> John Paul Fullerton wrote:
> After a new union leader was elected, he wouldn't allow dialog any
> more on the shop floor. One complaint within the union was that their
> people weren't holding the "union line" and individuals couldn't be
> counted on to "say the same thing".
Before I comment here, I should mention that these opinions are
mine alone and not the official opinion of either General Motors or the
United Auto Workers. Although I serve in an Internationally appointed
capacity for the UAW, I have never held a bargaining position. My role
for UAW and GM is in the "joint interface" or "joint process" arena where
I work as a business consultant for both entities. Some of my opinions
are based on experiences as a freelance consultant as well.
Comments:
Sadly, this is often the case. Sometimes, the new union leader
gets elected on a platform of "eliminating the get-along programs."
However, in more than one instance, I've seen that same union leader who
created the stir, finally come along and seek some face-saving way to
continue collaborating on issues of mutual interest. The difference is in
understanding. Most rational beings are susceptible to reason and logic
and given sufficient information, will make decisions that are useful for
furthering their purposes.
So, one would think that it should be a simple matter to provide
the competitive situation to a union leader, relate it to global market
pressures, and watch the transformation. However, the dearth of trust
between union and management left over from years of adversarial-only
win/lose bargaining is a powerful obstacle to surmount. There are at
least three levels of consciousness in the business culture: the top
level, the middle level, and the bottom level. (Ain't that fancy?) These
layers or levels (in broad generalization) have belief systems that are
typically distinct from each other. (Peg Neuhauser, "Tribal Warfare in
Organizations.") In order for the top level to communicate it's concern
for the business to the union, it must communicate across tribal levels.
The worst attempts I've seen at this typically include strong
emphasis on the bottom line, profitability, return on investment,
shareholder concerns, budget constraints, and so forth.
Now, it's not that the union can't understand these issues
intellectually. It's just that this must be translated into information
that impacts something they are concerned with in their belief system.
Jobs. Security. Keeping up with inflation. Dignity. Family welfare.
Making a meaningful contribution. These are issues that have weight for
many. Any progress in understanding and accepting change will certainly
be based on how that change (or lack thereof) would affect circumstances
related to these values.
> It seems like some of the advances in hours and pay that workers have
> received has been due to the "team strategies" that unions have used.
That's exactly correct.
> One question is whether management in "learning mode" would ever
> learn to pay their workers in the same monies that they are paid.
It's doubtful. There are substantial "union-busting" activities
going on now, which hinder significantly, those of us who are encouraging
collaboration. (On both sides.)
Remuneration will likely always be an issue of divergent concern.
However, there are so many other issues of *mutual concern*, that union
and management will spend years learning about them.
> Even taking into account the real benefits to a company of
> management, do we ever think that the manager's work is worth so many
> times the laborer's work?
In order to hire and maintain effective managers, a company must
pay the market price. However, there are some who would argue that the
market price of some managers is inflated given the trend toward
recognizing the contributions of all members of an organization.
My guess is the bulk of managers in unionized enviroments don't
make multiples of the laborer's wage. It's possible that in non-union
businesses this is often so. Doesn't this go back to the old argument
about whether compensation should be based on effort or education?
-- @__Roy_J._Winkler,_AAS,_BSM... @__Consultant:_OD/HRD/Group_Dynamics @__UAW/GM____Anderson,_Indiana___USA @__E-Mail: rwinkler@iquest.net