Rev: LU 13: Union Mgt Cooperation

WORKPLACE INTERVENTIONS ARE ANY ACTION BY MGT, THE UNION, OR BOTH TO TRY & IMPROVE A CONDITION, OFTEN PRODUCTIVITY, BY ADDRESSING A PROBLEM OR WEAKNESS IN THE WKPLACE

Workplace interventions are initiated at the plant or office level, they may reside in a single location, w/ a single union, or they may be part of a larger joint union mgt program

Link

The Figure: The Cooperation Continuum demonstrates that the range of coop available to wkplaces today is very diverse

Workplace interventions often aim to improve product quality, productivity, profitability, enhance job security, & ensure continued the operation of the firm

Workplace interventions often lead to new designs for work & org through the use of team based methods, lean production, cell mfr, self directed work teams, job enlargement, etc.

Workplace interventions increase workplace flexibility for the employer which will increase productivity & also increase job security for the wkrs

Pay programs are changed so that wkrs share in productivity or profitability gains & reduce employers' risks during downturns

WORKPLACE INTERVENTIONS TIE WKRS PAY MORE TO THEIR SKILLS & PERFORMANCE THAN TO THEIR JOB TITLE OR SENIORITY

Link

The Table: Incidence of Cooperative Clauses in Private Sector Collective Bargaining Agreements 1997 - 2007 shows that unions have been involved in many workplace interventions focusing on employee involvement & cooperation btwn labor & mgt

Link

The Table: Comparative Analyses of Workplace Interventionsdemonstrates that the many types of cooperative workplace interventions vary along several important dimensions including philosophy, goals, level of participation, the ability to make suggestions, the role of the supervisor, the role of mgrs, bonus formulas, frequency of pay outs, role of union, impact on the mgt style

The Table: Type & Extent of Joint Programs across Manufacturing demonstrates that the prevalence of workplace interventions vary widely

Most joint programs focus on product quality & productivity & most frequently addressing these issues w/ work teams

The productivity & labor mgt climate are usually handled by committee structures

Most programs were initiated w/o outside assistance, but the fed govt was the most frequently used outside help

Workplace interventions can be divided into gain share & non gainsharing place

Gainsharing plan increase pay when labor becomes more productive

Non gainsharing plans include changed rewards during the intervention, but it is not proportional to productivity

Typical workplace interventions include:

- Scanlon Plans
- Rucker Plans
- Impro Share Plans

- Quality Circles
- Quality of Work Life Programs
- Total Quality Mgt Programs

If gainsharing plans are implemented at the same time that base pay levels are reduced, grater proportions of an employee's pay would be at risk

ORGL COOPERATION IS NOT WIDESPREAD IN US IND BECAUSE BOTH MGT & UNIONS WOULD RATHER OPERATE IN TRADL AUTHORITARIAN MODES

US employers basically oppose unions, esp their involvement in decision making

For 60 yrs, union mgt cooperation programs have been tried, but most have not been sustained

Since the 80s, more cooperation programs have been bargained into contracts & improved productivity & job security in about half of all unionized firms in the private sector

Link

Figure: Bucket Bargaining Process depicts how the five types of bargaining issues, including minor issues, past problems, change issues, discussion issues, & econ issues are divided into 5 'buckets' of update, repair, redesign, discussion, & econ

In bucket bargaining, negotiators begins w/ the update issue, & then moves in order to the other issues, ending w/ econ issues

Link

Figure: Bargaining Economics depicts how settlement guidelines set the stage for joint agreements btwn mgt & the union & some issues are decided by mgt or the union

In joint discussions over econ issues, the core process is the:
1. establishment of an econ package
2. framing issues
3. ranking the issues
4. defining the unit cost in each issue
5. defining the interests of mgt & the union in the econ package
6. agreeing on the tools to shape the final econ package

In joint discussions over econ issues, the tools include:
a. drawing up a straw design, a prototype
b. sitting an expert panel
c. problem solving

In joint discussions over econ issues, problem solving methods include:
a. developing options
b. agreeing on standards
c. applying the standards

Link

Figure: A Model of the Effect of Cooperation on Performance & Labor Relations Outcomes demonstrates that several factors affect cooperation, including orgl structure, power of the union, power of the corp, the structure of labor mgt relations, orgl constraints, orgl envl constraints, the cooperative structure, & orgl performance

The model of cooperation depicts the relationship among the cooperative structure & the power of mgt & the union, & how the intensity of cooperation is shaped by orgl constraints, resulting in changes in labor mgt relations & company performance

Internal Links Top	Figure: The Cooperation Continuum	External Links
	- FULL COOPERATION
	- Decisions on strategic issues
	- High Performance practices
	- Guarantees of employment security
	- Decisions on traditional issues
	- Committees to review mutual concerns that arise
	- INTENT TO COOPERATE
	Figure: The Cooperation Continuum demonstrates that the range of cooperation available to wkplaces today is very diverse
	Source: GR.. Gray, DW. Myers, and P.S. Myers, "Cooperation Provisions in Labor Agreements: A New Paradigm?" Monthly Labor Review 122, no. 1 (1999), p. 31.

Top

Table: Incidence of Cooperative Clauses in Private Sector Collective Bargaining Agreements 1997 - 2007

External
Links

Provision

Number of Contracts

% of all Contracts

% of all Employees

Total in Sample

1,041

100.0

All Contracts w/ Coop Provisions

485

46.6

46.2

All Contracts w/ Explicit Coop Language

286

27.5

29.2

Stage 1: Statement of Intent to Coop Only

150

14.4

9.6

Stage 2: Joint committees to review issues

163

15.7

16.0

Total at stages 1 and 2 only

160

15.4

13.1

Stage 3:

Drug Problems

6.9

4.7

Health Care

1.5

2.2

Human relations

106

10.2

10.9

Safety

261

25.1

28.8

Stage 4:

Favored "nation"

4.4

3.2

Neutrality toward organizing

4.7

4.6

No layoff

2.1

2.8

No subcontracting

1.3

0.7

Stage 5: High performance work practices

154

14.8

19.1

Stage 6: Strategic decision making

2.6

4.4

Table: Incidence of Cooperative Clauses in Private Sector Collective Bargaining Agreements 1997 - 2007 shows that unions have been involved in many workplace interventions focusing on employee involvement & cooperation btwn labor & mgt

Source: GR.. Gray, DW. Myers, and P.S. Myers, "Cooperation Provisions in Labor Agreements: A New Paradigm?" Monthly Labor Review 122, no. 1 (1999), p. 33.

Top

Table: Comparative Analyses of Workplace Interventions

External
Links

Gainsharing

Non gainsharing

Program Dimension

Scanlon

Rucker

Impro Share

Quality Circles

Labor Management Committees

Quality of work life
Projects

Self Managed Work Teams

Philosophy / Theory

Share improvements; people willing to make suggestions, want to make ideas work

Primarily economic incentives; some reliance on employee participation

Economic incentives; increased performance

People capable/willing to offer ideas/make suggestions

Improve attitudes; trust

Improve environment (physical, human, systems aspects)

Reduce layers of management; increase employees' control over work environment

Primary Goal

Productivity Improvement

Productivity improvement

Cost reduction, quality

Improve labor management relations, communications

Improve psychological well being at work; increase job satisfaction

Productivity improvement; reduce levels of supervision

Subsidiary Goal

Attitudes, communication, work behaviors, quality, cost reduction

Attitudes, work behaviors

Attitudes, work behaviors, quality, productivity

Work behaviors, quality, productivity, cost reductions

Attitudes, communication, work behaviors, quality, productivity, cost reduction

Worker autonomy, quality, cost reduction, flexibility

Worker Participation

Two levels of committees: screening (1), production (many)

Screening committee, production committee (sometimes)

Bonus committee

Screening (1); circles (many)

Visitor subcommittees (many)

Steering committees; ad hoc to work on problem; informal

Control over work assignments, production methods

Suggestion Making

Formal system

None

Context of committee

None, informal

Possibly informal, depending on project

Determined within team

Role of Supervisor

Chair, production committee

None

Circle Leaders

None

No Direct Role

No Supervisor

Role of managers

Direct participation in bonus committee assignments

Ideas coordinator evaluates suggestion, committee assignments

None

Facilitator evaluates proposed solutions

Committee members

Steering committee membership

Communications with work team on production targets; problem solving

Bonus Formula

Sales/payroll

Bargaining unit payroll/ Production value (sales materials, supplies, services)

Engineered std. x BPF/ Total hours worked

All savings/improvements retained by company

Frequency of pay out

Monthly

Weekly

Not applicable

Role of Union

Negotiated provisions, screening committee membership

Negotiated provisions

Tacit approval

Active membership

Negotiated provisions, screening committee membership

Job design negotiated into collective bargaining agreement

Impact on Mgt Style

Substantial

Slight

None

Some

Substantial

Table: Comparative Analyses of Workplace Interventions demonstrates that the many types of cooperative workplace interventions vary along several important dimensions including philosophy, goals, level of participation, the ability to make suggestions, the role of the supervisor, the role of mgrs, bonus formulas, frequency of pay outs, role of union, impact on the mgt style

Source: Expanded from M. Schuster, Union Management Cooperation: Structure, Process, and Impact (Kalamazoo, MI: WE. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 1984), p. 73.

