Labor Relations Development Structure Process 12th Edition Fossum Solutions Manual Download

Chapter 06 - Union Organizing Campaigns
Solution Manual for Labor Relations Development

Structure Process 12th Edition Fossum 0077862473
9780077862473
Full download link at:
Solution manual: https://testbankpack.com/p/solution-manual-for-labor-
relations-development-structure-process-12th-edition-fossum-
0077862473-9780077862473/
Test bank: https://testbankpack.com/p/test-bank-for-labor-relations-
development-structure-process-12th-edition-fossum-0077862473-
9780077862473/
CHAPTER 6
UNION ORGANIZING CAMPAIGNS
MAJOR POINTS
1. Organizing is a complex activity involving unions, employers, and the

National Labor Relations Board, whose job it is to administer the National
Labor Relations (Wagner) Act. The union seeks to organize a majority of the
employees; the employer seeks to avoid unionization, inasmuch as it
establishes boundaries and impediments to the employer’s full range of
discretion in running its operations; and the board seeks to ensure that a free
choice in such matters is preserved for the employees.
2. Either employees or union organizers can initiate the organizing effort.

Collecting a sufficient number of authorization card signatures, determining
the scope of the proposed bargaining unit, campaigning for employee votes,
and gaining/defeating certification are all crucial aspects of the process.
Charges of unfair labor practices may arise during these various stages, and
their resolution may have an important bearing on the outcome of the
campaign.
3. Even though employees do not give particularly high levels of attention to

the issues raised by either side during the NLRB election campaign, a variety
of forms of communications from both the union and employer typically
characterize such campaigns. The union will try to make contact with every
potential voter, and supervisors will typically be watchful about
developments that may predict the eventual outcome or the leanings of
employee-voters.
6-1
Copyright © 2014 McGraw-Hill Global Education Holdings, LLC. Permission required for
reproduction or display.
4. Research suggests that smaller bargaining units, where employees are more
homogeneous, closer geographically, or better acquainted with each other,
may be easier to organize. On the other hand, though Fossum does not say
so, larger bargaining units may be more resistant to decertification, once the
bargaining unit is first organized.
5. Management activity prior to the actual filing of the petition may be more
efficacious. Unfair labor practices do appear to influence employee-voting
decisions. And well-designed and executed unions campaigns are more
influential on the ultimate outcome as well.
6-2
6. Unions prevail in contested elections about 50% of the time. Many such
elections are conducted in bargaining units with fewer than 30 employees..
This pattern correlates highly with changes in occupational and industrial
distribution of employment.
KEY TERMS
Exclusive representation
Union-free
Authorization card
Recognitional picketing
Representation election
Certification election
Decertification election
Raid election
Appropriate bargaining unit
Consent election
Board-directed (petition) election
Regional director
Excelsior list
Multiemployer bargaining
Community of interests
Craft severance
Accretion
Community action
Corporate campaign
Election bar
Totality of conduct
Bargaining order
CHAPTER OUTLINE
ORGANIZING AND UNION EFFECTIVENESS
 Organizing provides an opportunity for employee “voice” and

effectively creates a labor supply monopoly.
o This monopoly power generally confers a wage premium for
union employees.
o Strong interest in unionization exists where nonunion
competition reduces monopoly power.
o Fossum notes that with increasing globalization of
manufacturing, eliminating nonunion competition in the product
market has become virtually impossible in many industries.
6-3
 Membership also generates dues flow to the union.

 Union Effectiveness
o More members create economies of scale.
o The level and scope of member services are related to some
extent to a union’s size.
o Organizing new units, accreting expanded facilities, and
merging with or absorbing other unions are all mechanisms
used to expand membership and enhance union effectiveness.
HOW ORGANIZING BEGINS
 National Unions target specific employers or geographic areas and

send professional organizers to encourage and assist local employees in
unionizing.
 National campaigns often occur if a unionized firm opens a new
nonunion plant.
 National organizing may also target nonunion firms in predominantly
unionized industries. Most organizing begins at the local level when some
employees decide they would be better off if they could bargain
collectively with the employer.
Note: Fig: 6.1 [Sequence of Organizing Events]
The Framework for Organizing
Authorization Card Campaign
 An authorization card campaign tries to enroll employees in the union

in the unit the union seeks to represent. Employees are contacted
individually by organizers so as to sign cards authorizing the union to act
as their agent in negotiating wages, hours, and terms and conditions of
employment.
Note: Fig: 6.2 [Authorization Card]
Recognition Requests
 If a majority of employees the union is trying to organize signs

authorization cards, the union can request recognition as the employees’
bargaining agent. A union seldom requests recognition unless a substantial
majority has signed because employers often question whether some
workers are eligible to be represented or to vote in an election.
6-4
 If a majority has signed and the employer is satisfied with the

appropriateness of the proposed bargaining unit, the employer can grant
recognition voluntarily.
 A union may picket an unorganized employer for up to 30 days, to
recognize its majority status. The employer can petition with the NLRB for
an election in the employee unit the union seeks to represent. If the union
loses, further regional picketing would be an unfair labor practice.
Representation Elections
 Representation elections are held to determine whether a majority of

employees desires union representation and, if so, by which union.
Certification elections are elections in units where employees are not
currently represented. Decertification elections, on the other hand, are
held if employees are currently represented, but at least 30 percent of them
indicate they do not want continued representation.
 Raid elections occur when at least 30 percent of employees indicate they
would prefer a different union to represent them.
 Decertification elections may not be held while a contract is in effect.
Note: Fig 6.3 [Avenues to Election Petitions]
Election Petitions
 A union, an individual, or (under some cases) an employer may file a

request for a board-supervised election with the NLRB. Within 48 hours of
filing, the proof of interest must be shown, that is, there must be evidence
that at least 30% of the proposed bargaining unit supports the union as its
bargaining agent.
 While the same 30% standard for a showing of interest in rescinding a
bargaining agent’s majority status must also accompany a petition for a
decertification election, the two types of board-supervised elections are not
as symmetrical in practice as they may first appear.
Preelection Board Involvement
 If there is no disagreement concerning the scope of the proposed

