Search results

The purpose of this article is to provide analysis of organizational communication used by one major US airline during a Teamsters unionizing campaign as a means for readers to examine what airlines do when faced with the threat of unionization, how they prepare front‐line management for communication with employees, and what role these managers play in unionizing campaigns.

A range of corporate communications from the airline were gathered within a seven‐month period and qualitatively analyzed, including management training manuals, e‐mails, and conference calls between line managers and regional directors.

Anti‐union communication strategies position front‐line managers in the key persuasive role of controlling and disseminating essential top‐down information in the effort to keep employees union‐free, utilizing a complex and multi‐layered organizational approach to train managers for employee communication during a unionizing campaign.

While granted access by America West to observe conference calls and view internal documents the authors were not granted access to listen to Teamsters Union conversations or view Teamsters' internal documents. As a result, the authors realize that their study is limited to an analysis of only one side of the story. Additional research into this topic could include data from both campaigns.

Analysis of organizational anti‐union campaigns and the role of front‐line managers in these campaigns identify key areas of interest for both organizations and unions. This analysis, in conjunction with assessment of the overall results of a unionizing campaign, provides information that organizations can use when selecting strategies for internal communication in times of potential change.

This paper provides useful information about the complex function of line management in supporting and promoting the organization when external factors are perceived as endangering internal infrastructure. It also offers a practical glimpse into a unique type of managerial communication whose aim is to be both cautious and persuasive.

Union membership has declined in many countries reducing union capacity to bargain and contribute to economic equality. This paper aims to explore a more hopeful case in an Australian state, where the dramatic anti-union strategies of conservative governments have been reversed by Labor governments.

The research frames union recognition and union security in an international context, highlighting differences between US, Canadian, UK and Australian approaches. The research focuses on the Australian state of Queensland, providing an historical account of changes to union recognition and union preference provisions, drawing on legislation, major public service agreements, newspapers and parliamentary transcripts.

Conservative governments in Australia have implemented anti-union strategies, and Labor governments have often failed to restore union-friendly provisions when re-elected. In contrast, the Queensland study demonstrates a substantial restoration of union security provisions when Labor governments are re-elected, rebuilding political capital with unions and potentially supporting union membership. This difference is due to unique political and institutional factors that provide governments with unfettered powers to legislate their industrial relations agenda, whether in support or otherwise of unions, and has led to the more distinctive pendulum swings to the right and left than occurred elsewhere in Australia.

The research contributes to debates about the factors related to declining union membership and highlights a case where unions have achieved restoration of many provisions that increase their influence and potentially their membership.

For over thirty years, one of the most overt forms of employer opposition to unionization has been anti-union campaigns conducted by union avoidance consultants. As a result, both union and employer associations have attempted to influence the provisions of the LMRDA that cover consultant activities. This article provides the first comprehensive historical analysis of the LMRDA's reporting and disclosure requirements covering employers and consultants. The first section examines consultant reporting policy from the late 1950s to the late 1970s, a period when unions filed relatively few complaints and the DOL initiated few investigations, but the consultant industry expanded significantly. Section two examines developments in the 1980s – the period of greatest congressional and judicial activity on consultant reporting since the 1950s. The final section looks at post-1980s events and examines why organized labor has persisted with its campaign to reform government policy on consultant reporting, despite its inability to make progress on the issue over the past four decades.

Many familiar global corporations have well-developed corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies that enunciate socially caring values that include the dignity and well-being of their employees. Yet opposition to independent employee voice from companies with trumpeted CSR credentials indicates an uncomfortable contradiction between rhetoric and reality in the treatment of employees as valued stakeholders. The purpose of this paper is to explore these contradictions using the lens of a libertarian tradition.

The CSR statements of three companies are examined to provide the context for their espoused values towards employees. Media, trade union and academic publications on each of the companies are then considered to identify systematic evidence of anti-union practices.

The paper illustrates the paradox of companies with espoused CSR policies advocating the dignity and well-being of their employees with often explicit coercive anti-union practices. These practices are a constraint on the negative freedom/liberty of employees in the libertarian tradition and amount to unethical behaviour on the part of the firm.

The paper offers important insights into the disconnection common in many firms between normative ethical claims in CSR statements to treat employees as valued legitimate stakeholders and the reality in the workplace.

The author presents the experiences of a (re)founding organizer of a local union chapter in South Texas. The union member’s experience in organizational development under circumstances that are politically and economically hostile to employee rights - particularly the ability of faculty associations to offer protection to its membership in the current national anti-union political environment - is evaluated. The case is made here that the State is continually using its sovereign executive and legislative power to extract rights from those whom it makes exceptions, particularly unions. Politicians and higher education executives are simultaneously attempting to remove, effectively weaken and devalue the craftsmanship of worker knowledge at the organizational level. An interpretation of the overall case study is assessed using the knowledge analytic

If politics really is the art of achieving that which is possible — let done reasonable — then Margaret Thatcher and Denis Healey must modify their public pronouncements.

Warren S. Stone, President of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, when asked, at the height of the anti‐union open shop movement of the 1920s, what labor thought of the churches, said “…labour does not think very much of Iabor.”

This paper examines the attempts by trade unions in Britain to gain organisational rights for their members and for workers in organisations operating within the hitherto non‐unionised “new economy”.

By using data drawn from fieldwork interviews with full‐time union officials and supplemented by secondary sources, the paper assesses the genesis and progress of these campaigns, suggesting a combination of employer hostility and worker indifference explain the limited advances made to date.

In particular, the paper considers the configuration of the inter‐relationship between employer action, union strength and sudden grievances as the major explanatory variable in accounting for the variation in the outcomes of the eight union recognition campaigns. Finally, the high degree of dependence and reliance on full‐time union officers, contra the “organising” model, is examined.

Further research on union presence and activity in the “new economy” are needed to critically examine these conclusions, given that the research was based on a study of eight employers.

The implications for trade unions are that not all campaigns for union recognition can be expected to be equally successful, that campaigns are likely to take a relatively long period of time before significant advances are made and that greater scrutiny of potential campaigns is needed.

Provides lessons for trade unions attempting to gain organisational rights for their members.

Although studies on Chinese industrial relations (IR) have examined topics such as unionization and collective bargaining, little is known about employers’ reactions to recent IR changes. In particular, researchers have not thoroughly considered foreign employers’ labor relations strategies. Amidst this background, the purpose of this paper is to investigate how a foreign employer perceives and responds to the recent IR changes in China.

This paper conducted an exploratory, inductive study of the Chinese subsidiary of one multinational corporation. The data were collected through the author’s extensive fieldwork at its headquarters and Chinese subsidiary.

This paper shows that the union of a foreign firm in China serves three major functions – a collective voice, a monopoly, and an external affairs function – and that the firm’s interpretation of these functions has changed within China’s dynamic IR environment. Further, this paper finds that an employer has initiated its own compliance strategies, such as forming a friendly union, decoupling the union’s functions, de-collectivizing employment relations through effective HR practices and stricter policies, and scaling down in size to reduce administrative burden.

By introducing an employer perspective regarding recent IR changes, this paper provides a nuanced understanding of unionization and collective bargaining implementation in China. In addition, this paper identifies an emerging pattern of employer perception and response in China, highlighting unique features that have not been addressed in the existing literature on employers’ anti-union behavior. This study’s contributions also facilitate further research encompassing different contexts.