Top

Figure: Bucket Bargaining Process

Top

Figure: Bargaining Economics

Top

Figure: Bargaining Economics depicts how settlement guidelines set the stage for joint agreements btwn mgt & the union & some issues are decided by mgt or the union

Top

Figure: A Model of the Effect of Cooperation on Performance & Labor Relations Outcomes

Top

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Bargaining

External
Links

BARGAINING

Bargaining is the contract negotiations, & all that it entails ( bargaining structure, unit(s), issues, etc. ) engaged in by unions(s) & employer(s)

Bargaining structure is the organizational nature of the relationship btwn union(s) and employer(s) in contract negotiations, including a specification of the employees and facilities covered

Types of bargaining structure units: A bargaining unit is a collection of employees w/ similar interests who are represented by a single union representative

Factors Impacting Bargaining: The most important factors impacting bargaining are economic, in the form of the increased competition that resulted from globalization & deindustrialization, and political, in the form of an aggressive anti labor stance by mgt & the govt

Unionization has traditionally been fought by US firms

Beginning in the 1970s, firms implemented active union avoidance programs by fighting new organizing, shifting production from unionized plants to new greenfield operations, & reducing investment in unionized plants

Adversarial relationships carry over from organizing to bargaining & implementing contracts

The union needs gains through bargaining to keep the membership committed to the union

Unions are granted the right to exclusive representation by the Wagner Act, therefore the union must be responsive to all bargaining unit members

The law specifies that mandatory bargaining issues focus on immediate economic issues of wages & hours, & not employer issues or union survival issues

As a result of the increased competition from globalization, mgt has sought some cooperative relationships w/ wkrs in the wkplace

Mgt tends to view cooperative relationships as those in which the union has an insignificant role in decision making

Integrative bargaining is the bargaining over issues in which both parties may achieve a better position than the one held previously

The primary role of unions is to negotiate wages & conditions at work & to enforce the contract agreed to by mgt & labor

After a union wins a certification election, it negotiates a contract w/ the employer, who is required to bargain in good faith

There are 150,000 contracts covering 17 mm unionized workers in the US & over half of these workers are covered by the 2000 largest contracts

Labor contracts are a significant extension of the property rights of wkrs over their jobs & over their conditions of employment

Col barg has resulted in union wkrs earning about 10 to 15% more than nonunion wkrs (Wallace, Leicht & Raffalovich, 1999), not including fringe benefits

Union employees receive 24% of their total compensation in fringe benefits as compared w/ 18% for nonunion wkrs

Labor contracts typically reduce the gap btwn the highest & lowest paid wkrs in a wkplace because unions are committed to improving conditions for the lowest paid wkrs & because a small wage gap increases wkrs' solidarity

Col barg agreements are open contracts that include almost anything including wages, benefits, overtime & shift premiums, promotion & layoff procedures, due process, grievance procedures, etc.

Elected officials, including the president, vice president, & the shop steward get limited release time to deal w/ union business such as grievances

See Also: Economic Sociologists

Organized labor & individual wkrs have generally been reluctant to seek shared responsibility for decisions making in the wkplace

Some theorist maintain that:

a. wkrs are culturally conditioned to be servile; i.e., to not welcome wkplace control by lower level employees

b. wkrs are alienated if they have no voice / power in the wkplace; i.e., wkr are more satisfied if they do participate in decision making in the wkplace

Labor has been reluctant to seek workplace control because of their historical adversarial role, the corporatist / business unionism philosophy, & because of the economic concessions labor would have to make to gain such participation

Both employers & unions began to consider cooperation during the 1980s where firms found themselves in highly competitive market environments

In return for concessions on wages & benefits, labor has sometimes won greater control over the work process, & a share in the profits

Greater control of the workplace & greater control of their share of the profits have often been done to help achieve employer survival & increase employment security

The effect of labor mgt joint decision making flows along the TWO dimensions of:
a. control rights
b. return rights

a. Control rights involve the degree to which labor participates in org decision making

Unionization in itself inserts a degree of control rights because mgt decisions are now limited, w/ some of them being made by the workers through their union

At the extreme, control rights include work council arrangement such as in Germany

b. Return rights include the wage & salary system, incentive plans, profit sharing, gainsharing, ESOPs, etc.

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on an Overview of Democratic Organizations

External
Links

A DEMOCRATIC ORG IS ONE WHERE THE SYSTEM OF MGT OR ADMINISTRATION IS CHOSEN BY THE EMPLOYEES WHO ENJOY FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, & OWNERSHIP OF THE ORG

A dem org is similar to the traditional bureaucracy as understood by Weber, et al; however, Weberian bur usually locates control of the org outside of the org in the hands of investors in the case of a business, or the govt in the case of a govt. service org

A dem org locates control of the org inside the org & its relationship of investors & mgt. / admin is as services hired by the firm, as controlled by employees, rather than as org actors who control the org

In practice, most orgs today are strictly bureaucratic, making only a nod to democracy & participation

In practice, democratic orgs today are a combination of democratic org structures, employee participation programs, employee ownership plans, etc. & traditional bureaucratic authoritarianism

Conflicts over participation rights, control rights, return rights, the historical antipathy of employers, & adversarial relationships in labor mgt. relations have made the creation of joint problem solving / democratic orgs difficult

SOME UNIONS ARE DEMOCRATIC & ORGANIZE TO ESTB DEMOCRATIC MGT PRACTICES

Some movements toward a democratization of an org have been made via union mgt. cooperation to jointly accomplish their separate goals

Many cooperative experiments are initiated through side letters in the contract or through agreements to suspend contract provisions to experiment w/ new methods

Union mgt cooperation is established through integrative bargaining during contract negotiations & in part through the development of ongoing cooperative relationships

There are many types of employee involvement programs (EIPs) that have evolved since the human relations school of mgt came to the forefront in the 1930s

Labor law & employee involvement programs, quality control circles, workplace democracy, etc. are all factors that interact & shape orgs & thus the orgl env

The Taft Hartley Act forbids the dominance of a Labor or union org by a firm, i.e., no "business unions" are allowed

The court judgment on the firm Electromation narrows all firms' ability to ask workers to consider & be involved in deciding workplace issues

Involvement of workers in non mandatory bargaining issues is generally accepted & legal

COMMUNICATIONS & SUPERVISION STRUCTURE ARE IMPORTANT FACTORS IN IMPLEMENTING EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT PROGRAMS, QUALITY CONTROL CIRCLES, WORKPLACE DEMOCRACY, ETC.

Communications & employee involvement programs, quality control circles, workplace democracy, etc. are all factors that interact & shape orgs & thus the orgl env

Communications activities are similar to collecting survey data

Democratized, i.e. open communications enables both sides to increase understanding of their perceptions of problems

Supervision structures, employee involvement programs, quality control circles, workplace democracy, etc. are all factors that interact & shape orgs & thus the orgl env

Some employee involvement (EI) committees supplant supervisory tasks & actually eliminated supervisory jobs

Wk grps may make own their wk assignments, create & op training, make recommendations on staff decisions, manage day to day activities, & more

Thus E I programs, which have the effect of giving power to workers, threaten both low & mid mgt as well as unions

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Democratic Organizational Structure

External
Links

- Project: Bureaucratic & Democratic Orgs

Link

- Project: Govt Orgs & Democracy

Link

- Project: Democratic Orgs' Effect on Society

Link

MOST OF US ARE SOCIALIZED / ACCUSTOMED TO WKING IN AUTHORITARIAN ORGS & CANNOT CONCEIVE OF OR FUNCTION IN DEMOCRATIC WKPLACES

Democratic organizations use the structures & culture of democracy to disseminate power w/in the organization to achieve the advantages of democracy

Most orgs are authoritarian in that the boss/owner is the absolute ruler

Organizations range in political authority, as do countries, from authoritarian to democratic

Most organizations are totalitarian / authoritarian

Few people feel / see the contradiction of living in a democratic country & working in an authoritarian workplace

Link

Democratic workplaces typically demonstrate increased efficiency

Productivity studies show a general increase in productivity when workers control the process of the work

During the 1960s & 1970s, the US fell behind Japan & Europe in terms of productivity

Link

DEM ORGS MAY EXHIBIT ALL OR ANY OF ALL THE QUALS OF:

1. QCCs
2. LIFETIME EMPLOYMENT
3. COOP WK AGREEMENTS

4. DEMOCRATIC UNIONS
5. DEMOC ORG STRUC
6. EMPLOYEE OWNERSHIP

7. PAY LINKED TO PRODUCTIVITY
8. COOP WK CULTURE
9. MINIMUM DIV OF LABOR

Japanese workplaces have made TWO democratic innovations

1. QUALITY CONTROL CIRCLES ( QCCs ) ARE A TYPE OF DEM WKPLACE WHERE WKRS HAVE CONTROL OF QUALITY ISSUES

QCCs are small to medium sized groups that make suggestions on how to improve the organization

QCCs have FOUR Functions

a. QCCs function to improve & develop the organization

b. QCCs function to increase respects for workers, improve human relations & enhance worker satisfaction

c. QCCs function to utilize workers full potential

d. QCCs function to lower production cost, improve product quality, while taking into account worker needs

Thus the purpose of QCCs is both financial & psychological
While Japanese wages quadrupled btwn 1969 & 1979, American wages fell during this time

Formal orgs in Japan are like very large primary groups as described by Ouchi & his Theory Z type orgs

In developing his Theory Z type orgs Ouchi highlights five differences btwn formal orgs in Japan & in the US, including: hiring & advancement, lifetime security, holistic involvement, broad based training, & collective decision making

2. LIFETIME EMPLOYMENT IS CONSIDERED TO BE ESSENTIAL FOR A DEM WKPLACE BECAUSE IT BUILDS WKR COMMITMENT

Link

Lifetime employment, called tenure by Weber, fosters loyalty & commitment

Link

One limitation of the Japanese innovations is that they are limited to the shop floor