bargaining unit, the Board will schedule a consent election. If the parties
disagree about what the contours of the appropriate bargaining unit
should be, the board regional director will hold a hearing on the record to
make that determination. When that decision is final, a board-directed
election will be held.
 In a petition election, the employer must provide within 7 days a so-
called Excelsior list containing names and addresses of employees in the
6-5
designated bargaining unit. After 10 days but within 30 days, the election
will normally be held.
The Election
 The text indicates that ballots can be challenged by either side in a

board-supervised election, but does not discuss the mechanics of how such
challenges are handled or why they may be made.
 The NLRB conducts the secret-ballot election. Company and union
observers may challenge voter eligibility but cannot prohibit anyone from
voting. After the votes are counted and challenges decided, the choice
receiving a majority is declared the winner. If more than two choices are on
the ballot and none obtains an absolute majority, a runoff is held between
the two highest choices. After any challenges are resolved, the regional
director certifies the results.
Note: Fig 6.4 [Specimen NLRB Ballot]
BARGAINING-UNIT DETERMINATION
 The NLRB considers a variety of factors to determine the bargaining

unit: (1) legal constraints, (2) the constitutional jurisdiction of the
organizing union, (3) the union’s likely success in organizing and
bargaining, (4) the employer’s desires to resist organizing or promote
stability in the bargaining relationship and (5) its own philosophy.
 Bargaining units differ depending in part upon whether the focus is on
unit organizing or contract negotiations. Several retail stores owned by the
same employer in a chain may constitute an appropriate bargaining unit for
the purposes of a representation election. The actual bargaining process,
however, may involve several different employers in what is known as
multiemployer bargaining. (See the text and the accompanying comment
in this Instructor’s Guide for Chapter 8.)
Legal Constraints
 According to § 9(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act, a majority of

professionals must approve being combined with nonprofessional
employees in the same bargaining unit.
 A recognized craft may not be stopped from defining its own
community of interest, even if previously included in a larger and more
comprehensive bargaining unit. However, NLRB case law has narrowed
this possibility when there has been an established and stable bargaining
history that argues to the contrary.
6-6
 Plant guards and security personnel may form a bargaining unit, but
they may not be in the same unit with other types of employees.
 Supervisors and managers who meet the definition of employers
within the meaning of this act may not be included in a bargaining unit or
bargain collectively. However, there is again considerable narrowing of
this exception through case law.
 Fossum notes that the National Mediation Board handles elections in
situations covered by the Railway Labor Act, and that those cases must by
law have bargaining units determined on a craft basis.
Jurisdiction of the Organizing Union
 The AFL-CIO has traditionally done an excellent job of mediating

disputes which arise when a bargaining unit represented by an AFL-CIO
union seeks to rescind the authorization of bargaining agency for that
union, and via a three-way election, select a different AFL-CIO union as its
new bargaining agent. Since a condition of affiliating with the AFL-CIO is
agreeing to let the federation resolve internal disputes, this mediation takes
care of the problem in the vast majority of cases.
The Union’s Desired Unit
 A union must balance its concerns with the prospects of winning a

certification election with a hypothetical bargaining unit on the one hand,
and being successful in negotiating appropriate contract terms later.
Fossum notes that craft unions are likely to prefer organizing units
consisting of workers with similar skills, whereas industrial unions
generally seek to organize the largest and most comprehensive range of
employees within a given plant or company.
 There are problems associated with organizing a small group of
workers that are rather peripheral to the employer’s operations: if the union
bargained to impasse and called a strike, the employer could simply
subcontract the work, leaving the union with little leverage. Fossum offers
the example of a custodial bargaining unit in a manufacturing plant as an
example of such a problem area.
o The union, then, has two bargaining-unit goals: (1) creating a
winnable” unit and (2) creating a unit that will have bargaining
power with the employer.
Note: Exhibit 6.1 [Bare-Knuckled Campaigning for Representation

Rights]
6-7
The Employer’s Desired Unit
 The employer generally prefers a unit which the union may not carry in
an election. However, if the union support is so strong among one group of
workers, the employer may seek to keep that group as small as possible,
and confine its losses to one worker group instead of an entire facility’s
workforce.
 Fossum notes that on one hand, the employer would generally prefer a
set of bargaining units that would each constitute functionally independent
communities of worker interests. But on the other hand, no employer wants
to set himself up for an uninterrupted cycle of negotiations with a never-
ending series of unions. The potential to be caught in a sequence of
compelling demands to catch up (or preserve) comparative positions with
other groups of workers can be very difficult to handle.
Note: Fig 6.5 [Conflicting Unit Desires]
NLRB Policy
 In determining appropriateness, the board considers carefully the

community of interests of the employees in the proposed unit. Some factors
include:
o Degree of functional integration
o Common supervision
o The nature of employee skills and functions
o Interchangeability and degree of contact among employees
o Work situs
o General working conditions
o Fringe benefits
o Extent of organization
 Fossum notes many of the above factors are, or at least could be,
interrelated.
Craft Severance
 The NLRB will allow craft severance when all of the following
circumstances apply:
 A high degree of skill or functional differentiation is present.
 There is only a short bargaining history in the present arrangement,
and the proposed craft severance would cause minimal disturbance.
 With the established unit, those desiring craft severance have
maintained a distinct separation unto themselves.
 The prevailing patterns in the industry favor such a craft severance.
 There is a low level of integration associated with the production
function.
6-8
 The prospective representative of the craft in question has a high level

of experience in representing such workers.
What Factors Are Used?
 Additional administrative considerations arise in the health care sector.

However, on balance, the board has made these determinations on a case-
by-case basis, and there has not been clear consistency.
 Judicial precedents are scanty, in part because NLRB bargaining unit
determinations are not “final orders” and therefore are subject to appeal as
separate matters. If the employer were dissatisfied with the board’s
determination of the appropriate bargaining unit, it would simply refuse to
bargain after the election outcome were known and let the courts decide. In
most instances, Fossum observes, the courts have left such board
determinations undisturbed in their oft-cited practice to defer to the
expertise of the agency with initial jurisdiction in such matters.
Other Issues in Unit Determination
 Accretion
 Reorganization and Reclassification
 Successor Organizations
 Joint Employers
o In the text, it is fairly clear what is meant by the obligation of

the new owners to abide by the unexpired commitments of their
predecessors following a merger. Occasionally, a group of
employees has two employers. If an employment agency
supplies temporary employees to another and both can fire,
discipline, changes wages, and so on, they are called joint
employers. An appropriate bargaining unit can include
temporary joint employees, regardless of whether the employer
that hires and pays them consents.
The Railway Labor Act and Airline Mergers
 The last decade has seen a substantial amount of consolidation among

