Union Member on Union (and Company) Leaders

I get email all the time from current union members. It’s usually hate mail containing all kinds of “thoughtful feedback” about things I should do to myself and asking me about my sleep (I sleep well, by the way…). Since most of this email can’t even spell the curse words right I don’t reprint it. However, I do occasionally get insightful emails like the one below (lots of great stuff in here for union leaders as well as company leaders):

Dear Sir:

And a very pleasant good morning to you.
I really don’t know how it happened, perhaps reading something on NPR or whatever, but your ’spot’ on the page caught my attention.

Allow me to introduce and explain myself and why I am writing.

I have been employed for the last  (almost) 31 years as an agreement employee on a major US railroad. I can speak of unions with a little bit of ‘authority’ I believe.
I subscribed to ‘the seven lies’ out of curiosity; and surprisingly, I am not in total disagreement with you! I guess it’s because of the failure of some of these organizations to ‘deliver’ on their empty and ‘fantastic’ promises.

SOMEthing is wrong when, at a regular meeting, five people show up and of that five, two are retired and bringing the day old doughnuts. Perhaps two active members are present, and of course, there is most likely the local political windbag there along with some ‘investigator’ (usually a disabled former employee) from some (usually) ambulance chasing law firm. This is a sad commentary, sir! Very sad.

Unions were born out of necessity. They are not some exclusive, elite prestigious organization. I needn’t go in to the history and genesis of all this because I can easily tell that your firm and your associates are educated, intelligent and learned folks, otherwise you would not be in the business you are in. But I digress. Unions were (originally) born to combat the corporate greed, disregard for the well being of employees and SAFETY. Let’s throw in MEDICAL insurance, also. I KNOW I am not receiving these benefits, along with somewhat fair work rules (debatable) because my employer LOVES me. To them I am a liability; even though people such as myself and my Brothers and Sisters are the ones who actually MAKE IT HAPPEN for these folks and generate the revenue so that they can make their millions and all their stock options etc etc ad nauseum. Yet we are the same folks that they exploit, abuse, cheat and intimidate to achieve their ultimate goal. It’s things like that that spawned unions. A fair piece of the ‘pie’, a safe place to work, fair pay etc. No, I donot think that some Detroit ghetto kid with barely an eighth grade education should have a job as a forklift operator in one of the “Big Three” automakers to the tune of seventy dollars an hour or what ever obscene amount they get. There’s something WRONG there. I’m TWICE as skilled as that individual, and I am only considered ‘Semi Skilled’ and my pay, albeit is a decent living, doesn’t come close to the forklift driver from the ‘hood.’  Strong Unionism? Yes. Fair? Absolutely not! I am not envious of thsi person, I just think there is a fine line between ’subliminal’ and ‘bizarre’ And we wonder why an automobile costs so much. There’s a start, wouldn’t you say? I am not so blind as to rule out what the executives get, either, so there is ‘fault’ if you will, enough to go around so that everyone gets their share. (Akin to ‘partisan ploitics’)

Sadly, I have come to the realization that perhaps in the ‘beginning’ unions served an important purpose. I don’t think anyone in their right mind will argue that. What is even more sad, is the fact that most of our leaders have lost sight of their objective, and have ceased to serve their membership. I have a real problem with some joker in Cleveland OH making six figures, who is so out of touch with his membership, and is probably ‘in bed’ with someone from the industry or playing golf with another, and acepting little ‘perks’ if they will relent on a certain point of contention on an upcoming negotiation. I have seen some terrible things happen where we have all but been sold out.

I donot even belong to the union that holds my contract becasue of a certain representative (if you want to call him that; I prefer ‘Company Whore”) continues to be re elected despite all his opposition. This ‘person’ ( I refuse to recognize him as a MAN) has consistently made agreements that are so detrimental to his membership, that he doesn’t even DARE set foot in Denver, as actual threats have been made on his life. And for THIS I am supposed to pay over one hundred dollars a month? Representation for WHAT? I received a lot of flak when I joined an opposing union, but I trust them more than the former. It’s a matter of who lies to yiou least, and who will screw you with less impunity!