Link

Worker management relations in Japan are less conflicted than in US

Scandinavian workplaces have made TWO democratic innovations

3. COOPERATIVE WORK AGREEMENTS CREATE DEM DECISION MAKING AT THE UPPER LEVELS OF THE WKPLACE

Cooperative work agreements are contracts designed to allow high levels of employee input/power in workplace usually resulting in innovative work processes

Example: At Saab the workers did away w/ the "holy grail" of the assembly line & developed pod production

4. DEMOCRATIC UNIONS MAGNIFY THE POWER OF WKRS WHO MUST DEAL W/ MGT AS EQUALS IN A DEM WKPLACE

Democratic unions are those that voice for workers at all levels of the firm, including the shop floor, middle mgt. upper mgt. & the board room

There are FIVE orgl features that are important for orgl democracy to succeed in the US & there are several types of each of these orgl features

5. DEM ORGL STRUCTURE OPERATES DIFFERENTLY THAN THE COMMAND & CONTROL BUREAUCRACY

Democratic orgl structure has FOUR features

a. Democratic orgl structure has the feature of direct or representative democracy

b. Democratic orgl structure has the feature of including democratic unions

c. Democratic orgl structure has the feature of supplementing democracy w/ cross division QCCs

d. Democratic orgl structure has the feature of bring democratic features to all areas of the organization

6. EMPLOYEE OWNERSHIP, LIKE LIFETIME EMPLOYMENT, BUILDS WKR COMMITMENT

There are THREE major forms of employee ownership
a. Corporation w/ employee stock ownership of at least 51% w/ no one person w/ a controlling block
b. Cooperative
c. Partnership

7. PAY IS LINKED TO PRODUCTIVITY BECAUSE THE MOST DEM FORM OF COMPENSATION IS MERIT PAY

There are THREE major forms of pay linked to productivity
a. Piecework pay
b. Innovation pay
c. Org wide bonus
On average, top level managers cannot earn more than four times the pay of lower level workers

8. A COOPERATIVE ORGL CULTURE IS PERHAPS THE MOST DIFFICULT ASPECT OF DEMO ORGS BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE ACCUSTOMED TO BEING TOLD WHAT TO DO

A cooperative orgl culture has SIX aspects
a. Psychologically prepared democrats
b. Internalized social controls are
c. Commitment to participation
d. Ability to be proactive
e. Commitment to equality of opportunity & outcome
f. Commitment to social responsibility

The informal side of bureaucracy is that members of organizations try to personalize their procedures & surroundings

9. A MINIMUM DIVISION OF LABOR DEMOCRATIZES THE WKPLACE BECAUSE WKRS ARE EXPECTED TO BE ABLE TO PERFORM NEARLY ALL TASKS

A minimum division of labor may be accomplished through FOUR work processes
a. Rotation of work
b. Job enlargement
c. Work teams
d. Cross training

	'WORK W/O BOSSES' IS KANTER'S CONCEPTION OF A DEM WKPLACE WHERE THE WKRS MAKE ALL THE DECISIONS
	Work Without Bosses: Organizational Democracy As the Alternative to Bureaucracy, by RM Kanter RM Kanter found that cooperatives & collectives utilize FOUR techniques a. Minimum written rules b. Shun specialization through the development of job rotation & job enlargement c. Eliminate formal positions d. Democratic/consensus decision making
	RM Kanter found that in order to understand the fundamental differences btwn cooperatives & collectives & traditional organizations, one must distinguish among THREE types of rationality
	Traditional orgs use either economic rationality or formal rationality
	Traditional orgs use either economic rationality or formal rationality
	Cooperatives & collectives utilize substantive rationality
	Orgs that utilize economic rationality focus on developing the most efficient path to achieve a goal
	Orgs that utilize formal rationality focus on adhering to rules & procedures, w/ goals being secondary
	Orgs that utilize formal rationality focus on adhering to values over goals, rules, or procedures
	ROTHSCHILD-WHITT FOUND SMALL, TIGHT KNIT ORGS MOST EASILY ESTB WKPLACE DEMOC CULTURE & STRUCTURE
	If democracy is to succeed as an alternative to bureaucracy, Rothschild-Whitt has found that FIVE characteristics are important a. Small size b. Sense of community c. Socialize outside the job d. Limits on terms of office e. Organized political groups which were institutionalized
	THERE ARE MANY DEMOC ORGS THOUGH MOST MAJOR CORPS CONTINUE W/ AUTHORITARIAN STRUCTURES
	Examples of democratic orgs a. United Airlines ( ESOP ) b. Saab ( team structure ) c. Saturn ( team structure ) d. Avis Car Rental ( ESOP )
	Other orgs w/ substantial democratic features
	Starbucks
	Southwest Airlines

Top

Democratic workplaces increase efficiency
Productivity studies find that workers w/ control of the work process show /\ prod
Today: greater competitive pressures so we are attempting to design more efficient workplaces
US fell behind industrial world ( Japan & Europe ) in this is playing catch up now

Top

2. Lifetime Employment
Has made Japanese work organizations more efficient
Workers are less likely to leave for a better job elsewhere
The employer is expected not to lay off workers to cut costs
Top mgt. takes wage cuts
Workers are retrained & reassigned
Japanese top execs earn less than American execs 3x 10x

Top

Japanese Innovations are limited to shop floor

Workers have power mostly at the shop floor level. They still receive goals from top.
QC circles act w/in framework of goals set by management

Top

Worker Management Relationships in Japan are less conflicted

Also, there is less of a history of worker management. conflict in Japan.
QCCs have not been widely accepted by unions

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Areawide Labor Mgt Committees

External
Links

AREAWIDE LABOR MGT COMMITTEES ARE ORGS OF INDL & UNION LEADERS IN A GEOG REGION W/ THE GOAL OF DEALING W/ COMMON CONCERNS, LABOR MGT COOP, JOB SECURITY & COMPETITIVENESS

Areawide labor mgt committees (AWLMCs) are jointly sponsored orgs w/in a geographic area designed to advise on jointly experienced employment issues

AWLMCs do not engage in bargaining nor form bargaining units

AWLMCs are typically a response to significant regional employment problems, reduced profits, job security, or any joint issue, & have historically been concentrated in the Northeast & Midwest which have experienced deindustrialization & the relocation of plants to other areas

An example of an AWLMC was a healthcare labor mgt council in Minneapolis St. Paul w/ the help of the MN Bureau of Mediation Services, which faced adversarial union mgt relations, managed to built trust to improve labor mgt relations

Labor & mgt in an AWLMCs pressure each other to identify sources of problems & use cooperative methods to reduce or avoid conflict

AWLMCs are managed by an exec director hired by top level corp & union leaders

AWLMCs CONDUCT SOCIAL EVENTS, ESTB LABOR MGT COMMITTEES, NEGOTIATE, & FOSTER ECON DEVELOPMENT

AWLMCs engage in FOUR activities including:

1. the sponsorships of social events to improve labor mgt commo

2. the estb of labor mgt committees in local plants

3. assistance in negotiations

4. the fostering of local econ development

AWLMCs FOCUS ON PROBLEM SOLVING, ESP W/ A FOCUS ON FIRMS IN DECLINE

AWLMCs aim to create an env suitable for problem solving & an apparatus for labor mgt cooperation

AWLMCs need the backing of major firms who have visibility in the community & the backing of competent executive directors who are willing to stay in the post for an extended period of time

AWLMCs usually are implemented during times of econ decline

An example of an AWLMC was a Buffalo, NY in plant committee established to facilitate negotiations in a utility company undergoing a 17 week strike in four cargo handling firms faced w/ declining business

The Buffalo AWLMC managed to improve business volume & efficiency

A Jamestown, NY AWLMC was formed in small & mediums sized plants but could not get the largest corps to participate

The Jamestown AWLMC improved productivity & reduced overhead, but because implementation was weak, it mostly failed

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Joint Labor Mgt Committees

External
Links

A JOINT LABOR MGT COMMITTEE IS A FORMAL ORG OF EMPLOYERS / MGRS & LABOR UNION OFFICIALS DESIGNED TO DEAL W/ COMMON INDUSTRY WIDE PROBLEMS IN AN INTEGRATIVE MANNER

Joint labor mgt committees (JLMC) involve top union & mgt leaders & strive to understand national local relations in decentralized industries

JLMCs often examine occupational safety & health issues, technology, health care, & competitiveness issues

An example of a JLMC is seen in the cooperation of ATT & the Communications Wkrs of Am (CWA) who developed a corp / national union method to help local unions & mgt cope w/ cutbacks & job changes resulting from the breakup of ATT & the birth of the "Baby Bells," et al, & from the result of new tech

Many of the ATT CWA JLMCs involved retraining

JLMCs are often implemented in industries w/ many employers & a dominant union w/ locals in many employers & locations

JLMCs usually deal w/ particular problems rather than addressing an entire scope of bargaining or employment issues

At times the success in dealing w/ a particular problem has resulted in the expansion of the JLMC to other issues

An example of an JLMC is seen in the cooperation to Xerox & the Amalgamated Clothing & Textile Wkrs (ACTWU) which addressed the growing competitive pressure in the early 80s & the effect this had on job security

An example of an JLMC is seen in the employee involvement (EI) program by Ford & the United Auto Wkrs (UAW) which worked to improve quality & value in response to foreign auto mfr pressure

A JLMC in the construction industry formed when joint building trades unions & contractors estbed committees to improve safety, training, absenteeism, reduce jurisdictional disputes btwn unions, declining jobs going to nonunion contractors, etc.