domestic air carriers.
 In Delta’s takeover of Northwest, virtually all of Northwest’s
organizable employees were represented, while only Delta’s pilots were
represented. Northwest employees were unable to convince Delta
employees to unionize and all merged employee groups involved in
elections voted against union representation.
 In the United and Continental merger, major groups of employees are
represented by different unions in the merger partners. Although the airline
6-9
will want to see representation consolidation in the future, recent additional

mergers will slow the process.
THE ORGANIZING CAMPAIGN
 Either employees become sufficiently frustrated about their treatment

and economic conditions; or
 A national union identifies the employer as a ripe target for an
organizing effort. Factors considered in the latter case include:
o The economic and political climate.
o Evidence of employee receptivity to a union organizing effort.
o Prospects of community support.
o The demography of the potential bargaining unit.
Note: Fig 6.6 [Theoretical Model of the Certification

Election Process]
o For unions, organizing is an ongoing effort. Those who did not

initially sign petitions or authorization cards need to be won over;
new hires that arrive after a union is certified must be recruited
successfully. For management, meeting such an attempt is more
likely to be a sporadic concern. When the unionization is a
prospect, management faces the possibility of major changes in
the way the physical assets as well as operations may be
managed. The national union involved may have its own agenda,
too.
Employer Size and Elections
 In the last 20 years, over half of all certification elections have involved
prospective bargaining units of less than 30 employees.
 Fossum outlines a calculation that indicates when an organizing effort
begins. The prospective gain for the union in dollar terms is about $1,800
per year. Employees remit union dues at the approximate rate of 1.15% of
pay, and typically gain a premium over nonunionized labor of about 10%.
Thus, there is generally a favorable cost/benefit ratio for the employee.
 Very few certification elections take place in private sector bargaining
units of more than 500 employees. The expected annual return to an
organizing campaign for the national union would be $103,500. However,
there are fewer large units available to organize than in the past.
 Fossum notes that national unions are becoming more successful in
organizing bargaining units outside their traditional core constituencies,
particularly in industries related to their traditional areas of concentration.
6-10
General Organizing Campaign Rules
No-Distribution or No-Solicitation Rules
 The text does a good job in noting that solicitation by outsiders is

fundamentally different than solicitation by coworkers on the premises.
Also remote operations may require some accommodation for outside
organizer access, if no other feasible way to contact workers exists.
 Shopping malls and other facilities that operate as public
thoroughfares are still private property and do not provide outside
organizers with ready rights of access that public sidewalks and roadways
afford.
 “No Solicitation Rules” do not apply to employees, and are
particularly difficult to ban in nonproduction areas like break rooms, locker
rooms, lunchrooms and the like. Since national union representatives can
be generally denied access to the plant, support from within the plant is
virtually essential for an organizing drive to succeed.
 Employers may restrict computer communications such as e-mail and
chat rooms to work-related activity and to working time. And, employers
can monitor employee use of such communication channels more
effectively, too. However, here again, if the employer has been largely
indifferent to the use of computer e-mail for personal reasons in other
situations, it will probably be difficult to restrict such computer use only
when a union organizing effort appears on the horizon.
Communications
 Employers may require employees to attend meetings on company

premises and during working hours to hear presentations opposing the
union. However, if the union is barred from the premises during
nonworking time, the union may be entitled to equal access.
 Employers cannot make unilateral promises of improved wage or
working condition benefits, contingent upon a rejection of the union at the
voting site. The employer may, however, inform the workforce that if the
union is certified, all existing levels of wages and benefits will be subject
to negotiation.
 The obligation of parties to be entirely truthful in certification
campaigns has been a shifting policy for the NLRB. At present, outlandish
promises are up to the voting employees to filter out as best as they can.
The-24 Hour Rule
 Because claims made on the eve of an election would be difficult to

respond to, the board under its ruling in Peerless Plywood prohibits both
6-11
employers and unions from holding any captive audience presentations

with 24 hours directly preceding an election.
Interrogation
 Generally speaking, employees involved in an upcoming bargaining

unit election cannot be summoned to executive offices that are not
normally accessible to them, and then questioned about their views on the
ballot question pending. Such treatment is viewed as inherently
intimidating.
 Fossum holds out the possibility that such conduct could be
permissibly utilized to confirm signatures on authorization cards or
otherwise to test a claim of majority status, but it would be unfair if (1) the
employer has been hostile toward unions, (2) information is likely to be
used against a particular individual, (3) the questioner is a high-level
manager, (4) the interrogation is done in an intimidating manner, or (5) the
respondents are fearful.
Surveillance
 Surveillance employers routinely operate a variety of surveillance

equipment to track the security of their premises. If videotaping is used to
record protected concerted activity such as organizing by employees during
break times in nonwork areas, this would be a ULP.
Union Strategy and Tactics
 The union organizing campaign has three sequential goals:

o Obtaining signed authorization cards from the majority of
workers in the bargaining unit it seeks to represent;
o Achieving either voluntary recognition from the employer or a
board-directed election; and
o Negotiating, ratifying, and implementing a first contract
successfully.
Note: Table: 6.1 [Percentage Use of Various Union

Organizing Tactics]
 Organizing may require community action if the employer is a

significant economic entity in the local area.
 When the employer is well known to the public or is linked to a high-
profile organization, the union may launch a corporate campaign to
inform the public and pressure the employer to conduct a fair campaign.
 Traditional organizing tactics have included handbills, direct mail, and
mass recruiting meetings. In recent years, national unions have
6-12
supplemented these traditional methods about a third of the time with

community action efforts and/or corporate campaigns. Home visits and
one-on-one campaigning are still essential, however.
 As campaigns gain momentum, an internal organizing committee is
established. A negotiating committee may also be established to define
what specific outcomes are important to obtain in a first contract.
 In bargaining units where women predominate, studies indicate that
face-to-face organizing techniques are more successful, and that
opportunities for advancement and technical training become more
germane.
 Minority workers are significantly more likely to favor unionization.
 Individual organizer characteristics, attention to women’s issues in
bargaining units where women predominate, coworker and family values
about unionization, and beliefs about the union as an effective
instrumentality for achieving attractive outcomes are also important
predictors of voting outcome in board-supervised elections.
 Within given industries, the success of union campaigns is related to
firm size, capital intensity, the ratio of labor costs to total costs, and
extremes in profitability. In general, large and unprofitable firms are more
likely to be successfully organized.
 Fossum lists a number of other factors which are related to the
prospects of union success at a board-supervised election.
Factors Related to Union Success in Organizing
 Union campaign success within industries is affected by firm size,

