The Childcare Dilemma Is A Good Problem For Labor-Management Committees

Posted on May 13, 2024 by CALMC Blog

This week in the U. S. we celebrate Mothers’ Day, and a  few weeks ago, the Boston Fed had a podcast on an important topic that affects most mothers, and fathers, too, and that’s childcare.  On the podcast, they talk about the problems associated with childcare and how it’s at a crisis point.

Childcare problems are multi-faceted.  Families, of course, are impacted but so are employers and the child care facilities.

For families, childcare can be very expensive or there might not be adequate childcare.  If a single parent or both parents work evening or midnight hours, childcare is usually not available. Some parents, whether they’re single-parents or married couples, sometimes can’t work because child care is not affordable.

Because parents may be struggling to pay for child care costs, childcare facilities don’t necessarily have the revenue stream to pay good wages or even increase wages for workers. That creates a lot of turnover for childcare facilities as workers seek better paying jobs.  It becomes a vicious cycle for the facilities as quality of care suffers and parents seek alternatives.

Employers face difficulty recruiting or retaining employees if childcare facilities can’t meet the needs of potential workers.  Absenteeism can be affected if workers don’t have adequate childcare.  Productivity and quality suffer which affects the workplace to be competitive.

The childcare crisis is a good project for labor-management committees to work on together.  It could either be through a community labor-management committee that works on the problem in a broader sense such as for the community as a whole or a workplace labor-management committee that looks at childcare for workers at a particular workplace.  It also could be both.

A community labor-management committee could either be an “ad-hoc”, one that looks at a specific issue, or a committee like CALMC where management and labor come together to support working together.

Either community labor-management committee can have labor and management members from the community plus members from other organizations that may have an interest in supporting joint efforts such as local governments or public agencies.  If the committee is looking at a specific problem, people that are more familiar with the problem should also be included.  In the case of child care, representatives from child care facilities should be involved.  A community labor-management committee can also be a way for everyone to learn and share experiences from each other on how they’re managing the problem either through union or workplace members.  Representatives on a community labor-management committee can help address childcare needs that could benefit multiple workplaces and the entire community.

If it’s a workplace labor-management committee, representation of the workplace is important and inviting representatives from child care facilities to a specific meeting is a good idea if the committee is considering a particular facility or if the committee is looking at issues associated with child care for their particular workplace.  A workplace labor-management committee may also represent multi-locations and having experts on childcare would still be beneficial.

With either a community labor-management committee or workplace labor-management committee, having affordable and available childcare is a common interest both unions and employers should have.  Unions, of course, should be interested because of the benefit for some of their members.  Employers should have an interest because they need available workers to produce products or provide services. Having childcare facilities to meet workers’ needs benefits both sides.

Another problem that should be a common interest for both unions and employers is the lack of childcare facilities.  Since the pandemic, facilities have closed or there are no employees to work.  That also could be an interest of childcare operators as they see this occurring.

There also is another common interest of both labor and management and that is as workers retire, workplaces will be hiring more younger workers.  The number of working mothers has increased 2% also since the pandemic.  This number will probably increase as retirements happen so it is a growing problem.  For unions with younger members that could be as an important as it is for the workplace trying to attract and retain workers.  While the problem of childcare could be addressed during negotiations, it is better to be worked on through labor-management committees because the pressure of negotiations is removed and it allows members to take time and look at the problem more thoroughly.

The childcare issue isn’t limited to a particular demographic or job.  All workers and all types of jobs are impacted by this dilemma.  It truly becomes more of a community-wide problem as many workplaces will face it.  That’s where it may be better for community labor-management committees to play a role.  These committees can help identify more common interests between labor, management, childcare facilities, and local officials and why community labor-management committees can focus more on a broader scale than individual workplaces which work only on their own situation.

Many childcare facilities are privately run, but because the childcare problem has become so universal, some states are working on developing public-private partnerships.  The states looking into the public-private partnerships are looking at cost-sharing between, the state, employers and employees.  Federal legislation has also been addressed but was unable to pass in Congress.  There also has been some agreements between labor and management that have included childcare allowances, more flexible work schedules and paid leave so parents can be home with children if schools or childcare facilities were closed.

Childcare as mentioned is a huge problem.  Not all labor-management committees will be able to address it.  As we have blogged before, good labor-management committees are made up of people who are committed to working together.  When a labor-management committee comes together for the first time it may not be able to work on such a large scale problem as this.  Starting on smaller problems may be better so a committee can get some practice solving problems together and developing a relationship. It will be very important for both a new committee or an established committee to have patience.  It may be necessary for some workplace committees to get some training on how to work together first and that means there must be support by leadership on both sides especially when it comes to working on tough issues.  Labor-management committees whether they’re community based or workplace based help.  It’s important for unions and employers to continue to use either or both.  It’s amazing to watch labor and management work together!