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Scanlon Plans

External
Links

A SCANLON PLAN IS A GAINSHARING PROGRAM IN WHICH EMPLOYEES, AS A GROUP, RECEIVE BONUSES FOR IMPROVEMENTS IN LABOR PRODUCTIVITY

Scanlon plans are designed to improve productivity

Scanlon plans allow wkrs grps to screen & implement suggestions & the suggestion process is under the control of the union or wkrs

The Scanlon plan was born in the late 30s in a struggling steel mill

Joseph Scanlon, a union leader, saw that wage increases w/o increased productivity would close the plant

Scanlon proposed labor & mgt wk together to increase productivity ot which a wage bonus would be linked

The foundation of the Scanlon plan is that all production employees in a unit participate in increasing productivity & there is equity in reward distribution

Scanlon plans recognize that abilities are widely distributed in the org & that change in the org's env is inevitable

SUGGESTIONS FOR PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT ARE RESEARCHED & IMPLEMENTED THROUGH A JLMC

Because change occurs & employees at all levels may have solutions to problems or suggestions to improve productivity, the system includes an open suggestion procedure

Link

The Figure: Scanlon Plan Production Committee details a typical committee structure & their actions in a Scanlon Plan

The Figure: Scanlon Plan Production Committee shows that wkr suggestions receive a thorough review & implementation, which leads to a proportional reward for many of the wkrs involved

Suggestions are evaluated & acted on by joint wkr mgt committees who make recommendations up the line

Suggestions are evaluated by a wk unit's production committee

If suggestions have merit & can be implemented in the unit, the production committee can implement it

If the suggestion is questionable or has wide impact, it is sent to a screening committee comprised of executives & employee representatives

The screening committee is responsible for determining the bonus which is calculated by comparing the usual share of product costs attributed to labor compared to the most recent actual costs

Link

The Table: Simple Labor Formula represents a formula on labor gainsharing which demonstrates that many factors go into determining productivity, not just production rates

BONUSES ARE USED TO REWARD PRODUCTIVITY & ARE CALCULATED BY A SOPHISTICATED METHOD TO ENSURE FAIRNESS

Companywide & individual bonuses are calculated after the screening committee receives operation results

Link

The Table: Bonus Report gives an example of a company bonus report

The Table: Bonus Report show demonstrates how bonuses are calculated to distribute gain shares among all wkrs based the amt of gain share, while saving some for possible distribution losses in the future

The purpose of a Scanlon plan is to increase rewards to labor & mgt for productivity gains, encourage & reward participation, & link pay to performance

The plan focuses on reducing labor costs for a given level of output, a factor more directly win workers' control

Thus, the behavior outcome relationship is higher than it is for profit sharing????

Productivity gains are shared across wk grps which encourages solutions that benefit several depts

In one Scanlon program, over a nine yr period, they paid bonuses all but 13 months because productivity was consistently up, though it did not increase as rapidly as in the industry as a whole

Another Scanlon program often failed to pay bonuses because of the orgl env of falling prices, but suggestions & saving have continued to increase

SCANLON PLANS MUST ESTB PARTICIPATION, FAVORABLE ATTITUDES, SUFFICIENT TIME FOR THE PLAN, REALISTIC EXPECTATIONS, MGT COMMITMENT, ETC.

For a Scanlon plan to succeed:

1. wkrs must perceive that participation is necessary

2. mgt attitudes must be favorable

3. sufficient time must be allowed

4. expectations should be high but realistic

5. a high level mgt exec must lead the implementation

Company size, plant size, or the type of production tech is not related to the success or failure of the Scanlon Plan

Top

Table: Simple Labor Formula

Sales

$ 96,000

Returned Goods

3,000

Net sales

95,000

Inventory +

5,000

Production Value

$100,000

Labor Bill

Wages

$ 16,000

Salaries

8,000

Vacations and holidays

1,800

Insurance

1,700

Pensions

500

Unemployment

500

FICA

1,500

Total labor bill

$ 30,000

Ratio

.30

The Table: Simple Labor Formula shows that represents a formula on labor gainsharing which demonstrates that many factors go into determining productivity, not just production rates

Source: C.F. Frost, J.H. Wakeley, and R.A. Ruh, The Scanlon Plan for Organization Development: Identity, Participation, and Equity (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1974), p. 103.

Top

Table: Bonus Report

a. Scanlon ratio

0.40 / 1.00

b. Value of production

$ 100,000

c. Expected Costs (a x b)

40,000

d. Actual Costs

30,000

e. Bonus pool (c-d)

10,000

f. Share to company - 20% (e x 0.20)

2,000

g. Share to employees - 80% (adjusted pool) (e x 0.80)

8,000

h. Share for future deficits - 25% of adjusted pool (g x 0.25)

2,000

i. Pool for immediate distribution (g - h)

6,000

j. Bonus for each employee* as a percentage of pay for the production period (i/d)

20%

The June pay record might look like this for a typical employee:

Name

Mary Smith

Monthly Pay for June

$ 900

Bonus Percent

20%

Bonus

$ 180

Total Pay

$ 1,000

* This example assumes all employees are participating in the plan at the time this bonus is paid; for example, there has been no turnover and no employees are in their initial 30-, 60-, or 90- day trial.

Table: Bonus Report show demonstrates how bonuses are calculated to distribute gain shares among all wkrs based the amt of gain share, while saving some for possible distribution losses in the future

Source: Modified from C.F. Frost, J.H. Wakeley, and R.A. Ruh, The Scanlon Plan for Organization Development: Identity, Participation, and Equity (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1974), p. 15.

Top

Figure: Scanlon Plan Production Committee

Figure: Scanlon Plan Production Committee shows that wkr suggestions receive a thorough review & implementation, which leads to a proportional reward for many of the wkrs involved

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Rucker Plans

External
Links

A RUCKER PLAN IS A GAINSHARING PROGRAM IN WHICH WKRS, AS A GRP, RECEIVE BONUSES FOR IMPROVEMENTS IN LABOR PRODUCTIVITY & REDUCTIONS IN MATERIAL COSTS

Rucker plans, which were named after the indl engineer who developed them, have some of the participative elements of Scanlon plans, but mgt names an idea coordinator to handle suggestions

Rucker plans are designed to improve productivity

Rucker plans allow wkr grps to screen & implement suggests, & the suggestion system is controlled by mgt, not the wkrs nor the union

Bonuses are calculated by determine the historical value added by direct labor

Any improvement in value added will earn a bonus

Wkrs receive bonuses based on output increases, lower scrap rates, & other material or subcontracting savings

If costs increase in the the face of improved productivity, it will negate bonuses

Rucker plans are good for those unions or firms who are not ready to participate in a full blown Scanlon plan

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Impro Share Plans

External
Links

IMPRO SHARE IS A GAINSHARING PLAN IN WHICH GRPS OF EMPLOYEES RECEIVE BONUSES AS A RESULT OF PRODUCING PRODUCTS IN FEWER HOURS THAT STANDARDS REQUIRE

Impro Share plans shares saving resulting form performance improvement over an engineered standard & allows employers to make "buyouts" or productivity improvements if new technologies are introduced

Impro Share plans tie pay to improve productivity

While consultative mgt is suggested, participation is minimal except a bonus committee is responsible for determining some aspects of the bonus formula

Impro Share plans have complex bonus formulas where the actual hours wked are subtracted from the base value earned hours & if the result is positive, then that savings is shared as a bonus

Impro Share plans allow owners to direct incentives to specific jobs or grps

Impro Share plans make it more difficult to determine wage costs

Wkrs have difficulty calculating what they will earn

In one Impro Share plan, productivity increased 8 % the 1st yr & was up 17 % by the 3rd yr

Often productivity gains can be attributed to reductions in defects & downtime

Larger wkplaces had lower rates of improvement, suggesting that free riding is less of a problem in smaller plants

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Quality Circles

External
Links

- Project: Your Quality Circle

Link

QUALITY CIRCLES (QCs) CONSIST OF A GRP OF WKRS WHO MEET TO APPLY STATISTICAL PROCESSES CONTROL METHODS TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF PRODUCTION

A QC is a grp intervention that give wkrs the opportunity to have greater input into issue at work

QCs are teams of wkrs supported by mgt who meet regularly to examine product & service quality or other issues

QCs take initiative for developing incremental changes in production techniques that help increase productivity through continuous improvement (Demming, 1982)

Typically a QC is comprised of people who have similar jobs in mfr orgs, & discussion revolves around issues of product qual & production efficiency

In both union & nonunion setting, the leaders or facilitators are not usually the supervisors of the wk grp, particularly where the circle cuts across functional areas such as production & quality assurance

QCs HAVE BENEFITS FOR BOTH WKRS & ORGS

QCs have benefits for both wkrs & orgs

QCs allow individual wkrs to enjoy greater participation, which many find stimulating & enjoyable

A QC meeting can be a welcome break from routine work to spend time discussing work problems w/ colleagues

For the org, this should mean better production procedures b/c the people who do the wk are often the most knowledgeable about what the problems are & how they can be solved

Research has shown that wkrs in a QC were more productive & had fewer absences than wkrs who did not

YOUNGER WKRS ARE MORE OPEN TO QCs THAN TRADITIONAL WKRS

In relation to quality circles, younger wkrs often:

- find the QC experience more rewarding

- believe the union should be involved in QCs or other employee involvement programs

- were less likely to be involved in the union

- were more often involved in suggestion programs

- desired more participation in the workplace

- had more info on QCs

CENTRAL FEATURES OF QCs

The central features of QCs include innovation, wk grps, trust, job security, lifetime employment, cooperation, enhanced productivity, concern w/ wkrs, error prevention instead of error detection, etc.

