|
IBEW
FACT SHEET
Why Employers Oppose the Union - The Facts
Why do employers fight
the legal right of employees to organize? Without a Union, employees are
employed at will. What this means is legally, employees have no
rights other than those expressed in state and federal laws. Laws are only as
good as their enforcement. If an employer violates the rights of employees,
employees are usually unwilling to expend the expense and time to fight the
charge and clear their good name. Employers have a whole cadre of attorneys and
consultants to protect the company. The duty of these attorneys and consultants
is to represent the interests of management.
With a union, employees gain
additional rights, enforceable in a court of law. The IBEW has its own cadre of
attorneys and representatives whose sole purpose is to represent the rights of
employees. Employees gain further legal rights just with their union
representation. The law gives rights to employees organized collectively that
individual employees do not enjoy.
What about employer
claims that they will lose flexibility with a union? Employers do lose
flexibility in certain circumstances with a union, because the rights of both
employer and employee are spelled out in a legal, binding contract. For example,
employers lose flexibility in doing the following under most union contracts:
<
Set wages where they want, without input or review by employees;
<
To layoff employees without recourse and employee input;
<
Utilize subcontractors on an unlimited basis to reduce costs of
full-time employees;
<
Change benefits whenever management wants without any say by
employees;
<
Absolve actions by supervisors or managers without a hearing or
review of such actions;
<
Hold a grievance meeting with peer and/or management review that
has no legal recourse by the employee filing the grievance, and is unenforceable
in a court of law;
<
Discipline an employee and refuse to allow the employee's right to
a fair hearing, and further, to deny the employee the right to review by an
impartial arbitrator.
Are there economic
considerations that prompt management's opposition? Yes. Employers make
no qualms about their desire to maximize profits and minimize costs. If
unorganized employers compete with surrounding organized employers (which are
limited in their ability to cut wages of employees or subcontract jobs at a
cheaper rate) the unorganized employer can be very successful in reducing costs
by holding or reducing employee wages and benefits. If all employers are
organized, however, employee wages and benefits are taken out of competition,
and employers must then compete on improving productivity or innovative methods.
Without a union, management is
free to use employee wages and benefits to reduce its costs, thereby driving
down the wages and benefits of the organized employees of other utilities. The
unorganized employer then must cut its employee costs further, and on and on.
The cycle never ends.
Are organized companies
competitive? Yes, most definitely. The IBEW has worked hard with its
employers to insure the employers are productive and competitive. Employees have
the same desire to make a company successful as management does. However, the
methods are different in organized companies. In organized companies, workers
and management are equal partners in addressing the needs of employees,
shareholders, and customers.
Are there any other
reasons employers oppose our right to organize? The ultimate reason is
that employers lose total control over the working lives of its employees. When
employees organize a Union, employers must, by law, bargain with employees and
their union over terms and conditions of employment, and that right is enforced
by Federal Law. This is the primary reason employers expend so much time,
effort, and money preventing employees from finding out the truth about union
organization.
Industrial
democracy provided by our Union limits the dictatorial power of management. Only
then can we as employees have an equal, effective voice in our own affairs.
|