capital intensity, the ratio of labor to total costs, and extremes in
profitability.
 Unless there are salient local issues, even well-organized organizing
drives are likely to fail, as did efforts to organize several state Blue Cross-
Blue Shield insurers.
 An analysis of 261 elections found that union wins were predicted by
the percentage of authorization card signers, holding solidarity days,
establishing a bargaining committee before the election, and focusing on
fairness and justice issues.
 Unions that use innovative methods, specialize in representing specific
employee groups, and do not have centralized control have more
organizing success.
 If there is a substantial union vote that fails to achieve a majority and
if the turnover rate is relatively low, the union can rely on an established
cadre to work on subsequent campaigns.
6-13
Neutrality Pledges and Card Check Agreements
 In companies where some units are already organized, unions try to

negotiate neutrality pledges into the collective bargaining agreement.
Where they are successful, this means that the employer agrees not to take
a position in future organizing drives by the union within the company.
 Neutrality agreements have been negotiated between the
Communications Workers (CWA) and the major land-line phone
companies, except CenturyLink, and the CWA has card check agreements
with AT&T and Verizon. UNITE HERE has a neutrality pledge agreement
with both Hilton and Starwood hotel chains.
 The effect is substantially greater than for neutrality pledges, because a
card check would never be sought before the union held a majority.
 One study comparing U.S. and Canadian organizing campaigns found
that about 3 to 5 percent of the difference in unionization between the two
countries can be accounted for by the greater prevalence of card checks
leading to voluntary recognition in Canada.
 Requiring an election instead of allowing card checks enables the
employer to orchestrate an opposition campaign.
Management Strategy and Tactics
 Management opposition to union organizing drives is predictable; and

unless the organizing effort is in the public sector or in a firm already
broadly unionized. Resistance can often generate procedural delays, which
usually work in favor of management by sapping worker sentiment for
representation. Thus, employers almost always routinely challenge the
composition of the proposed bargaining unit, since that alone can introduce
appreciable delay. Employers, particularly those with poor working
conditions and low wages, sometimes intentionally commit unfair labor
practices, since the make-whole relief to which the board is limited in
providing remedy depends upon the filing of an unfair labor practice
charge which may never come, and which in any event would not cost the
company any more than they would have had to pay out in a worst-case
scenario, had they abided by all the rules.
 Management is free to campaign vigorously in opposition to the
union’s organizing effort. Management campaigns paint unions as
outsiders that are less concerned than the employer about employee
welfare. They also argue that unionization may not improve conditions and
that employees will lose the right to deal individually with employers on
employment conditions.
 Consultants generally suggest that employers engage large-scale
employee communications efforts. First-line supervisors generally receive
extensive briefings on what they may and may not legally do in
communicating with employees in the proposed bargaining unit. Unless an
6-14
employee expends a significant effort to become aware of the union’s

position, chances are he/she will have been exposed more often and in
greater detail to the employer’s position on the organizing effort.
 Management campaigns against union organization drives have little
effect, especially after the petition for election is filed. But union tactics
were about three times as influential as management tactics. Employees
form an early and stable decision about how they will vote in NLRB-
supervised elections.
THE ROLE OF THE NLRB
 The NLRB’s position is that an election should “provide a laboratory

in which an experiment may be conducted under conditions as nearly ideal
as possible, to determine the uninhabited desires of the employees.”
Election Certifications
 After an election, if no objections or unfair campaign charges are filed,

the NLRB certifies the results. If the union lost, then an election bar takes
effect, barring elections for one year. If a winning union loses its majority
within the year, the board will not permit a new election.
Setting Aside Elections
 If challenges are filed and the board finds the activity interfered with
the employees’ abilities to make a reasoned choice, the election will be set
aside and rerun.
Bargaining Orders
.
 The board has established its purview over what it has termed the
“totality of conduct.” Hence, under the decision in Gissel Packing Co., the
board emphasized that it was the pattern of unfair labor practices, at once
both numerous and flagrant, that the resulting situation warranted the
issuance of a bargaining order without the holding of an election.
The Impact of Board Remedies
 The board can, and on occasion does, order an election rerun for
irregularities of one kind or another. Unions do not fare as well in rerun
elections as they do the first time. How much of this pattern is due to the
simple effects of delay, which tend to work against union election success;
and how much to the specific nature of the rerun election issues, is hard to
say.
 Bargaining orders do not necessarily lead to a contract.
6-15
o Cease-and-desist orders
o Reinstatement with back pay and inters orders
Election Outcomes
 As previously indicated, over half of all representation elections occur

in units with less than 30 employees.
 Fossum’s discussion of “Election Outcomes” and Table 6.2 should be
considered in the context of these ideas.
 Over half of the representation elections are conducted in units of less
than 30 employees. Unions win over 60% of all elections.
Other Types of Representation Changes
 Fossum notes that unions have a harder time winning a representation

election in a large bargaining unit. Actually, the relationship between
bargaining unit size and representation election outcomes (which include
decertification election cases) is a bit subtler. Large bargaining units are
more robust; that is, they are harder to convert from one status to another.
Unions have a harder time organizing large bargaining units successfully
and have less success in NLRB-supervised elections in large units than in
small ones. But decertification efforts have a harder time in larger
bargaining units than in smaller ones. That is, incumbent unions are more
likely to win NLRB-supervised representation elections when a
decertification question is at stake.
Contextual Characteristics Related to Election Results
Union Characteristics
 Unaffiliated unions win more often than AFL-CIO affiliated unions.