1. Japan is a leader of innovation in a number of aspects of labor relations & production tech, esp in relation to the development of QCs & other employee involvement plans

2. Central to QCs & other EI programs is a reliance on wk grps

3. Systems of teamwork depend on first estbing trust btwn the wkr & the firm

Once loyalty & trust are estbed, wkrs are willing to cooperate w/ teammates & supervisors to promote productivity

In QCs & other teamwork systems in large corps, there are many positive consequences for both productivity & the quality of working life

4. Job security means that wkrs do not fear tech innovation & instead wk to implement innovations as effectively as possible

In Japan, large enterprises are more concerned w/ workers' welfare than is typical in Western state regulated capitalist societies

5. Trust is achieved through the assurance of lifetime employment for many wkrs, something that is virtually unheard of in the US

The Japanese system of job security & team org makes it possible for firms to integrate quality control operations into production areas

6. Because wkrs are committed to the success of the firm, they are more eager to cooperate to improve quality than wkrs in other advanced cap sys

7. Enhanced productivity is gained through a critical mass of cooperation btwn labor & mgt on all substantive issues & esp through error checking.

In W cap firms, wkrs are rewarded only for the wk they directly perform

US & Brit firms do their quality control checks after production is complete

Firms which check quality at the end of the production line have to go through the costly process of fixing mistakes that the Japanese sys encourages wkrs to avoid making in the 1st place (McMilli, 1984, p 163)

8. Firms w/ QC type innovations of labor mgt cooperation estb a process whereby production errors are discovered & corrected during the production process, rather than at the end of the production line

Error checking in process mean less wasted time on completing flawed products, & less waste overall because fewer errors become serious

	GERMANY HAS APPLIED THE PRACTICE OF QCs TO HEALTH EFFICIENCIES ON THE JOB FOR WKRS
	In Germany the QC has been adapted to focus on wkr health rather than job performance
	The German Health Circle is an intervention team where wkrs discuss ways to improve health & well being

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Team Based Approaches

External
Links

WORK TEAMS ARE GRPS ASSIGNED TO PRODUCE A GIVEN PRODUCT, ASSEMBLY, OR SERVICE WHERE ALL WKRS ARE EXPECTED TO PERFORM ALL TASKS IN SOME FORM OF ROTATION

As a result of globalization, deindustrialization, out sourcing, & the restructuring of orgs which began in the 80s, team based approaches became more common

Work teams are constructed of wkrs who are responsible for a particular function or who operate in a given wk area

Wk teams have responsibility for the output from the area, including how the tasks are assigned to wkrs, & control of the wk process itself, given the equip they have

Each member of a wk team can perform any of the tasks for which the team is responsible

MANY WORK TEAMS ARE BASED ON SKILL BASED PAY PLANS THAT INCREASE WKRS' PAY AS THEY GAIN EXPERIENCE, SKILLS, ETC.

The greater the number of skills each wkr, or each team possesses, the greater the variety of tasks they can perform

Many team based programs are based on a skill based pay plan (SBPP)

SBPPs tie wkrs' pay to the number of skills they demonstrate

Broader skills mean the firm can more easily accommodate change

Less equip downtime occurs because one of the skill sets includes equip maintenance

Multiskilling improves job security

Creating wk teams, training them to take responsibility for wk assignments & output allows for the elimination of supervisors, creating a leaner org

Teams at Saturn Corp are led by a mgt & union rep

Saturn teams are involved in dec mking outside of mandatory bargaining issues such as choosing suppliers, product design, & vehicle types to be produced

Link

The Figures: Saturn's Organizing Principles & Saturn's Partnership Structure demonstrate aspects of the team process at Saturn as a labor mgt system that integrates cooperation into the culture & structure of the organization throughout the plant level

At Chrysler's Jefferson North Plant, a "modern operating agreement" was implemented for rebuilding the Detroit plant

In the Chrysler team, leaders are elected, but rotation is infrequent & they encourage equal effort & reduced absenteeism

IN WORK TEAMS SUPERVISORS ARE FACILITATORS & WKRS SUPERVISE THEMSELVES & EACH OTHER

Supervisors act as facilitators rather than directing work

In orgs w/ team concepts, small numbers of distinct jobs exist

Wkr supervisor relations improve
- when there is substantial participation by union leaders
- where wk has not appreciably changed
- where wkrs are experienced
- where mgt does not subcontract

Team approaches were controversial at GM in the 70s, but have been successful in New United Motors Manufacturing, (NUMMI) which is a joint GM Toyota venture in Freemont CA

The NUMMI teams resulted in lower absenteeism & greater productivity, & a faster pace of production

The NUMMI team approach was innovative in that it was accompanied by a no lay off policy, similar to ones common in Japan

At GM Van Nuys Plant only a bare majority of wkrs voted for the team approach because they saw it as pitting wkrs in various domestic plants against each other

The wkrs at GM Van Nuys also saw teams as eroding local & national union power, & reducing the power of seniority

At Van Nuys there was no job guarantee

Teams are the most productive where wkrs have the necessary skill, esp in the statistical process control area, & where mgt has designed autonomy into the team structure

Teams have trouble when encountering problems that occur outside the org such as supplier quality, shipping schedules, & inventory mgt

Product line changes can disrupt teams as employment levels change

Because teams were implemented about the same time wage concessions were granted, they are very controversial in many plants

Dissidents claim concessions haven't saved jobs & that teamwork is harder than the assembly line approach

In firms w/ teams, members claim their locals discourage grievances & create a layer of union bureaucrats who are not in elected office, & thus not accountable

Internal Links Top	Figure: Saturn's Organizing Principles	External Links
	Treat people as a fixed asset
	Provide opportunities for them to maximize their contributions & value to the organization
	Provide extensive training & skill development to all employees
	Saturn will openly share all info, including financial data
	Decision making will be based on consensus through a series of formal joint labor mgt committees, or Decision Rings
	As a stakeholder in the operation of Saturn, the UAW will participate in business decisions as a full partner, including site selection & construction, process & product design, choice of technologies, suppliers selection, make buy decisions, retail dealer selection, pricing, business, planning, training, business systems development, budgeting, quality systems, productivity, improvement, job design, new production development, recruitment, & hiring, maintenance, & engineering
	Self managed teams or Work Units will be the basic building blocks of the org
	There will be a minimum of job classifications
	Saturn will have a jointly developed & administered recruitment & selection process, & Work Units will hire their own team members.
	Seniority will not be the basis for selection, & the primary recruiting pool will consist of active & laid off GM/UMW employees
	The technical & social work organization will be integrated
	There will be fewer full time elected UAW officials & few labor relations personnel responsible for contract administration
	Saturn's reward system will be deigned to encourage everyone's efforts towards the common goals of quality, cost, timing & value to the customer
	Source: S. Rubinstein, M. Bennett, & T. Kochan, "The Saturn Partnership: Co Management, & the Reinvention of the Local Union," in BE Kaufman & MM Kleiner, eds, Employee Representation: Alternatives & Future Directions (Madison, WI, Industrial Relations Research Assoc, 1993), p. 343, table, p. 345, figure.

Internal Links Top	Figure: Saturn's Partnership Structure	External Links
	Work units are organized into teams of 6 to 15 members, electing their own leaders, who remain working members of the unit
	They are self directed & empowered w/ the authority, responsibility & resources necessary to meet their day to day assignments & goals, including producing to budget, quality, housekeeping, safety & health, maintenance, material inventory control, training, job assignments, repairs, scrap control, vacation approvals, absenteeism, supplies, record keeping, personnel selection & hiring, work planning, & work scheduling
	Saturn has no supervisors in the traditional sense.
	Teams interrelated by geography, product, or technology are organized into modules
	Modules have common Advisors
	Modules are integrated into three Business Units: Body Systems (stamping, body fabrication, injection molding, & paint); Power train (lost foam casting, machining & assembly of engines & transmissions); & Vehicle Systems (vehicle interior, chassis, hardware, trim, exterior panels & assembly)
	Joint labor mgt Decision Rings meet weekly
	At the corporate level the Strategic Action Council (SAC) concerns itself w/ companywide long range planning, & relations w/ dealers, suppliers, stockholders, & the community
	Participating in the SAC for the union is the local president & , on occasion, a UAW national representative
	The Manufacturing Action Council (MAC) covers the Spring Hill manufacturing & assembly complex
	On the MAC representing the local is the union president & the four vice presidents who also serve as the UAW bargaining committee
	Each Business Unit has a joint labor mgt Decision Ring at the plant level
	The local president appoints an elected exec board member who is joined by UAW Module Advisors & Crew Coordinators in representing the union
	Decision Rings are also organized at the module level
	Module Advisors & the elected Work Unit Counselors (team leaders) participate in the module Decision Rings
	Source: S. Rubinstein, M. Bennett, & T. Kochan, "The Saturn Partnership: Co Management, & the Reinvention of the Local Union," in BE Kaufman & MM Kleiner, eds, Employee Representation: Alternatives & Future Directions (Madison, WI, Industrial Relations Research Assoc, 1993), p. 343, table, p. 345, figure.

