Economic, political, and social changes have forced unions to reexamine their tactics and adopt new strategies for survival, but they have been unable as yet to reverse the tides that have eroded their membership levels from 35 percent of the eligible U.S. workforce in 1954 to about 15 percent last year and just 10 percent in the private sector. While most analysts acknowledge that employers play a key role in defeating organizing campaigns, they stress the importance of union innovations to the future of the American labor movement.

To gauge the outlook for unions, BNA interviewed two prominent labor observers with very different perspectives: Arthur B. Shostak, a professor of sociology at Drexel University in Philadelphia who authored Robert Unionism: Innovations in the Labor Movement, and Alfred DeMaria, a partner in the New York-based management consulting firm of Clifton, Budd & DeMaria who wrote Avoiding Unions in the 1990s and How Management Wins NLRB Campaigns.

Factors That Influence Organizing

DeMaria said he expects the unionized share of the workforce to continue shrinking, primarily because of changes in the structure of employment and continued economic prosperity, which diminish the appeal of unions. Most new jobs are being created in nonunion industries where companies provide nontraditional compensation packages and workers do not share the same values as unions. These new jobs, particularly in the high-tech industry, are less conducive to union organizing, because employees identify more with management than with unions.

Despite the AFL-CIO's new focus on organizing, DeMaria said he does not expect to see an upsurge in the number of union election petitions filed with the National Labor Relations Board, but would not be surprised if union win rates improved from recent levels of 44 percent to 49 percent. He said unions are becoming "more efficient" in organizing by selecting targets where they think they can win instead of using a scattershot approach. He said the health care industry should continue to be the focus of intense organizing because of unions' past successes in that sector, in addition to the fact that so many health care workers remain unorganized.

Shostak, on the other hand, said he sees a lot of potential for expansion, but it hinges on unions' ability to become more innovative and technologically sophisticated. Unions must convert quickly to being "CyberUnions," adept in the use of cutting edge technologies, to have any hope of being taken seriously in the 21st century. Labor's "starkest enemy" is not outside, but inside, in the form of "clinging to the familiar and fear of bold risk-taking," he said. Unions need to devote more "smarts" into organizing.

According to Shostak, the greatest potential for organizing success, at least initially, lies in places where "the pain of employees is greatest," as in sweatshops, among farm workers, and in health care settings where "matters of human dignity keenly need addressing." In the long-run, however, he said unions should pick up members where "human capital becomes the critical difference between company success or failure," as in small telecommunications firms, most high-skilled electronic firms, and a wide range of service operations.

'On the Road to Irrelevance'

Both Shostak and DeMaria credit AFL-CIO President John Sweeney with revitalizing union organizing efforts, but they disagree about the federation's potential for success.

Shostak said he sees a much more dynamic organization simultaneously advancing on many fronts. He pointed to the hiring of a more diverse and motivated staff, high-energy street rallies, new alliances and community activists, better media relations, and more "flexing of the federation's political muscle." He predicted that there will be a stronger, more high-tech AFL-CIO in the future which should enable greater gains than ever.

In contrast, DeMaria said he sees the AFL-CIO as "an institution on the road to irrelevance." He likened Sweeney to a "new CEO coming into a failing company," doomed to fail because of forces beyond his control. Despite all the AFL-CIO's rhetoric, there has been no change in the bottom line when it comes to organizing, with the number of elections and wins still down.

Sweeney is "bucking the tide of the future," which is likely to witness the growth of companies that treat employees as resources, give them a greater role in decision-making, and incorporate their values into company policies, DeMaria said. Unions may call that "union-busting," but the truth is, such companies are simply making unions unnecessary.

The Employers Association

RESPONDING TO UNIONIZATION EFFORTS

It's on record that recruiting new members is the AFL-CIO's top priority. Given this fact, employers and HR professionals are advised to revisit their corporate policies for maintaining union-free status.

Union organizers are placing greater reliance upon the "card-check strategy." This strategy focuses on getting at least 51% of the employees at a company to sign authorization cards to demonstrate that they back a union. The organizer then demands that the company recognize the union.

The most aggressive unions say they hope to persuade most employers to recognize unions based on card-checks. From their perspective, this would avoid months of labor-management hostility in hard-fought representation elections.

Because they are viewed as unfair, most employers refuse to accept card-checks. Too often, employees sign cards after hearing only the union's pitch and never about the negative side of unionization. Therefore, elections are preferable because workers are allowed to hear both sides of the story. Employers are strongly cautioned not to look at authorization cards as it can be interpreted as support and recognition of the union.

There are a number of tried techniques to lawfully combat organizational efforts. Frequently, the HR professional and management develop a plan which is executed on a day-by-day basis by front-line supervision to maintain a union-free environment. Important is the communication of the company philosophy and preference to remain non-union. This philosophy frequently incorporates factual reason which employers want to convey to their employees on why it is in the best interest of the employee to keep the company non-union. For example:

Contractual Obligations. Union members will be legally bound by the local union's by laws and the international union's constitutions. Violations of these laws can result in fines and disciplinary actions by union trial boards.

Financial Cost. Union membership can result in financial expenditures for dues, assessments, initiation fees and penalties.

Restriction on Freedom. Under a union contract, employees do not deal directlywith management, but instead they go through the shop steward. Consequently, employees can lose freedom to manage their own affairs and may need to endure time-consuming steps.

Failure to Represent. In thousands of cases, unions have violated their legal duty to represent employees in connection with grievances and other matters affecting terms and conditions of employment.

Unsuccessful Negotiations. Negotiations often result in wage and benefits increases that are no larger than if there had been no union. In today's economy, there are cases in which union negotiations have resulted in concessions, wage freezes or wage reductions. Additionally, there is no guarantee that employees will keep existing company provided rights, benefits or privileges during negotiations.

Strikes. With a union, strikes are possible. This means lost wages, benefits and perhaps even the loss of a job.

Possibility of Violence and Hostility Between Employees. A strike can produce hard feelings and unions may engage in acts of violence against company property and physical confrontations. When a union is voted into a company, divisions between employees who supported the union and those who did not may arise and endure.

Union Trade-Offs. During contract negotiations, most unions will trade off existing employee benefits for provisions such as a union shop or dues check-off clause which are more beneficial to the union corporation rather than to the employees. At times, unions may act in their own self-interest.

There are different methods to communicate these messages. However, due to the complexity of federal labor laws, labor counsel should be consulted. While management should emphasize legal and proactive efforts, they also need to know and avoid certain types of prohibited conduct and statements.

HRM Update