 Larger and more democratic unions win more often than smaller, more
authoritarian ones.
 Direct benefits to members and lower dues structures seem to be
correlated with union organizing success among white-collar workers, but
these factors are less salient when blue-collar workers are involved.
 Teamsters generally have lower success rates than do other unions.
Environmental Characteristics
 Recently high unemployment rates and a high degree of unionization

within a given industry are correlated with union election victories.
 Union victories are more likely in bargaining units with workers who
possess homogeneous skills.
6-16
 State right-to-work laws work against union success in NLRB

elections.
 Private-sector preferences are correlated with a belief that a union
would be a more effective instrument for changes in the workplace than
reliance upon employer initiatives. Perceptions of the union’s image and
job dissatisfaction also are factors in the private sector. Public sector
employees, on the other hand, respond more favorably to unions when they
have concerns about job security.
 Registered nurses who were employed by health care providers
involved in mergers or restructurings perceived a reduction in the attention
paid to health care and their interest in increased unionization.
Worker Characteristics
 African-Americans have a stronger preference for representation.

 Women are more likely to vote for union representation than are men.
 While there is some indication that recent immigrants unionize at
about the same rate as other new entrants to the labor force.
 Peer and familial attitudes are associated with union election voting
patterns, both pro and con.
 Workers with a Marxist or with a humanistic set of work beliefs and
values are more likely to vote in favor of union representation.
 While individual characteristics are related to the likelihood of voting
for representation, working conditions are much more strongly related.
FIRST CONTRACTS
 Fossum notes that winning a board-supervised election hardly clears

away the union’s path. The board must certify the election results.
Employers may object to any number of procedural irregularities,
especially if the results were close. These objections and timely appeals
take time to resolve, and time generally erodes the level of union support.
 Resistance may even include the conscious commission of unfair labor
practices, since the penalties for doing so are generally no more than
promising not to do so again.
 While organizing is highly adversarial, successful negotiating may
require accommodation and compromise. Once the election has concluded,
the union needs to adjust its orientation.
 Fossum cites the S. Lichtenberg case in the text, where an employer
went to extreme lengths to avoid unionization.
 Evidence suggests that newly organized employers have been taking a
harder line in negotiating first contracts, especially since there are few real
penalties the NLRB can implement for refusing to bargain.
6-17
 A study of FMCS-assisted negotiations found that in about a quarter of

cases, managements, and unions failed to reach agreement on a first
contract.
 The Employee Free Choice legislation advocated by unions has been
put into practice in several Canadian jurisdictions. The legislation
mandates first contract arbitration (FCA) in situations where the union and
employer cannot agree on a contract. The presence of FCA cuts work
stoppages in half.
WORKER CENTERS
 At the same time that private sector unionization has continued to

decline, an alternative mechanism has been developed particularly to help
less-educated and lower-skilled workers to obtain work-related outcomes
that are guaranteed by law and, if they desire, give them assistance in
exploring union organizing alternatives.
 Some of the functions of worker centers include:
o Assisting with claims that employers violated overtime and
minimum wage requirements, health and safety issues, and
employment discrimination claims, among others.
o Publicizing disputes that groups of employees have with
particular employers, picket employers, promote boycotts, or
other informational activities that call attention to employment
conditions.
o Contacting employers about specific employee complaints in an
attempt to resolve employment problems.
 Worker centers receive substantial financial assistance from
international unions. As individuals or groups of workers receive
continuing assistance from worker centers, they may become increasingly
aware of the benefits of unionization and seek assistance from a bona-fide
labor organization in developing an organizing campaign in their employer.
 Worker centers constitute an entry-level employment-related
assistance organization helpful for low-skill workers who may also have
language problems.
Web Sites
www.aflcio.org
www.changetowin.org
www.laboreducator.org
www.nlrb.gov
www.nrtw.org
www.nuhw.org
www.seiu.org
6-18
CASE: GMFC Custom Conveyer Division
General Materials and Fabrication Corporation (GMFC) acquired a manufacturer of

custom-built conveyer equipment used in the freight forwarding industry. The plant is located
in Cumberland, a small rural city of about 2,500. All the employees are hired from about a 20-
mile radius around the plant. The district director of the United Steelworkers in the region in
which Cumberland is located wants to increase the number of members in the district. He
received an e-mail from Dave Neumeier, an employee of GMFC-CCD, who is a former
Steelworker member. Dave suggested that CCD was ripe for organizing given the difference
in wages between CCD and GMFC’s main Central City operation. He said some of the
preppers were dissatisfied, too, because their work was much more repetitive and dirtier than
the other jobs but the pay was the same. Since Dave Neumeier is already an employee, there
is little CCD can do to silence him short of an unfair labor practice. In all likelihood, the
district director will have sent an organizing kit to Neumeier at his home address in advance
of the arrival of Rebecca Shea and Rick Anderson, the two newest organizers whom the
district director assigned to attempt to organize the plant. Since CCD’s market share is on the
rise and the firm is given to be quite profitable, it would seem likely that employment
prospects are good for Shea and Anderson at the plant. However, the case also suggests that
generally sluggish business activity among the customer base may lead to a layoff within two
months, due to a lack of orders placed. Thus, CCD may be increasing its share of a declining
market.
In any event, if either Shea or Anderson or both can secure employment at the plant,
there will be three who can coordinate the organizing drive. And if not, at least Neumeier is
on the inside for now.
If the union could learn that layoffs are a possibility in two months in the absence of a
pick-up in orders placed, it is imperative that the organizing drive begin in earnest before
then. For one thing, Neumeier is still sufficiently recent in his separation from the plant where
he was affiliated with the steel workers that he has been in contact with. If he lacks seniority
at CCD and layoffs come, he could be laid off before any organizing activity began and the
firm could claim ignorance of any organizing plans or activity involving Neumeier. That
would make the organizing task that much more difficult. It would also diminish Neumeier’s
credibility in a small town environment, making him appear to be a disgruntled employee who
was an outsider to begin with. For all these reasons, the organizing effort should begin as
quickly as possible. If layoffs do in fact occur, those laid off would still be eligible to vote in a
bargaining unit election, unless they had been terminated. Union activity may provide them
with a cloak of insulation against such a prospect; and if layoffs do materialize, organizers
should try to associate the event with union activity or the costs borne by workers of going
forward without union protection to the degree possible.
Arguably, the targeted bargaining unit should consist of all production employees, but
no others. The three clerical employees are presumably closely aligned with management, and
their small number and limited similarity with the much larger production staff make their
inclusion in the proposed bargaining unit harder to win and harder to administer if it were
won. The first contact with them would likely tip off the management to the union’s
6-19
organizing campaign, and take control of the campaign away from its organizers. If we may
assume that the three clerical workers are women (as is typically the case), information
offered in this chapter suggests that more direct contact may be needed to bring them on
board. And unless two of the three would vote the union, their inclusion would be an
impediment at the margin.
With a potential bargaining unit of 120, a minimum of 36 (30% of 120) signatures on