CALMC activities, including our blog, are made possible in part by the continuing support of our members, such as

Our activities are also made possible in part by a grant from the City of Columbus.

Contact us for more information about Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee or to become a member.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How a Labor-Management Problem COULD be Resolved Cooperatively

Posted on May 5, 2024 by CALMC Blog

A couple of weeks ago we wrote about a labor-management problem and how not to solve it. We discussed a problem impacting Major Leage Baseball (MLB) and the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA), the union representing major and minor league players.

The dispute centers around serious injuries to pitchers. Both sides have resorted to traditional labor-management behaviors in approaching the problem. To summarize, this has involved:

1,        One party announces to media that there is a problem,
2.        The parties take a position and blame each other for the problem,
3,        The sides present limited reasoning for their positions, often siting little or no evidence for their conclusions.
4.        Fire up their constituents by continuing to blame each other.
5.        When the problem does not go away on its own, move on, and hope no one will notice,

It is unlikely the parties will be able to find solutions to the problem unless they change their approach. Today, we would like to consider how they could approach the situation by working cooperatively.

We have discussed effective problem solving procedures in several earlier blogs, and detailed them in our instructional videos on our CALMC web site. To summarize the process, we use 5 basic steps.

1. Start by Defining the Problem. The union began the process by declaring an increase in pitcher injuries was caused by the use of a pitch clock. The timer is designed to speed up the game by limiting how long a pitcher can take between pitches. The union contends the clock increases the strain on pitchers’ arms by cutting down on the recovery time between pitches.

Management blames the problem on additional strain placed on pitchers’ arms by the increased velocity of the pitches they throw and the motion they use to add additional spin on the ball. This spin causes ball to break more, either vertically or horizontally to make it harder for the batter to hit.

Either of these accusations might be right, or they both might be wrong. We do not know unless we can analyze data to help understand what is really happening. Without information, we cannot consider the causation of the problem. We can only guess, and that is rarely effective.

Clearly, there are problems here that impact both management and labor. Pitchers are getting hurt and often out of action, sometimes for months or longer. This adversely affects the teams that lose these players as well as the careers of the players.

There is also no doubt there is additional strain placed on pitchers’ arms. In 2010, the Cincinnati Reds signed Cuban pitcher Aroldis Chapman after a bidding war for his services. The primary attraction was his ability to consistently throw the baseball over 100 miles per hour. You can imagine the strain placed on the arm and shoulder, especially when it is repeated multiple times per game.

When Chapman arrived in Cincinnati, he was very unusual. Fans loved to come to game to see how fast he could throw that day if he came out of the bullpen. He was one of very few pitchers who could throw with that velocity.

Now, there are multiple pitchers who can throw that fast, often one (or more) per team. Demand for this ability continues to increase, with resulting increases in salaries for those who can.

Additionally, pitchers want to put more spin on the baseball when the throw it. Those who are good at this can make the ball break over a foot on the way to the plate. Teams hire coaches who can teach pitchers to throw this and staff minor league teams with training facilities to help measure the ability to do this and throw the ball with more and more spin.

The human arm is not meant to throw a baseball this hard or with this spin rate. The average spin rate in major league baseball is around 2,150 revolutions per minute, and has been measured as high as 3,468 rpm. It is accomplished by rotating the arm as the pitch is thrown.

As you can imagine, the torque both of these actions result in tremendous strain on shoulders and elbows. Teams and players may want to strike a balance between the ability to throw hard with spin while limiting the risk of injury. Neither pitchers nor teams always make good decisions in this regard.

Before we can proceed, we need to consider the possible problems without trying to fix blame. The concerns impact both labor and management. Examining these factors takes effort and careful consideration, It seems like both labor and management could be right, but how can we know?

Interestingly, many prominent players disagree with the position of their union, Justin Verlander has been one of the best pitchers for many years, but has suffered significant injuries since  2021. He said, “it would be easiest to … blame the pitch clock.”  He noted the desire of pitchers to throw harder with increased spin rates, even if it comes with a higher chance of injury.

2, Diagnose the Problem. Now for the hard part, gathering and analyzing data that is relevant to the problem. Without data and information, we cannot really understand what is happening.

Some groups try to skip this step. If they do, effective problem solving is not likely to occur. There are a variety of tools we could use in this effort. Some are statistical, others are qualitative. It can take time and could result in some expense, but doing so would avoid jumping to a wrong conclusion.

If baseball and the players work together to diagnose the problems, they might be able to come to common understandings of what is really happening. With this, they could also build on their ability to work together on future problems.

In an attempt to support their position, MLB released the results from a study conducted by Johns Hopkins University. It focused on the stress on elbows as the cause of pitcher injuries, but did not consider other factors. Although the data was impressive, by minimizing other possible factors, is is far from conclusive.