I am cognizant of the goal and purpose of my employer is to make money for their stockholders. I own a chunk of Union Pacific and over the years, the stock has been very good to me and has allowed me to get rid of a lot of bills prior to retirement (47 days). I’m all about the company doing well. Unfortunately, Big Business has a mindset today that makes the ‘Robber Barons’ of the past look tame. What’s worse, our unions can’t even come CLOSE to competing with them at the so called “bargaining” table. How do you justify a Philly lawyer going against some Harley T-shirt wearing, surely not as educated and polished as the former in negotiations and expect to come out victorious? Do we still believe in the Easter Bunny? Our illustrious leaders aren’t even smart enough to get a real negotiator, to do our bidding. Michael Jordan surely wouldn’t be making the money he is making today in the NBA had one of our ‘negotiators’ been his agent. He’d be sweeping floors after the game!
Sir, I am not going to ramble on about this. Our unions have lost their vision, have strayed from their mission and are STUCK in the Fifties. Along with every other facet of life, things progress, things change, and life goes on. If one isn’t flexible, and ’strong enough to bend’ he/she will surely be left in the dust.

Yes, getting rid of a union is a Herculaen task in itself! It has been discussed many times among us rank and file. The down side is, that if we were to ;’decertify’ these folks, we’d have to wait an unacceptable amount of time before we could get a NEW organization to do our bidding, and that would leave us unprotected. I would not trust my employer for TWO SECONDS let alone the two years it takes for this process. We’d ALL be working for minimum wage, I’m afraid. Corporate greed is why there are unions. Unfortunately, the Unions have just become another corporation and are no better than the folks that they are supposed to ‘defend’ us against.

It’s too bad that we can’t “just get along”

Thank you for your time

I sent him the following reply (you can judge for yourself whether it was thoughtful or not…):

Thanks for your email. I appreciate your thoughtful analysis
and, like you say, I think we probably agree on more than we disagree
(that’s true of most union members I talk with).

Unions are not all bad, and some employers need a union to keep them
honest – although many unions don’t do a very good job of that. You
are also right that it is tough to decertify a union. I don’t know
your company, but if you think a decertification is possible I
wouldn’t assume that the employer will just turn around and screw you
if you get rid of the union. They know that you can turn right around
and organize another one and most companies would prefer to deal
directly with their employees.

Like you say, not all employers are honorable and they might take the
actions you fear while you are in between unions, but if the current
union isn’t representing you that’s probably a risk worth taking.

He gave me permission to post his original message on the blog and I thought it was something most employers could find useful. Not just about the mistrust many union members have toward their unions, but the fact that they look at companies just as suspiciously. It is so important to do the hard work of building trust, no matter what kind of environment (non-union or union) that you have in your workplace.

Employee Free Choice Act: 2 Simple Rules

To help companies prepare for the Employee Free Choice Act I started doing a series of interviews with our former union organizer consultants. We’ll be posting some of these interviews over the next few months and they are wide-ranging discussions that offer a lot of insightful tips for managers and company leaders.

This week I did an interview with one of our newer former union folks from the grocery and retail industry. While she laid out a series of tips for managers on how they should respond to the proposed Employee Free Choice Act, we covered one of my favorites. Instead of worrying about what form the law will take, focus on what you can control: the employee relations environment you create.

As she laid out some of her tips on creating a great work environment I was reminded again about how you could boil down the best action plans into two simple rules:

1. Be Predictable: Communicate clearly and be consistent. Most employee relations problems come out of situations where an employee is surprised or feels “sneak-attacked” by their leader. This doesn’t mean that every situation must be lined out in a company policy manual (or a union contract). It also doesn’t meant that you have to ignore performance and treat everyone exactly the same (another union notion that has crushed many companies). However, you must deal with situations in a clear and predictable way to build trust and loyalty with your people.
2. Follow the Golden Rule: This one will sound trite, but it is a cliche because it is true. If you just treat people with respect and take some time to care for them as a fellow human being, it will do wonders for your work environment – not to mention your own work life.