authorization cards would be necessary to secure a board-supervised election. While turnover
has been very low, it is at least possible that some few who signed the cards initially might
leave CCD before the showing of interest is matched against an Excelsior list by the field
agent handling the case in the board’s regional office. Therefore, it will be necessary to get at
least 45 to 55 signatures on cards before bringing the campaign very far into the open, if at all
possible. Neumeier must make a list of those he believes would be receptive to an overture to
sign such an authorization card. If Shea and Anderson are hired, they can add to the list of
eligible names. In a small town, there should be little difficulty in identifying which people
live where. Although the plant draws from a 20-mile radius, focusing on those closer to the
worksite would be a more efficient use of time. Signing up should start with the employees
most receptive and work down the list, for the most receptive may also be the ones most
likely to become active in the solicitation process.
A list of arguments should be mapped out with Shea and Anderson as soon as possible
and definitely before any organizing contacts are made. Arguments would include the
disparity between CCD’s wage schedule and what the same employer is paying elsewhere
(copies of wage schedules from agreements currently in force between the Steelworkers and
the parent firm should be made available in quantity). Also, copies of whatever public
relations material the company itself has put out within the past year should be included; no
doubt the employer has wanted to praise its hard-working employees for helping it be so
profitable after the recent buyout, and in all likelihood has written letters to the editor of the
local weekly paper, facilitated feature pieces on the new management team and the parent
company. Annual reports and other financial data of the parent firm (assuming the firm’s
stock is publicly traded) should be assembled so as to help establish the company’s ability to
pay more than they do. Toward this end, the Steelworkers’ district office should be able to do
some “number crunching” and send suitable quotations and campaign ammunition to
Cumberland. Any printing to be done should be out of town, so as to keep other firms from
being untimely leaks of filling the CCD management in on what is about to happen next.
Workers may also be approached with the suggestion that signing an authorization
card does mean the individual cannot change his/her mind once in the voting booth. A strong
campaign may be sufficiently unsettling to management that even if the union does not
prevail, the employer may feel it cannot afford not to improve working conditions and pay
rates at least somewhat. Clearly the firm cannot promise that in advance; but just getting a
board-supervised election may suffice to cause management to pay more attention to workers’
needs. But to do that, the union will need to get 45 to 55 signed authorization cards at a
minimum. While workers do not generally change their minds about whether to vote for or
against union representation and this approach may seem counterproductive, the first job is to
get the signatures. Once that is accomplished, then the organizing campaign can focus on
6-20
getting those who signed authorization cards without much enthusiasm to take the next step
and get those votes locked down.
While the firm may not want to make martyrs out of Neumeier, Shea, or Anderson,
preparation should be made for the possibility that the company would terminate key people
and thus risk unfair labor practice findings and the attendant adverse publicity, just to quash
the organizing campaign. The district office should have all the paperwork done as much in
advance as possible (the forms are available at no charge from the regional NLRB office),
leaving as few spaces blank as possible. If organizers are hassled and especially if any newly
signed supporters are hassled, the union district office must be prepared to swing into action
right away and demonstrate that these people have the support of the organization.
Organizers should continue to gather signatures. Picnics, rallies, and other pep-
building activities should be planned and staged, complete with appealing door prizes, free
food and beverages (with an eye toward what beverages and what levels of moderation in
drinking would comport with prevailing community standards), and so on. Letters to the
editor of the local paper should be part of the campaign, and should be ghostwritten if
necessary. Fill-in-the-blank formats may be distributed, but these should be returned for
retyping by the district office staff or by Shea and Anderson on scene with word processors so
that the letters seem to convey personal sentiments.
The union should expect delaying tactics by management. Shea, Anderson, and
Neumeier together with district office staff need to keep a mailing pattern going to keep up
morale and to minimize the inevitable erosion of support for the union in the face of delaying
tactics. As the election date draws near, the names on the Excelsior list should be closely
monitored. People who support the union and who may be on vacation or suspended for
disciplinary reasons must be encouraged to vote if at all possible, unless it is quite clear that
their sentiments are antagonistic to the union’s objectives. Those who are members of the
households of managers or executives, while they may find employment in the proposed
bargaining unit, are ineligible to vote. Such individuals as well as others ineligible to vote
should be recognized at the polling place and the union should be well versed in the procedure
to challenge their ballots. The selection of a polling place observer should be made.
Depending upon the level of support achieved, consideration may be given to the
effect of a strike and picketing (not to exceed 30 days) once the petition is filed. Other unions
that pick up and deliver at the plant should be approached with a request that they honor the
Steelworkers’ picket lines. In this way, perhaps, the employer will voluntarily recognize the
union’s majority status and will commence bargaining.
Rumor control will be a problem. A branched network for a telephone tree should be
developed. If they are organized correctly, a call started by the principal organizer to five
others should be passed through the tree to all 120 employees in 15 or 20 minutes, with
appropriate return loops to make sure the message content has retained its integrity and that
the contacts have all been made.
6-21
Cumberland is a small town, and union organizing orchestrated from the outside may
not sit well with every resident. It is important that union organizers present themselves as
insistent and as leader-like as necessary, but not in a manner that offends or alienates. Let
management be seen as boorish or mean-spirited; the union should stay active but within the
law and within the parameters of community values.
The Management Role
If there is not a “No Solicitation” rule in force, one should be instituted immediately,
and it should be uniformly and consistently enforced. If the firm has permitted solicitations
before, an announcement should be included in each employee’s pay envelope indicating that
such a practice will no longer be permitted. Management should apply the policy to its own
solicitations immediately, but if past practice has permitted solicitations for church suppers,
the Little League, Big Brothers Big Sisters, or the Scouts, a transition period should be
allowed to phase in the new policy. During such a transition period, those who solicit will be
informed of the new policy and will be asked to refrain; they should each be provided with a
written and dated copy of the firm’s new policy in this regard. Such a transition period should
conclude as early as practicable.
Management needs to ingratiate itself to the local establishment. If Aldrid, the plant manager
and Christian, a supervisor, and other management figures have not done so before, they need
to begin immediately to prepare the ground for a potentially needed harvest of community
goodwill down the road. Management has learned that Neumeier apparently harbors positive
feelings toward the Steelworkers from the sticker in his toolbox. His application and
background should be scrutinized carefully - where he worked previously, what kind of
worker he was, what kinds of union activities he was involved with, etc. This is not with a
view toward the commission of any untoward act - just reconnaissance. CCD should continue
to accept applications for work, and all new applicants should be scrutinized carefully - more
so than usual. No new hires should be made of anyone who is new to the area or about whom
detailed background profiles are not available. A hiring freeze ought to be seriously
