What labor negotiation strategies can help negotiators achieve avoid strikes and reach a win-win negotiation? Professionals seeking to avoid not only labor strikes but impasse in general can apply lessons from real-world labor disputes, including the 2012 Chicago teachers’ strike, to their own workplace negotiations. Show Tackle Tough Issues TogetherWhen a difficult negotiation such as a labor contract renegotiation looms, it can be tempting for each side to try to make unilateral decisions on certain issues in the belief that negotiations will be a dead end. This strategy may pay off in the short term, but it’s important to factor in the long-term costs of failing to negotiate key issues. Take the 2012 contract negotiations between the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) and the City of Chicago, which led to a 10-day strike. After being elected mayor of Chicago in February 2011, Rahm Emanuel, President Obama’s former chief of staff, lobbied the Illinois state legislature hard for an education-reform bill targeted at Chicago’s troubled school district that included changes to collective bargaining between the city and the CTU. Specifically, the bill, which passed in May 2011, raised the percentage of CTU members who must vote in favor of a strike from 50% to 75%. The new law, known as SB7, also effectively prevented the CTU from striking over issues other than teacher salaries and limited the issues that could be negotiated—leaving out class size, for instance. Outraged, the union viewed the law as a signal that the new mayor was aggressively anti-union. Chicago’s Emanuel-appointed school board then further alienated Chicago teachers by rescinding a promised 4% pay raise and, at the same time, upping the salaries of newly installed CPS executives. Emanuel then began a campaign, ultimately successful, over a single education issue—his quest for a longer school day. But instead of negotiating with the CTU, he launched negotiations with individual schools. Entering the Strike ZoneThe union was further frustrated when the Chicago School Board delayed negotiations over the teachers’ new contract, leaving only weeks for the parties to come to agreement on a host of issues, including teacher salaries, evaluations, availability of books and other supplies, and air conditioning in schools. On June 6, 2012, an overwhelming 90% of CTU members voted to strike, far exceeding the 75% required by the new state law. Both sides turned down the recommendation of an independent arbitrator on the issue of teacher salaries. As thousands of Chicago Public Schools teachers joined picket lines across the city on September 10, Chicago parents scrambled to make arrangements for their children’s care. Ten days later, the CTU and the school board finally reached a breakthrough on a deal that provided victories for both sides, including a longer school day and annual teacher raises. 5 Top Labor Negotiation StrategiesA case could be made that dramatic reforms were needed to improve Chicago schools. But if one of Emanuel’s goals was to avoid a teacher strike, as suggested by his support of SB7, then his strategy of dodging and delaying negotiations with the CTU and limiting the number of issues on the table was counter to a win-win negotiation strategy. The combative and destructive nature of this strike suggests the following 5 labor negotiation strategies and win-win negotiation skills for others engaged in potentially contentious labor negotiations:
What other labor negotiation strategies and win-win negotiation techniques have you found to be helpful?
The labour relations process that produces a union-management relationship consists of three phases: union organizing, negotiating a collective agreement, and administering or enforcing the collective agreement. Phase One of Labour Relations Process: Union OrganizingIn phase one of the labour relations process, a non-union employer becomes unionized through an organizing campaign. The campaign starts either internally, by unhappy employees, or externally, by a union that has picked the employer for an organizing drive. Once workers and the union have made contact, a union organizer will try to convince the majority, if not all, of the workers to sign membership cards. By obtaining signed membership cards, the union is able to provide the labour relation with proof of the workers’ interest in having the union represent them. In many cases, employers resist the organizing campaign by speaking out against unions in letters, posters, and employee assemblies. However, it is illegal for employers to interfere directly with the organizing campaign or to coerce, intimidate, or threaten employees into not joining the union. Once the union has a sufficient number of signed membership cards, it submits an application to the applicable labour relations board to be certified as the exclusive bargaining agent for a specific unit of employees. After receiving the union’s application for certification, the labour relations board notifies the affected parties, i.e., the employer and the employees, and schedules a time and a date for eligible employees to vote on whether they want to be represented by the trade union or not. Supervisors and managers cannot participate in this voting process. The vote is conducted by an officer of the labour relations board. Both the union and the employer are entitled to have scrutineers present during the voting process. If the majority of the employees vote for the union, the labour relations board certifies the union as the exclusive bargaining agent for the employees who had been designated as eligible voters. The employer then has to bargain with the union over wages, hours of work, and other terms of employment and come to an agreement on these terms. The resulting agreement is often referred to as the collective agreement. Phase Two: NegotiationsThe negotiations that take place between the employer and the union in order to reach an agreement is generally referred to as collective bargaining. Typically, both management and union negotiation teams are made up of a few people. One person on each side acts as the chief spokesperson. Bargaining begins with union and management negotiators setting out a list of contract issues that will be discussed, with the union and the employer meeting face-to-face and exchanging written proposals. Demands, proposals, and counterproposals are exchanged during several rounds of bargaining in the labour relations process. Any contract that results from the negotiations between the union and the employer must be approved by top management and ratified by the union members. Once the agreement is approved by both sides, the collective agreement becomes a legally binding contract that covers such issues as union security, management rights, wages, benefits, and job security. Phase Three: EnforcementThe union’s main means of enforcing the collective agreement is the grievance procedure outlined in the collective agreement. A grievance is a formal complaint by an employee or the union that management has violated some part of the contract. Under a typical contract, the employee starts by presenting the grievance to the supervisor, either in person or in writing. If the problem cannot be solved at this point, the grievance is put in writing. The employee, one or more union officials, the supervisor, and perhaps the plant manager then discuss the grievance. If the matter still cannot be resolved, another meeting takes place with higher-level representatives of both parties present. If top management and the local union president are unable to resolve the grievance, it proceeds to arbitration. Arbitration is the process of settling a labour-management dispute by having an independent third party, either a single arbitrator or a panel of arbitrators, make a decision that is final and binding on the union and employer. The arbitrator reviews the grievance at a hearing and then makes the decision, which is presented in a document called the Arbitration Award. DISCLAIMER: The content of this article, and this website generally, is not intended as legal advice and cannot be relied upon as legal advice. To provide legal advice on your problem, a lawyer must first understand your specific situation.To book a consultation, please give us a call toll-free 1 (877) 708-8350 or locally (604) 475-0041. You can also book a consultation online here.
