among the individual plants or companies. (Doherty 1989)

Multi-Employer Organizing w/ a new Twist

SEIU Justice for Janitors Campaign

Industry = Cleaning Services

Region/Market=Northern New Jersey

Target = All Cleaning Contractors…More than 40

SEIU uses innovative strategy…which I have researched…

6. In his opening paragraph, Eimer suggests that SEIU has developed a strategy that “seeks to organize whole labor markets at once using a trigger mechanism which is sensitive to the competitive pressures employers face when confronted with the costs of unionization(Eimer 2008: 1). After reading the article, please explain what that statement means. Be sure to discuss what is meant by competitive pressures and trigger mechanisms.

SEIU in North Jersey

Step 1: Begin to Contact Workers at jobsites across North Jersey Defined as region north of Rt. 195

Step 2: Worker Committees formed at various workplaces Small actions held to demonstrate interest in unionization

Step 3: SEIU contacts the employers in North Jersey and invites them to a meeting

“We called the union companies. We called all the non-union companies and said we’re bargaining an agreement for the industry. Come and [talk with us]. Tell us what you think the market can bear. Have a voice. Find out who we are and what we’re about” (Eimer 2007)

SEIU in North Jersey

Step 4: Meeting held to discuss wages, hours and working conditions Employers, union reps and rank and file workers

Step 5: The Trigger…this is the key innovation Contractors who agreed to recognize the union

were told that they would not have to raise wages or increase benefits until a majority of its competitors also went union, ensuring that no contractor was put at a competitive disadvantage” (Lerner 2007: 19)

SEIU in North Jersey

Step 6: Since North Jersey is not one homogonous real estate market, it was broken down into three sub markets called zones

Office space in Jersey City can be rented for more money than office space in Edison…so Jersey City could pay higher rates

Each Zone would be triggered separately

7. Eimer argues that trigger mechanisms reduce employer opposition to unions. How? What evidence does he provide to support this assertion?

SEIU in North Jersey

Employer Reaction

21 of 22 firms in attendance agree to the trigger

The New York Times reported: The CEO of Tri-Maintenance Contractors, one of the

larger firms in zone 1, “praised the agreement and its trigger mechanism,” telling the New York Times, “Once you have a majority signed on, everyone is on the same playing field, and everyone can work together. Once you get this going, everyone else will come into this program” (Greenhouse 2001).

The Company that refused to sign become the target of an SEIU corporate campaign and ultimately agreed to the contract

Trigger reduces Employer Opposition

Brofenbrenner found that 75 percent of employers engaged in “active anti-union tactics, including some combinations of discharge for union activity; captive audience meetings; supervisor one-on-ones; wage increases; promises of improvements in wages, benefits or working conditions; anti-union committees; and letters”

Subsequent research has consistently found that such tactics are effective and help contribute to the defeat of union organizing drives (Brofenbrenner 1994; Brofenbrenner 1997; Brofenbrenner and Juravich 1998; Brofenbrenner and Hickey 2004).

In North Jersey, the incidence of such tactics was dramatically reduced

With Little or No Opposition, Unions Grow

Union membership climbed from around 1,000 to over 6,000, lifting union density in the industry to around 75 percent

Within three years wages throughout the region were raised from the minimum wage $5.15 to a minimum of $9.75, and full time workers received health care for the first time

SEIU & Security

SEIU Security Campaign

Industry = Private Security

Region/Market = City by city New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle,

Minneapolis

Target = Security Firms in a given market…

Let’s go to the video-tape Stand for Security

Legitimate homeland security issue?

Next…

O.k.…a union has formed, now what…Collective Bargaining