The MLBPA released no data in support of its position. Without data and information, attempting to solve problems is like throwing darts at a moving target while blindfolded.

3. Develop a List of Possible Solutions. If we have effectively diagnosed the problems, we can now focus on how they can be solved. Beginning to discuss solutions earlier increases the risk of jumping to conclusions. Use the information you have gathered about the issues and start finding solutions.

Do not focus on finding the one solution to the problem. Rarely do problems ever have just one solution, we want to consider as many as possible, Use brainstorming to determine as many options as possible without judgement about them. That will come later.

Possible solution to these problems could involve limiting the number of 100+ mile per hour pitches thrown per inning or limiting the spin rate and the number of pitches thrown at high rates. They could involve better training techniques for pitchers.

It should be possible to develop a long list of options. One we have, we can start to decide what we will do.

4. Develop Standards to Help Us Judge the Options. Standards are how we determine whether a possible solution is workable. We recommend labor management groups use three basic standards in dealing with problems.

           Is the proposed solution feasible? If not, it will not work. Possible solutions such as “Eliminate pitchers and have a machine throw the ball” would not be workable without upending the game. Introducing a machine would interfere with the game too significantly.
           Is the solution affordable? If not, there is no reason to move forward unless costs can be cut. Fortunately, we are dealing with a multi-billion dollar industry, so the options are more likely to meet this standard
           Will the proposed solution work to solve the problem? If not, we do not need to consider it.

There are other options we can use that relate to the specific problem, The team working on the issue can consider them. They might involve limiting spin rates, pitcher workloads, types of pitches that can be thrown, or many other factors relevant to the problem.

5. Determine Which Options Meet the Standards. If an option does not, it should be eliminated. Only those meeting all standards will remain under consideration. The team can then decide on which option (or options) they want to try. This decision should be made by consensus.

But what if I don’t know anything about baseball? How can I help a team solve the problem? This is really not a concern, since when solving labor-management problems you shuld be working with people from both sides in the industry or organization, no matter whether it is a manufacturer, retail store, safety committee, school, or other group. Members of the team will provide the organizational expertise to deal with the problem. As long as you, as a trainer or facilitator, know the tools and process of problem solving, you can be successful and so will your tram.

After MLB and the players’ union raised the issue of pitcher injuries, the parties engaged in a traditional labor-management process that focused on finger pointing and blame finding. In the intervening weeks, nothing aimed at solving the problem has occurred. As a result, pitcher injuries are still happening.

A team-based, cooperative process like the one outlined here would be more likely to find potential solutions. It permits the parties to jointly attack the problem rather than each other. The process is nt necessarily easy or quick, but the outcomes are far better than the stalemate that results from traditional approaches.

_________________________________________________

CALMC activities, including our blog, are made possible in part by the continuing support of our members, such as

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 683

Central Ohio Chapter, National Association of Electrical Contractors

Our activities are also made possible in part by a grant from the City of Columbus.

Contact us for more information about Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee or to become a member.

Posted in CALMC, Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee, Data-Based Decision Making, Employee Engagement, Employee Involvement, Labor-Management Committees, Labor-Management Cooperation, Problem Solving, Systemic change | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Forming A Joint Safety Committee Can Be A Good First Step

Posted on April 28, 2024 by CALMC Blog

Last week workers at the VW Chatanooga, Tennessee, plant voted to unionize.  Overwhelmingly, workers voted in support of UAW representation.  One of the items they want to address is workplace safety.  Working on safety issues can be a good place to start for any workplace or worker-management partnership in  either a union or non-union setting because most everyone wants employees to end a shift without having any accidents or injuries occur.

A  joint safety committee can help the business, improve relationships and create a more positive work environment.  We’ve blogged before about one organization that focused on improving safety throughout the workplace.  They had tried many of the traditional things before like slogans, signs and games but none of those really worked.  The owner eventually decided it was time to involve the workers.  Once that happened, the organization saw a dramatic improvement in regards to accidents and injuries.  The owner at one time had thought about closing but when the improvements occurred m he instead was able to expand his business.   The workers also believed there was a greater interest in their well-being so the overall atmosphere of the workplace changed for the better.

Involving workers provides them with a voice and that makes a difference as far as loyalty and support for the organization.   The owner of the company we worked with said involving workers to identify the hazards and remind others about safety concerns made the difference between what had not worked in the past and the improvements in the  safety record that happened.

Starting a joint safety committee is not difficult.  The committee needs to be a good representation of the workplace.  Some committees like to have even-number of labor and management representatives but it’s not a necessity. The representation of the organization is more  important.  Some people think smaller committees work better than large committees but we can attest both have produced amazing results.  It’s more about the commitment of committee members and the support they committee receives.