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs)

External
Links

Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs) are profit sharing plans in which wkrs acquire part or all of the shares of stock in a private sector org

An ESOP is often structured as a wkr benefit program

ESOPs allows wkrs to own part or all of a firm's stock, but in general, wkrs are only allowed to own a small, non controlling share of a firm

An ESOP is designed to encourage productive wk & reward length of service

Louis Kelso, an American lawyer & investment banker, created the ESOP concept during the 1950s

In 1974, Congress passed the first of several laws that provide tax incentives for firms that form ESOPs

ESOPs were first permitted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) of 1974

Under ERISA wkrs may receive their firms stock through profit share, productivity gains, or subtractions from wages

Since the early 1980s, several firms such as Chrysler have paid wkrs w/ stock in exchange or concessions

The linking of ESOPs & other employee involvement programs (EI) to concessions, speed ups, lay offs, surveillance, & other wkr unfriendly mgt tactics makes many unions & wkrs reluctant to embrace them despite their positive possibilities

In some firms such as Weirton Steel, the wkrs became majority stockholders

Northwest Airlines wkrs agreed to take stock & have their pres join the board of directors in return for wage concession

Unionized wkrs at United Airlines purchased a majority of the stock from stockholders

ESOPs do not in themselves improve productivity

Employee owned firms in Israel don't function much differently than privately owned firms, but pay, productivity, & job security are somewhat higher

Ownership affect attitudes through greater influence & control & the financial value of ownership

Wkrs may not automatically favor ESOPs because the governance role involved in ESOPs may induce fear & anxiety as well as expanded commitment

Where performance of the firm is linked to retirement security, wkrs may wish to avoid ESOPs because their investments lose substantial diversification

While wkrs view mgt & union officer leadership of general committees as generally positive, wkrs viewed mgt & union leadership in administering ESOPs as weak

In 1991, 11 mm US wkrs, about 10% of the wkforce participated to some degree in ESOPs (Census, 1993e)

Today, the US has about 7,000 ESOPs, w/ about 10 mm participating wkrs

Union initiated ESOPs have gained importance in rescuing failing firms in order to save jobs

Another form of participation occurs in wkr owned cooperatives in which wkrs not only own the firm, but also actively manage its day to day affairs (Russell, 1992)

Wkr buyouts have provided an important counter balance to the tendency of conglomerate firms to shout down or reduce their labor forces

In 1993, the 79,000 unionized wkrs of United Airlines purchased the firm, making it the largest employee owned firm in the US (Moberg, 1994)

Wkr buyouts of existing firms have often been initiated in a effort to preserve jobs (Sirianni, 1987)

Wkr ownership offers no necessary panacea to troubled firms, but even test in this harsh env, it has had a good record of success

In the Boston area about 90 boats make a living off lobsters

The lobster boats were being priced off the docks by condominiums, office complexes, & yacht marinas, but w/ the help of the Boston archdiocese, these fishing families leased their own dock & estbed a coop that is flourishing (McManus, 1987)

While most ESOPs come into existence in order to save jobs by rescuing a distressed firm, they still have a better than average record of success when compared to traditional buyouts

Despite their success, using ESOPs as a exit strat for trad mgt is not a good strategy for labor

ESOPs could be much more effective & powerful if the labor mvmt & wkrs were more proactive & pursued the employee ownership strat in firms before they became distressed

The use of ESOPs & other employee buyout strats runs counter to the strat of both the Labor Mvmt, w/ its Business Approach, & the the GLC, as well as against mgt which has always opposed employee owned or run firms

ESOPs are also often utilized to the detriment of wkrs in that little control of firms accompanies stock purchases unless control is specifically negotiated

Thus many ESOPs bring a limited form of ownership where financial risks & rewards are purchased, but control or mgt of those risks & rewards is not

The optimal ESOP gives wkrs ownership which entails the financial risks & rewards in the form of dividends, stock splits, & capital growth, as well as control of mgt through election of the Board of Directors & top mgt

Many ESOPs are formed by borrowing money from a bank or other commercial lender to buy stock in the company

It repays the loan from money the company contributes to the ESOP out of earnings & profits

The company may deduct a certain amount of the ESOP payments from its annual taxable income

Every year, the ESOP gives participating employees shares of the cash & stock it has acquired in the previous year

The number of shares each wkr gets is based on the % of his or her salary compared to the total amount of salaries of the employees in the ESOP

A trust holds all the cash & stock paid to the ESOP

Generally, wkrs gain possession of their stock when they retire or otherwise end their employment

In some plans, they may hold the stock as long as they wish & get any dividends the company pays on it

In some plans, the wkrs also may sell or transfer ownership of the stock

The worth of the stock is determined by its fair mkt value

In some ESOP's, the company must buy the stock from former wkrs who want to sell it

ESOP's differ from one another according to four main elements which are:

1. the amount of worker ownership of the company

2. whether workers have voting rights for their stock

3. the degree of wkr control of the board of directors

4. the degree of labor mgt cooperation to achieve goals

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Research on Employee Involvement

External
Links

- Project: Which EI Program Would You Like to Work Under?

Link

- Project: EI Program in an Org You Researched / Know Of

Link

- Project: Compare EI Programs

Link

RESEARCH ON EI DEMONSTRATES THAT EACH PROGRAM IS UNIQUE BECAUSE OF THE COMPLEXITY OF WKPLACES, & THAT NEARLY ALL SHOW SIGNIFICANT POSITIVE EFFECTS

Common types of EI include:

- Scanlon Plans
- Rucker Plans
- Impro Share Plans
- Employee Stock Ownership Plans

- Quality Circles
- Quality of Work Life Programs
- Total Quality Mgt Programs
- Labor Mgt Committees

- Joint Labor Mgt Committees
- Areawide Labor Mgt Committees
- Cooperatives
- Democratic Mgt

The more active team based programs are, the greater their effect

Top union leader participation is important as well

Larger plants have more difficulty improving productivity through employee involvement (EI)

Tech changes improve productivity

Higher union security improves productivity

Subcontracting reduces productivity

The larger the proportion of women in the wkforce, the greater the productivity gains

Gains in product quality were greater in unionized firms w/ joint labor mgt programs

Joint programs had more productivity gains than programs runs solely by mgt

Coupling EI w/ capital investments substantially improved quality

Subcontracting, concessions, downsizing, & larger wk unit size reduces the effectiveness of joint programs

Link

The Table: Perceived Effectiveness of Involvement & Gainsharing Programs on Performance Measures demonstrates that many EI & gainsharing programs have a positive effect on many types of orgl performance, while a few have negative effects

Adversarial labor mgt relations are associated w/ higher costs, more scrap, lower productivity, & lower returns to direct labor than areas w/ more cooperation & improved grievance handling

EI programs occur just as frequently in union as nonunion settings, but unionized firms allowed wkrs less authority

EI programs have more influence on performance in unionized firms while profit sharing & gainsharing programs were more effective in nonunion firms

In general, unionized firms had higher value added, lower labor costs, a more experienced wkforce, & a more skilled wkforce

Strong union officer - mgt relations helped form general committees but did not improve the effectiveness of profit sharing or ESOPs

Grievances were reduced where committees or gainsharing plans were implemented

General labor mgt committees kept grievance handling more informal & resolved problems more quickly

Flexibility & reduced absenteeism & turnover were improved in all types of participation programs

Link

The Table: Managers Mean Evaluations of the Impact of Selected Committees & Programs on 6 Labor Outcomes demonstrates that general committees, gain & profit sharing plans, & ESOPs nearly all have a positive effect on union mgt relations, grievances, flexibility, absenteeism, & turnover

Union mgt relations were positively related to forming general committees but not as strongly related to decisions involving profit sharing or ESOPs

Grievances were reduced where committees or gainsharing plans were implemented

General labor mgt committees kept grievance handling more informal & resolved problems more quickly

Flexibility & reduced absenteeism & turnover were related to all types of participation as catalogued in workplace interventions

THE LONG RUN EFFECTS OF COOPERATION ARE THAT EFFECTS ARE REAL, OFTEN OCCUR EARLY ON IN THE PROGRAM, & HAVE THAT ONE INCREASE RATHER THAN A LONG, STEADY IMPROVEMENT

Scanlon & QC programs have the greatest participation

Cooperative plans cannot substitute for good mgt & labor mgt committees can help w/ mgt

In the absence of mgt commitment to participation, Scanlon & other high participation programs are likely to fail

Critical factors for success of EI programs are the training & commitment of supervisors & the construction & understanding of the bonus formulas

Firms & unions begin EI programs to improve labor relations, to increase pay, to increase job security, etc.