considered until after CCD learns whether or not the new orders will be coming in, and would
be a legitimate business reason.
CD should consider improving its wage package further. If no union organizing is evident,
marginal increases in the hourly wage schedule, perhaps an additional 25¢ per hour for
employees with 36 months or more on the job, should be given serious consideration. Such a
wage increase would not be an unfair labor practice, if management had no knowledge of a
union organizing effort; and it would provide the company with a very recent demonstration
of its regard and appreciation for its workforce. This increase would amount to $43,680 per
year for the first year (estimating that 70% of the 120 employees, or 84 workers, would
qualify for an additional $10 per week for a plant that earned more than $1 million last year
before taxes). That would be on the order of a 2% to 2.5% increase in payroll, in all likelihood
far less than the consequences of unionization, even if these increases were added on top of
cost-of-living or other planned increases. (The average premium for union scale wages across
all industries, vis-à-vis nonunion wages, is about 10%.) Since CCD is already a wage leader
6-22
in Cumberland, this might be partially offset by productivity margins associated with a more
selective workforce. And by creating a differential in employees - those with 36 months of
seniority and those without a union pitch that labor is “all in this together” is somewhat
undermined.
The firm might also consider introducing some additional benefits, such as a very
visible but very limited number of $500 scholarships (perhaps five or at most ten) to
employee dependents who were going to be full-time college students. That amount of
money, as a percentage of payroll, would be quite insignificant; but in a town of only 2,500,
the conspicuousness of the awards would permit the company to take a very public bow for its
philanthropy.
If a campaign did appear to be starting, the employer should immediately start a series
of direct mailings to each employee, extolling its programs and compensation packages. The
firm should highlight its position as a wage leader in the community and the very low levels
of worker dissatisfaction as suggested by the extremely low turnover rate experienced by the
firm. The dues structure of the union involved should be displayed prominently, and the
upfront initiation fee should be emphasized. What such a dues flow from the workforce at the
Cumberland plant in aggregate means to the community should be presented - large quantities
of dollars have an impact, even when the payroll is shared by many. The political candidates
endorsed by the union leadership should be made an issue, if they are at odds with voting
patterns in the small town of Cumberland. A recurring theme, pointing out the external
impetus behind the organizing campaign, should be, “Who are these people? And what do
they have in common with YOU?”
Supervisors should receive special preparation about what to look out for, what to do,
and what not to do. A prospective seniority list should be made, if it has not been made
already, and it should be posted. No threats of impending action are needed, but workers
should know long in advance of any layoff, where they each stand on the seniority list.
Layoffs, should they become necessary, should be made in inverse order of seniority. That
will blunt the criticism the union may try to make. It also insulates the company to some
extent if new employees (e.g., Neumeier, Shea, and Anderson) are laid off for any reason.
Comparative wage rates in the community, to the extent they can be known, should be posted
in conspicuous places around the plant.
The employer should avoid unfair labor practices at all costs. In a small community,
public relations is a major strength, especially for the firm that is the wage leader and as civic-
minded as CCD.
Mass meetings at the plant and hard campaigning on the shop floor should be avoided
also. The direct mailings should continue, however. If the necessary signatures are obtained to
generate a board-supervised election, CCD should calmly but firmly decline to recognize the
union’s assertion of majority support on the basis of a card count. CCD should also contest
the composition of the proposed bargaining unit; for the same reasons that the union would
probably seek to exclude the three clerical workers in their proposed bargaining unit, the firm
6-23
should seek to have them included. The firm should work for delays whenever it can feasibly
do so, inasmuch as delays erode union support.
If the firm has avoided the commission of any unfair labor practices, it is its right to insist on
a board-supervised election as the basis for any determination of the union’s majority status.
If striking to force recognition occurs, the company should be prepared to hire replacement
workers. In view of its position as a wage leader and the moderate size of the workforce, the
firm should be able to do so. Strikers should not be terminated for striking per se; several very
public efforts should be made to invite the valued employees who have contributed so much
to CCD’s success in the past to return to their jobs. But if they do not return, the firm should
be clear that they do not intend to cease operations, and replacement workers will be
considered for permanent replacement positions. It is important that the firm inform each
replacement worker of the temporary nature of employment, pending the return of the
traditional worker. If temporary replacements become permanent replacements, then it is
important for CCD to advise the replacement that his/her status has become permanent before
advising the striker of that fact. Strikers can be replaced, and subsequently terminated if
“redundant” to the needs of the employer. But the employer may not discharge the striker
BEFORE hiring the replacement, or else the board will deem the discharge to have come in
retaliation for the strike activity, and that would be an unfair labor practice. Offers of
permanent replacement to temporary workers should be made only after a worker has failed to
respond to any of three specific and personal invitations that he/she return to work. Replaced
strikers should be notified by registered mail, and they should be replaced in inverse order of
seniority with no consideration given to union roles whatsoever. The form letter should be
carefully worded, and it should make redundancy - not striking or any other concerted or
union affiliated activity - the only basis for the very reluctantly reached replacement decision.
If an election is held, replacement workers as well as those whom they have replaced
are entitled to vote. (Strikers can vote in such cases for one year.) Nevertheless, workers who
were notified of their termination should be routinely challenged as arguably ineligible to
vote. The necessary hearing on the record will cause additional delays. If the union prevails
after all this - and do recall that unions win just under half of all certification elections - the
firm should begin to bargain as hard as possible. The employer should seek wage concessions
that would bring its wage structure back in line with other area employers of workers with
similar skills. Certification does not mean the union will stay on, and workers may well
decide that union representation was a bad idea and seek decertification at the one-year
anniversary of the certification of the bargaining agent.
6-24
Discussion Questions
1. To what extent should the NLRB get involved in determining bargaining units?
Shouldn’t the vote be in the unit preferred by the employees?
Legal constraints limit the potential scope of a bargaining unit, but within these
constraints, the contending parties- labor and management- are free to jointly determine an
appropriate unit. If they agree on the proposed unit, a consent election results. If they do
not, NLRB determines unit appropriateness. Unions and employers have opposing goals
in the creation of a bargaining unit. A union must create a “winnable” unit and create a
unit that will have bargaining power with the employer. An employer prefers a unit that is
unlikely to win or one that has minimal union bargaining power. Because of these
competing concerns, the NLRB must sometimes get involved in determining the unit.
Students can come to their own opinions about the level of NLRB involvement. They
should discuss the community of interests of the employees in the proposed unit
including, the degree of functional integration, common supervision, nature of employee
skills and functions, interchangeability and degree of contact among employees, work
situs, general working conditions, fringe benefits, and extent of organization.
2. Should union organizers have more or less access to employees in organizing