As you think about your own Employee Free Choice Act action plan, remember to focus your energy on what you can control (your own work environment) and make sure you are teaching leaders to remember these 2 simple rules.

Baby Boomers the Secret Key to Engagement?

A recent study by Boston College’s Sloan Center on Aging & Work, researchers found that employee engagement among younger workers has dropped significantly during this recent economic downturn. That’s not really surprising – as I discuss in my book The Next 52 Weeks, job security is one of the keys to job satisfaction.

What is surprising is that the engagement of older workers has hardly budged during this economic downturn. The research team suggests that the reason for this difference probably lies in the greater experience of Baby Boomers – they have been through many downturns and know that there is light at the end of the tunnel. Due to their seniority and experience, it is probably also true that they are the least likely to lose their jobs in a layoff.

Younger workers – especially those Generation Y employees who have recently entered the job market (and in many companies are more likely to be laid off I might add) don’t have the same experience. These younger workers are more disengaged. Generation X workers fall somewhere in the middle (perhaps because they were working during the “Internet Bubble” and have at least that experience under their belts). You can view the whole study here.

This research has some interesting implications for people planning their employee engagement and Employee Free Choice Act communications. First, it makes sense to think about how to communicate to each of these three “cohort” groups or segments. It is really important to think about your messaging based on your audience. The message – and even the communication channel – may change based on the group you are trying to reach.

Younger workers are more likely to pay attention to things like websites, text messages and social networking platforms (like blogs, twitter feeds, facebook pages, etc.). Video content for Generation Y (and probably Generation X as well) should be bite-sized (think YouTube video clips). They are probably most interested in whether or not they are going to have a job. They may be motivated by the idea that this is an opportunity for them to pick up new skills.

Baby Boomers are more likely to digest information using more traditional channels (paper newsletters, meetings, longer form videos). They will be most concerned about how the downturn is going to impact their retirement nest egg. Many have lengthened their horizon for work and are hoping to ride the market up for a while before they leave. In addition to layoffs, these delayed retirements can also be a demotivator to Generation X employees who saw a potential promotion in their immediate future. This is another issue that must me managed.

One can read too much into “age-cohort” research, but it is powerful. If you have any interest in this subject I recommend taking a look at a book called Generations: The History of America’s Future, 1584 to 2069 (you can view it on Amazon here). This book is an exhaustive study (and I mean exhaustive – I’ll admit I skimmed a lot of the dense descriptions of each generation) of how the “frame” of your age cohorts has a major impact on world events. They go so far as to say that this historical understanding can also predict major events that will happen in future generations. It is a fascinating idea.

Whatever your belief about the predictive power of age-cohorts, there is no doubt that your “frame of reference” (I call this the prism which focuses – and distorts – how you view things happening around you) will dramatically impact how you feel about an event. Whether that frame is based on age, or based on other factors, it plays an important role in your response.

Today we recommend that our survey clients (you can get my free 54-page employee satisfaction survey guide here) segment their data based on the responses received and then divide work groups by levels of engagement. It is very important to action plan and communicate based on these frames. For example, people who are loyal and engaged in the organization are typically concerned about very different issues than employees who are “checked out” and disengaged.

Often the best strategy is to focus efforts on the groups who are neither engaged or disengaged if you want to really move the needle on employee engagement overall. As you plan your engagement strategy – and especially as you map out your Employee Free Choice Act communications – keep these frames in mind.

You should think about how you might alter your basic message and your delivery platform based on the relative engagement of these different groups. In addition, remember that union organizers will focus on your most disengaged groups. While the high-leverage employee engagement strategy is to focus on those who are “on the fence,” you should also think about how organizers might go after the least engaged of your workers. As I always say the very best “union avoidance” strategy is not really a union avoidance strategy at all – just create a great place to work and unions (not to mention your competitors) won’t have a chance.

Employee Satisfaction Survey Case Study – Chemical Plant

Chemical plant improves employee relations environment over 20% – and maintains envious production, safety and profit results.

This is one of the most perplexing companies we’ve ever worked with. Although they employ some great employee relations practices they are a constant target of an International Union – they have had several union elections over the last decade (which they’ve won – some with our assistance).