Gainsharing increases productivity more than labor mgt committees or QCs

But traditional collective bargaining seems as effective in improving labor mgt relations as any EI program

Firms & unions usually bargain rather than use cooperative alternative unless there are difficulties in accomplishing their goals

Bonus levels are increased as suggestions increase

Employment rates are relatively unaffected by cooperative programs

Labor relations are generally improved by cooperative programs

Productivity improvement usually occur as a one shot increase rather than a long steady improvement

Scanlon plans are the most likely to improve productivity

Top

Table: Perceived Effectiveness of Involvement & Gainsharing Programs on Performance Measures

Program or Characteristic

Improved
Quality

Improved Labor
Productivity

Cost
Reduction

Improved
Production
Process

Bonus
Payout
Level

Employee Involvement

95 %

Frequent bonus

90 %

95 %

Employee bonus share

99 %

not measured

Employee bonus share squared

99 %

not measured

Bonus pay outs

95 %

99 %

not measured

Bonus pay outs squared

99 %

95 %

not measured

Small bonus group

90 %

95 %

Scanlon plan

91 %

99 %

Modified Scanlon plan

95 %

Rucker plan

90 %

Customized plan

95 %

Consultant involvement

90 %

Employee vote

99 %

90 %

5 %

Labor intensity

90 %

95 %

Mkt growth

95 %

Financial situation

95 %

Average education

90 %

Average seniority

95 %

99 %

90 %

Union

99 %

95 %

99 %

Program age

90 %

95 %

90 %

99 %

Union Support

95 %

90 %

99 %

Table: Perceived Effectiveness of Involvement & Gainsharing Programs on Performance Measures demonstrates that many EI & gainsharing programs have a positive effect on many types of orgl performance, while a few have negative effects
The Black % figures denote the chance that the program will have a positive effect
The Red % figures denote the chance that the program will have a positive effect

Source: Adapted from Fossum from Kim: Factors Influencing Orgl Perf in Gainsharing Progs. Indl Relations, 35 (1996), pp. 232 - 33

Top

Table: Managers Mean Evaluations of the Impact of Selected Committees & Programs on 6 Labor Outcomes

All scores based on a 5 pt scale where 1: small negative effect, 2: small negative effect, 3: no effect, 4: small positive effect, 5: large positive effect

Union Mgt
Relations

Grievance
Rate

Ability to
Resolve
Grievances

Flexibility
in Utilizing
Labor

Absenteeism

Turnover

General Plant Committees

4.23

4.03

4.24

3.54

3.41

3.31

Specialized Plant Committees

3.77

3.71

3.66

3.25

3.32

3.25

Local Area Cooperation Committees

3.82

3.18

3.36

3.00

Employee Participation Programs

3.47

3.53

3.55

3.47

3.30

3.27

Gain Sharing Plans

3.57

3.76

3.57

3.47

Profit Sharing Plans

3.36

3.17

3.28

3.20

3.25

3.46

ESOPs

3.38

3.12

3.23

Table : Managers Mean Evaluations of the Impact of Selected Committees & Programs on 6 Labor Outcomes demonstrates that general committees, gain & profit sharing plans, & ESOPs nearly all have a positive effect on union mgt relations, grievances, flexibility, absenteeism, & turnover

Source: PB Voos, 'The Influence of Cooperative Programs on Union Mgt Relations, Flexibility, & Other Labor Relations Outcomes," Journal of Labor Research. 10 (1989), p. 109. In Fossum, 2002.

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Employee Involvement Programs: Opportunities & Threats

External
Links

EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT (EI) COMMITTEES ARE KNOWN AS QCs, QWLs, CIRCLES, ECs, OR COMMITTEES

Employer / employee committees, often called quality circles, are formed so that workers can make recommendations to mgt. about hiring, personnel assignments, hours, terms & conditions of work, & other similar issues

The issues that are dealt w/ in EI are frequently the same issues that are the subject of collective bargaining in unionized workplaces

The Taft Hartley Act forbids the dominance of a Labor or union orgs by an employer, thus outlawing "business unions"

The Electromation court judgment narrows an employer's ability to broadly ask employees to consider employment issues

The involvement of workers in non mandatory bargaining issues is unlikely to lead to charges of employer domination, even though this is one of the gray areas where some workers may feel pressure, but are unable to prove it

Unions should be aware that QCs & other EI programs can weaken union influence in the org, & therefore, control of the org

Wkrs will identify increasingly w/ the firm if the union doesn't support opportunities for interest employees to be involved

Communication activities in EI programs are often similar to collecting data w/ a survey & using this data as a representation of wkr attitudes

Some EI programs are vested w/ supervisory tasks

General Foods established work groups & the groups made their own work assignments, created & operated training programs, & made recommendations on staffing

The employee involvement program groups in the Gen Foods org was found, in a court case, not to be an employer dominated labor org

EI IS OFTEN AIMED AT IMPROVING PRODUCTIVITY, WORK LIFE, PAY, ETC.

Productivity studies find that giving workers more control of work increases productivity

Today, there are greater competitive pressures because of

- deindustrialization (conversion of old, heavy industry to new light industry & information age-- & to services)

- globalization, global competition, & the movement of multinational firms to foreign lands

Because of the competitive pressures of deindustrialization & globalization, many firms are attempting to design more efficient work relationships & quality circles are one design for increasing efficiency

EI IMPROVES WKPLACE CLIMATE, COMMITMENT, BRINGS CHANGE, & BENEFITS MGT & LABOR

EI programs include FOUR components, including:

1. improving the wkplace climate

2. generating commitment in both mgt & wkrs

3. implementing change

4. creating benefit for both mgt & wkrs through increased productivity, higher product quality, etc.

In planned programs, climate & commitment lead to change

In evolved programs, the climate leads to change which leads in turn to commitment

In induced programs, change leads to appropriate climate & commitment

Union willingness to become involved in QWL programs is related to the progressiveness of the firm & increase foreign competition

Increased involvement in traditional wkplace decisions is related to deregulation, changing demographics, & support by a parent national union

Cooperation in strat dec mking is often increases as a result of foreign competition & decreases as a result of domestic competition because unions often represent wkrs in competitive domestic industries & therefore are less willing to pit one firm against another

In an EI program w/ GM & the UAW, grievances, discipline, absenteeism, number of local contract demands, & negotiating time were reduced

EI programs result in higher product quality & reduced grievance rates

Product quality & productivity decreased when labor mgt conflict increased

EI programs are associated w/ reduced absenteeism, accidents, grievances, & quits

EI programs lead to greater loyalty to the union, rather than undermining commitment

The effectiveness of the grievance procedures is a stronger predictor of attitudes to the union than EI participation

EI is associated w/ improved job satisfaction & enhanced commo skills

EI programs increase "orgl citizenship" both through participation & changing job characteristics that require more task sharing

Union antagonism toward EI does not influence employee attitudes, but it does reduce participation

THE LEGALITY OF COOPERATION PLANS IS SOMETIMES PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE THE LAW STATES WKRS MAY NOT TAKE ON MGT FUNCTIONS UNLESS THEY ARE CLASSIFIED & PAID AS MGRS

Among unionized firms, cooperation plans meet the requirements of the labor acts because they are jointly agreed to by unions & mgt

Firms & nonunion firms estb joint mgt employee committees to deal w/ production & employment issue

Joint mgt employee committees may violate labor law unless the process & the subject of their work is closely regulated

The Taft Hartley Act (THA) forbids firms from creating & operating employer dominated labor orgs

Discussion of employment issue or proposals by committees for taking action on areas related to wages, hours, terms, & conditions of wk which intrude into the mandatory bargaining issues specified in the act

The NLRB was faced w/ ruling on the legality of an employer sponsored committee in the Electromation case

In the Electromation case the NLRB asked when does a mgt wkr committee lose its protection as a communication device & become a labor org, i.e. a business union?

In the Electromation case the NLRB asked what employer conduct is interference or domination of mgt wkr committees?

In the Electromation case the firm had set up five volunteer committees to look at absenteeism, pay bonuses, etc.

In the Electromation case the firm initiated the committees, drafted their goals, & had mgt reps to facilitate

The NLRB rules that the Electromation wkr mgt committee was a employer dominated labor organization

While it is difficult to determine what is a legal wkr mgt committee in a nonunion setting, such committees are still going ahead in many firms

EI IS AT THE CENTER OF THE SUCCESS OF HIGH PERFORMANCE WORK ORGS (HPWOs)

High performance wk orgs are firms that have adopted many EI & other wk practice innovations that increase wkr participation in or control of the the wkplace

Research indicates that firms need to implement a coherent set of practices in order to enhance orgl performance

A study of mini mills found that plants that implemented a combination of problem solving teams, flexible job assignments, training for multiple jobs, guaranteed employment security, & flexible pay plans were more productive & profitable than firms that implemented smaller combinations of these

Operating up time & added value were proportionally greater as more EI programs were added

Wkrs are proportionally more satisfied w/ work as more EI programs are added

WORKPLACE RESTRUCTURING IS SOMETIMES THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EI & OFTEN A GUISE FOR LAYOFFS & PAY CUTS

Because of globalization in the form of increased foreign competition, a great deal of wkplace restructuring has taken place over the past 20 yrs

This has been the orgl env in which EI programs have been born in US Labor mgt relations

Restructuring increases the intensity of wk, reduces the number of wkrs in mfr jobs, reduces mid mgt, & has outsourced many jobs

Wkplace restructuring & firm performance improve when the local union has horz & vert commo network ties & internal political vitality

Firms that implemented substantial EI programs during the early 90s had higher layoffs & no net increase in pay

Restructuring, overall, has been negative for wkrs, & had mixed results for the firms themselves as seen in smaller sales gains & smaller export gains

EI programs have neither increased job security nor pay except where the org's revenues were growing

Unions have also not made gains where EI programs were implemented

THE DIFFUSION & INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF CHANGE IS SLOW IN THE US COMPARED TO EUROPE & JAPAN

An imp issue for labor & mgt is how successful changes get diffused both w/in an org, as well as among orgs & become commonplace, the norm, i.e. institutionalized

EI needs a stable env to grow, & yet it is apparent that EI in the US has grown in the era of globalization, deindustrialization, downsizing, sourcing, restructuring, etc.