campaigns than they have now?
Students can come to their own conclusions. They should consider limitations on access
including employer prohibitions on solicitations by any organization on company property
or on company time. They should also discuss a union’s contacting employees through
employer’s email systems, situations in which organizers may solicit on company
property if reasonable access to employees is unavailable, and employer’s property rights.
They should also consider that employees can be required to attend meetings on company
premises during working hours to hear presentations opposing the union and whether this
should result in equal time for pro-union solicitation.
3. Should the NLRB require union organizer access to the workplace as a quid pro quo for
an employer demanding an election rather than agreeing to a card check, thereby gaining a
delay in the outcome?
Employers will oftentimes demand an election rather than agreeing to a card check
because it allows them to orchestrate an opposition campaign. Students should come to
their own conclusions about whether such a tactic should be met with a quid pro quo.
They should discuss the fairness of the situation and other tactics that employers might
use such as interrogation, surveillance, mandatory meetings, and the use of ULPs to
undermine labor efforts.
4. Do employers have an unfair tactical advantage in union organizing situations?
Students should come to their own conclusions. They should consider the many tactics
available to employers such as: requiring an election instead of allowing a card check;
6-25
uncovering union activity in a covert manner such as through supervisors, restricting

solicitations, waging an intense campaign, and opposing a consent election. They should
also discuss the ULPs that unions use, such as increasing wages, making promises about
future changes, and holding frequent captive-audience meetings, even with the threat of
sanction because the sanctions are still less harmful to them than unionization.
5. Is an adversarial relationship necessary for successful organizing and permanent

unionization of an employer’s establishment?
Students should come to their own conclusions. They should discuss the effect of
adversarial practices on unionization. They should mention Fossum’s theory that the
bargaining process requires that the parties, especially the union, start from the position
that gaining agreement on a contract is a primary goal. They should discuss how
campaigns in which unions filed ULP charges were 30 percent less likely to result in
contract. This would seem to suggest that an adversarial relationship is harmful for
successful organizing and permanent unionization of an employer’s establishment.
6-26

Labor Relations Development Structure Process 12th Edition Fossum Solutions Manual Download

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Labor Relations Development Structure Process 12th Edition Fossum Solutions Manual Download

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 06 - Union Organizing Campaigns

Solution Manual for Labor Relations Development

UNION ORGANIZING CAMPAIGNS

1. Organizing is a complex activity involving unions, employers, and the

2. Either employees or union organizers can initiate the organizing effort.

3. Even though employees do not give particularly high levels of attention to

ORGANIZING AND UNION EFFECTIVENESS

 Organizing provides an opportunity for employee “voice” and

 Membership also generates dues flow to the union.

HOW ORGANIZING BEGINS

 National Unions target specific employers or geographic areas and

Note: Fig: 6.1 [Sequence of Organizing Events]

The Framework for Organizing

Authorization Card Campaign

 An authorization card campaign tries to enroll employees in the union

Note: Fig: 6.2 [Authorization Card]

 If a majority of employees the union is trying to organize signs

 If a majority has signed and the employer is satisfied with the

 Representation elections are held to determine whether a majority of

Note: Fig 6.3 [Avenues to Election Petitions]

 A union, an individual, or (under some cases) an employer may file a

Preelection Board Involvement

 If there is no disagreement concerning the scope of the proposed

 The text indicates that ballots can be challenged by either side in a

Note: Fig 6.4 [Specimen NLRB Ballot]

 The NLRB considers a variety of factors to determine the bargaining

 According to § 9(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act, a majority of

Jurisdiction of the Organizing Union

 The AFL-CIO has traditionally done an excellent job of mediating

The Union’s Desired Unit

 A union must balance its concerns with the prospects of winning a

Note: Exhibit 6.1 [Bare-Knuckled Campaigning for Representation

The Employer’s Desired Unit

Note: Fig 6.5 [Conflicting Unit Desires]

 In determining appropriateness, the board considers carefully the

 The prospective representative of the craft in question has a high level

What Factors Are Used?

 Additional administrative considerations arise in the health care sector.

Other Issues in Unit Determination

o In the text, it is fairly clear what is meant by the obligation of

The Railway Labor Act and Airline Mergers

 The last decade has seen a substantial amount of consolidation among

will want to see representation consolidation in the future, recent additional

THE ORGANIZING CAMPAIGN

 Either employees become sufficiently frustrated about their treatment

Note: Fig 6.6 [Theoretical Model of the Certification

o For unions, organizing is an ongoing effort. Those who did not

Employer Size and Elections

General Organizing Campaign Rules

No-Distribution or No-Solicitation Rules

 The text does a good job in noting that solicitation by outsiders is

 Employers may require employees to attend meetings on company

The-24 Hour Rule

 Because claims made on the eve of an election would be difficult to

employers and unions from holding any captive audience presentations

 Generally speaking, employees involved in an upcoming bargaining

 Surveillance employers routinely operate a variety of surveillance

Union Strategy and Tactics

 The union organizing campaign has three sequential goals:

Note: Table: 6.1 [Percentage Use of Various Union

 Organizing may require community action if the employer is a

supplemented these traditional methods about a third of the time with

Factors Related to Union Success in Organizing

 Union campaign success within industries is affected by firm size,