Have you ever tried to negotiate a job offer? If so, you know that negotiating as an individual worker can be frustrating. Collective bargaining, in which workers group together and elect a representative to negotiate on their behalf, is often more effective. As individuals, workers typically do not hold a lot of power compared to their employers. Economists attribute this to several factors, including declining union enrollment, increased outsourcing, and decreasing real wages (the value of workers’ pay with inflation taken into account). Even when the unemployment rate is low, workers often need a paycheck more urgently—or at least, more immediately—than employers need staff. This gives employers the advantage in one-on-one negotiations with employees. When employees engage in collective bargaining, however, they have more power. In fact, research from the Economic Policy Institute shows that when more workers belong to unions, wages are higher even for non-union workers in the same geographic area. Collective bargaining is a negotiation process in which a group of workers, often represented by a labor union, chooses a representative to advocate for better terms of employment. This representative undertakes negotiations on their behalf. The result of this negotiation is called a collective bargaining agreement, which is an employment contract that spells out wages, work schedules, employee benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment. The Wagner Act of 1935, also known as the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), established a framework for collective bargaining in addition to guaranteeing workers the right to organize. The act applied to all employers engaged in interstate commerce except agriculture, airlines, government, and railroads.
Railroad workers and many other employees in the transportation industry are covered under the Railway Labor Act. The NLRA also established the National Labor Relations Board, which arbitrates labor disputes. The NLRB’s five-member board and division of judges decide unfair labor practices cases across the U.S. The NLRB also establishes the legitimacy of a “bargaining unit,” which is typically a single work facility. However, unions in some industries such as trucking and telecommunications have won the right to bargain as a national unit.
Many states have enacted laws modeled on the NLRA, some of which protect the collective bargaining rights of state and local government employees. To learn more, contact your state department of labor. The Taft-Hartley Labor Act of 1947 amended the NLRA, defining additional unfair labor practices and placed limitations on labor unions. These provisions allowed workers to refuse to participate in union activities (although they could still be required to join a union as a condition of employment.) They also prohibited unions from charging excessive membership fees. The Landrum-Griffin Act of 1959, also known as the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, gave state courts and labor relations boards jurisdiction over cases declined by the NLRB. It also tightened, revised, or instituted several other practices and prohibitions, and repealed the non-Communist affidavit provisions. The PRO Act, which would revise the definition of “employee” to include many workers who are currently classified as independent contractors, passed the House of Representatives in February 2020, but was not taken up by the Senate. According to the AFL-CIO, about three-quarters of private-sector workers and two-thirds of government employees have the right to engage in collective bargaining. The process differs slightly from union to union, but it typically looks like this:
The aim of the NLRA was to guarantee employees “the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid and protection.” As such, it would seem to be a benefit primarily for employees, not employers. However, the right to collective bargaining is beneficial to both parties.
Pros
Cons
Less disruption to business, the economy, and workers’ careers. Collective bargaining allows both sides the opportunity to resolve their disagreements, potentially without resorting to strikes, which could be costly to both parties. Higher pay. While this would seem like an exclusive benefit for labor, higher pay may be better for business as well. Henry Ford famously offered his factory workers $5 per day—double the standard rate in 1914. The result was a vastly more productive workforce. Profits doubled in less than two years. Time savings. Collective bargaining agreements typically set out pay scales, benefits, and other employment conditions for groups of workers, such as all workers with a given job title. This can save large organizations time and effort negotiating contracts on a case-by-case basis, even as it saves individual workers the time and effort of advocating for themselves. A less collaborative work environment. Gallup research has shown that unionized workers have a lower Work Environment Index score than their peers who do not belong to a union. They are more likely to say that they consider their supervisor a “boss rather than a partner.” They are also less likely to say that their supervisor creates a “trusting and open work environment.” Fewer jobs. Employees who belong to a union are generally better paid than those who do not. However, this benefit can also be a drawback. Some economists point out that higher labor costs can lead to fewer jobs, as businesses outsource to cheaper labor markets or lose market share to overseas competitors. Less individual choice. The collective bargaining process is necessarily about achieving a good result for the collective, which may occasionally lead to a frustrating result for individuals. In a unionized industry, workers who prefer to work on a different schedule or under different conditions than those agreed upon may find the process and outcomes restrictive. |