In any EI program, the union needs to avoid or isolate collective bargaining shocks & mgt needs to avoid strategic shocks

Layoffs create problems for teams because wkrs use competitive seniority rights to bump in & out

Changes are aided by implementing them in new facilities w/ new wkrs & then diffusion of successful changes can them move to estbed setting

Unions can assist change best when they have a role in strat dec mking such as plant locations

They may provided needed concessions & wk rule changes to make existing facilities economically viable

Training in new tech, increased job security, ensuring the viability of the firm, & satisfying wk processes are imp issues to wkrs & unions which EI programs can address

Labor should recognize that gainsharing & innovative participation are a logical pieces of successful labor mgt relations in today's wkplace

The ability to institutionalize change depends on high levels of trust & commitment by union leaders, union members, wkrs, supervisors, plant mgrs, & corp execs

Each of these orgl actors has different interests, a different status quo to protect, a different perception of EI programs, & a different role to play in advancing EI & a stronger wkplace

Estbing trust is not easy in the era of globalization, but it can be done, & it will improve the wkplace for all actors

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on the Labor Movement & Workplace Democracy

External
Links

- Project: Democracy, the Labor Mvmt, the Workplace

Link

BECAUSE OF THE INCREASING SOPHISTICATION OF WORK THERE IS THE NEED FOR A BROADER ROLE FOR UNIONS TO DEVELOP WORKPLACE DEMOCRACY

Historically, the Labor Movement is the most developed in the manufacturing sector, & therefore Labor has advanced workplace democracy the most in the manufacturing sector

Unions have focused on increasing the participation of workers in managing work & setting orgl goals (Appelbaum et all, 2000)

The UAW negotiates w/ the auto makers for training programs jointly managed by the union & the firm

Workers are trained to learn the skills needed to participate in devising strategies for the efficient use of new technology

In the GM Toyota joint venture in Fremont, CA, the participation program includes daily meetings of senior union representatives & plant managers about the operation of the plant, as well as a role for teams of workers & supervisors who meet to increase efficiency at every level of the org

In Ford plants, UAW workers have originated over 1,150 proposals for change in design & production methods

The Ford participation program is coupled w/ a profit sharing plan that results in a bonus of up to $1,200 annually for each worker (Schlossbergy & Fetter, 1986)

As part of the package of workplace democracy, the UAW Ford contract stipulates that Ford cannot lay off workers if the reduction in force results from transferring employment to overseas subsidiaries or suppliers

Union goals in the manufacturing sector include improving the quality of work life, as well as product quality

Most social scientists agree that a quality of work life results in increases in long term productivity

In a joint UAW Harman Industries worker participation experiment in Bolivar, TN, 30 shop floor committees of workers made changes at the plant, which makes rear-view mirror assemblies

In the UAW Harman Industries worker participation experiment, suggestions included
- a credit union
- a community child care center
- painting the walls to redesigning the assembly line to starting
- a school open to workers, their families, & community members
- a "compensatory leave time" arrangement for accumulating overtime credits (in place of overtime pay)

The success of UAW Harman Industries worker participation experiment rested on input from workers, rather than those of mgrs or consultants about what would improve efficiency & the working environment (Zwerdling, 1980)

UNION INVOLVEMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF WKR PARTICIPATION IS BENEFICIAL BECAUSE EVEN WKR PARTICIPATION PROGRAMS CAN DEGRADE WKRS' INTERESTS IF NOT DESIGNED TO ENHANCE WKRS' INTERESTS

While Labor has a strong interest in worker participation programs, they have reservations stemming from a concern w/ job security

If worker participation programs are to succeed, wkrs must be assured that wkr initiated improvements which increase productivity are NOT used to reduce the wkforce or create speed ups

While wkrs support piece rate pay in theory, experience has taught them that mgt will either reduce the wkforce or decrease the piece rate of pay

Large corps are engaged in antiunion campaigns at the top levels of strategic planning (Appelbaum & Batt, 1994)

Antiunion campaigns call for moving plants to regions of the country less hospitable to unions or even building new facilities overseas to avoid unions

An antiunion strategy is a poor env in which to originate & foster wkplace democracy, yet it is frequently the env in which Labor finds it must operate

Labor finds that local mgt is a willing partner in participation programs that fulfill productivity objectives but that top mgt. is simultaneously undercutting American jobs & wages by moving facilities to lower wage areas & even overseas (Parker & Slaughter, 1994)

Wkplace participation programs are often a short run strategy to get more work out of wkrs prior to layoffs

Quality Circles & other workplace participation programs are used to encourage wkrs to spy on each other & report union organizers & sympathizers to mgt (Grenier, 1988)

Quality Circles can be a carrot w/ a stick since increased productivity & increased quality are essential for the long term survival of high paying jobs

Because wkplace democracy is used against wkrs, labor seeks to increase the rights of wkrs over investment decisions

Investment rights can be manifested through various forms of wkr ownership

In 1988, 400 union wkr bought out their failing shipbuilding company in Seattle & the company emerged from bankruptcy w/ wkrs in control of the common stock & the board of directors

In the wkr owned ship building firm in Seattle, the Union President became the CEO (Egan, 1988)

ALTERNATIVE GOVERNANCE FORMS INVOLVE PARTICIPATION IN MGT OR ORGL ADMIN

Union mgt cooperation changes both the production process & wkplace governance

EI in dec mking shifts the focus of collective bargaining from structural rules to processes

Traditional collective bargaining offers less participation than other forms of governance

Link

The Table on Joint Governance & Other Governance Forms shows that the relationship btwn indl relations practices & various EI programs influencing governance in the wkplace is complex & multidimensional

UNION POLITICAL PROCESSES AID IN THE DIFFUSION OF CHANGE OF MANY ASPECTS OF THE WKPLACE, INCLUDING EI PROGRAMS

An adversarial indl relations climate is antithetical to collaboration in the wkplace

Major political changes are necessary to implement cooperation at nat & local union levels

A stable plant env & progressive mgt are necessary to ensure the safety net of union leaders need to the advocate change to EI programs

Unions adopt one of FIVE different approaches to innovative wkplace changes including:

a. "just say no"

b. let mgt lead & see what happens

c. become involved to protect the union politically

d. cooperate & collaborate

e. use EI to assert union interests

Local union defensiveness is not irrational because mgrs interpret cooperation as a willingness to make concessions & increase productivity, even as mgt efforts to undermine the union continue

When unions see themselves in an unequal power relationship w/ mgt, cooperation is hared to introduce

At Western Airlines, participation became effective only when unions gained power to constrain mgt rights & jointly formed a vision for survival

Union leaders can take advantage of commo about econ problems to further wkr interests

Cooperative programs offer an opportunity to negotiate permanence for EI in contracts

EI development is enhanced by intl union ed & the willingness of locals to be involved

Participation programs can benefit unions since active participants are more satisfied w/ their unions & involved in union activities

Union support is not undermined by member participation in EI programs per se, but may be if the union allows such programs to be developed only through mgt initiatives

Proactive behavior of leaders toward EI increases member commitment to the union, but members who are negative toward the firm & the union before EI programs are not changed regardless of the success of the programs

MGT STRATEGY IN RELATION TO EI PROGRAMS IS OFTEN TO SEEK PRODUCTIVITY, PROFIT, ETC. & EVEN TO USE IT TO ELIMINATE OR DEGRADE UNION INFLUENCE

Labor mgt cooperation programs are often implemented at the plant level although there are some corporate wide strats such as the Ford UAW EI program

Mgt may encounter situations in which wkrs, across plants, are represented by several different intl unions, each w/ its own approach toward union mgt cooperation

Research on mgt strats toward collective bargaining, cooperation, union avoidance, & firms performance suggest that firms improve profitability through extensive collaboration btwn mgt & labor

Performance is also improved by closing existing unionized facilities & opening or acquiring new nonunion plants

Deunionizing efforts in any existing plant has a negative effect on performance & destroys the trust necessary to foster joint labor mgt EI strats

Steel mills, like many firms, follow either a cost reduction or product differentiation strat

Cost reduction strats are associated w/ labor mgt conflict & the use of formal grievance procedures

Product differentiation requires flexible manufacturing & is associated w/ wkr commitment, collective bargaining, & the informal solution of problems

Wages in steel mills following a production differentiation strat are higher & wkrs add more value to the products

Top

Table: Joint Governance & Other Governance Forms

External
Links

Dimensions

Hi Involvement
Nonunion System

Traditional
Collective
Bargaining

Trad
Labor Mgt
Committees

Labor Reps
On the Board

German Style
Work Councils

Mutually Agreed
Joint Governance

Conflict vs. Coop

Heavy emphasis on coop; only interpersonal avenues for conflict resolution

Formal conflict resolution procedures w/ limited emphasis on cooperation

Cooperative forum w/ no decision making role & no formal conflict resolution procedure

More of a cooperative forum; some room for expressing conflict

Potential for cooperation; conflicts can be taken to labor courts

Potential for cooperation & room for surfacing & resolving conflicts

Procedural v. Substantive Work Rules

Few formal work rules; heavy emphasis on informal resolution

Heavy reliance on substantive rules enforced by the grievance procedure

Procedural rule making

Procedural decision making

Heavy emphasis on procedural decision making

Direct v. Indirect Participation

Heavy emphasis on direct participation

Mostly indirect; little emphasis on direct participation

Indirect

Indirect; informal direct participation

Indirect; creates pressure to introduce direct participation

Admin v. Political Skills

Admin skills taught to employees at all levels

Mgt concentrates on admin skills; union on political skills

Some overlap, but lack of decision making role prevents further diffusion

Labor reps develop admin skills bu only marginal diffusion of political skills among mgt

Labor develops admin skills; plant mgt develops political skills

Labor develops admin skills; mgt dev political skills

Joint & Equal Decision Making Power

Yes, but in bargainable issues & at bargaining time only

May contain equal number of labor & mgt reps, but equality is less significant because the role is mostly advisory

No, w/ the exception of the German law of 1951 covering the iron, steel, & coal industries

Yes

The Table on Joint Governance & Other Governance Forms shows that the relationship btwn industrial relations practices & various EI programs influencing governance in the wkplace is complex & multidimensional

The End

Top