This location’s initial survey, taken on the heels of their narrowest election win, showed some problems (overall they rated about neutral). They characteristically attacked the low-rated areas. Phillip Wilson assisted their team in implementing several projects to improve the work environment.

The changes included a formal performance appraisal system with regular feedback to team members. Supervisors were coached on both positive coaching skills as well as differentiating and coaching poor performers.

The management team used the survey results to map out a 3-year improvement plan. Quarterly the management team would revisit progress on the items identified as priority areas in the prior quarter. Near the end of that plan they conducted a second opinion survey. It showed a 21.7% improvement over the earlier survey.

During this time the facility maintained record production levels and a near-spotless safety record. It is a model for the industry.

NOTE: Due to the sensitive nature of these interventions, the company identity is kept confidential. If you would like to learn more, or wish to arrange a discussion with the actual client, please contact Phil Wilson at 800-888-9115.

Employee Satisfaction Survey Case Study – Medical Services

Medical services provider nearly loses union election, then transforms its employee relations environment in only one year – and the union never returned!

This company suffered about as near a miss as you can – they won a union election by just one vote in a unit of around 150 employees. They hired us to help them after this election.

This organization had a number of serious issues, starting with a challenging relationship between the owner of the company and its top operations manager. One of our primary tasks for the year was working this out or making a change. Ultimately a new leader was selected for the position.

The survey results also showed frustration with pay and benefits and immediate supervision. The company’s growth outpaced many of their employee relations systems and our task over the next year was to catch up. We developed policies and procedures to help ensure consistency across departments (a major complaint).

We were able to implement a number of other communication improvements. Things were really on a roll.

Then disaster struck. About a month before the union could file another petition (which we figured was a near certainty) the company learned that it would be forced to pay nearly 50% more for health insurance. It was able to absorb about half of this increase, but employees would be asked to pay about 25% more for insurance.

We used this very negative development to test how well we had done preparing supervisors for their role as communicators during the year. Each supervisor met individually with his or her direct reports and explained the situation. They went over all the options with employees.

In the end the benefit communication went as well as could be hoped. Employees weren’t entirely happy (which showed up in the survey results) but they were sure that the company was doing everything it could – and they saw tremendous improvement over the last year.

Surprisingly, the union never came back. This was a tremendous accomplishment and a testament to the hard work done by the leadership team of this company.

NOTE: Due to the sensitive nature of these interventions, the company identity is kept confidential. If you would like to learn more, or wish to arrange a discussion with the actual client, please contact Phil Wilson at 800-888-9115.

Employee Satisfaction Survey Case Study – Nursing Home

Two nursing home facilities in 18-facility chain move from worst to first in one year.

These two facilities are part of the same 18-facility nursing home chain. Our firm was engaged to conduct an employee satisfaction survey for the entire chain. These two facilities rated at the bottom of the company results. We were asked to work with the management team at both facilities to help them improve their results.

Each location worked up its own employee relations improvement plan with assistance from Phillip Wilson. One facility primarily needed to work on team-building issues among the leadership group. This included teaching the group the Facilitation Conflict-Resolution Model and assisting the Administrator in facilitating meetings with members of the leadership team.

The second facility needed to work on communication with one department and also had to deal with inconsitency among the departments. We implemented regular “skip step” meetings between the Administrator and the departments. We also implemeted regular “in-service” training for department heads on areas where we found the most inconsistency.

Both facilities also needed to work on development discussions with direct care and support staff. We coached leaders on how to conduct these discussions.

We assisted the facilities in communicating the survey results and developing action plans. During the course of the year we worked on high priority issues uncovered in the survey. Facility administrators also received individualized coaching to deal with issues that came up during the year.

One year later all 18 facilities were surveyed again. This time the two “problem” facilities rated number 1 and 3 on their overall survey results.

NOTE: Due to the sensitive nature of these interventions, the company identity is kept confidential. If you would like to learn more, or wish to arrange a discussion with the actual client, please contact Phil Wilson at 800-888-9115.