A safety workplace assessment also is a good start because it will provide some data for the committee  and help them determine where they need to begin their work.  Committee members, or a sub-group, can help develop what questions to put on the assessment.  It may be a good idea to get someone from outside of the organization to conduct the assessment and do an analysis on the results.  If an outsider does it and keeps the information, people may be more willing to give honest responses and not be afraid of answering questions.

In addition, it may be good for the safety committee to go through training or have a facilitator who can help them with necessary tools and techniques for looking at safety issues as well as to keep members on task.  If that is allowed to happen, it can show support for the committee and help it to succeed.

A safety committee should meet regularly, at least monthly.  Meeting on a regular basis especially in the early stages of formation is important to keep momentum going for the committee’s work plus it will aid in resolving the issues the committee addresses.  The length of time for the meeting is up to the committee.  Some have met for an hour while others have met longer.  There also may be times when the committee will have to meet more often, and, again, when that’s allowed, it helps to show support.  Sub-committees can also be useful and can include those outside the full committee especially if the committee is working on a issue in a particular area and those more familiar with the issue can help.

A safety committee can be the start to the use of other committees in the  workplace.  It gives people an opportunity to not only  help to be a part of resolving  workplace issues but it helps people learn about each other and that can build relationships which lead to a better overall work environment.  It does take some time and patience when using good problem solving but the overall impact can greatly enhance the environment and make significant gains on the bottom line of any organization.

CALMC activities, including our blog, are made possible in part by the continuing support of our members, such as

Our activities are also made possible in part by a grant from the City of Columbus.

Contact us for more information about Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee or to become a member.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How Not To Solve a Labor-Management Problem

Posted on April 21, 2024 by CALMC Blog

One of the things I enjoy when working with labor and management is helping them with problem solving. The sides learn they can proactively work together to find areas to improve their work systems.

Over the next couple of blogs, we want to take a look at a specific problem and examine how labor and management can try to solve the problem using a traditional approach and how it could be done more productively.

The problem we want to consider involves Major League Baseball (MLB) and the Major Leage Baseball Players Association (MLBPA), the union representing players in both the major and minor leagues.

The issue in question is regarding the number of injuries to pitchers this year. Although it is early in the season, it seems like many pitchers are suffering shoulder or elbow injuries, many of them requiring surgery and lengthy recoveries.

It would seem like this is a problem that should concern both the union and management, however both started by opening fire at each other. Their methods seem to be:

Step 1: Look at the Symptoms. Before carefully identifying the problem, both sides have considered the symptoms they have observed. The players association believes the injuries are resulting from rule changes imposed by management last year. Management believes the cause is from the extreme stress placed on pitcher’s arms by the way they throw.

While the symptoms may be accurate, they do not help identify the root cause of the problem. Treating symptoms is rarely effective when trying to resolve concerns. Unless we understand the causes of the problem, we are not likely to be successful in solving it.

Step 2: Blame the Other Side. The key is to put the focus on blame finding and finger pointing at the other side. Real evidence is not necessary, the us-vs-them is what is important at this stage.

The entire debate began at this step, with the MPBPA pointing at baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred for implementing the pitch clock. Management quickly slashed back at the union, pointing out the lack of evidence behind their stance.

Now, the battle lines are drawn with techniques designed to divide the parties, not resolve the problem. Nothing done so far is really designed to find a solution.

Step 3. Take a Position. The players union put out a statement on social media implying the pitch clock was the key contributing factor.

“Despite unanimous player opposition and significant concerns regarding health and safety, the commissioner’s office reduced the length of the pitch clock last December, just one season removed from imposing the most significant rule change in decades,” MLBPA executive director Tony Clark said. “Since then, our concerns about the health impacts of reduced recovery time have only intensified. The league’s unwillingness thus far to acknowledge or study the effects of these profound changes is an unprecedented threat to our game and its most valuable asset — the players.”

The pitch clock shows the amount of time pitchers have before they must begin their throwing motion. 2024 is the second season in which it has been in use at the major league level. In 2023, pitchers had 15 seconds between pitches when no runner was on base and 20 seconds to begin their delivery with runners aboard. Over the winter, the competition committee passed a rule change cutting the latter time from 20 to 18 seconds.

The proposals for the clock and the changes were approved by the six league representatives on the rule committee, while all four players on the panel voted against it. The MLBPA released a statement at the time calling the changes “unnecessary” and saying the 2024 season “should be used to gather additional data and fully examine the health, safety and injury impacts of reduced recovery time.”

Next, Major-League Baseball fired its own salvo. Arguing there has been “no empirical backing pointing to the clock as a contributing factor to pitcher injuries.” MLB instead suggested the main issue is the increased stress which pitchers are putting on their arms to improve the quality of their arsenals.

The league claimed “(The MLBPA’s) statement ignores the empirical evidence and much more significant long-term trend, over multiple decades, of velocity and spin increases that are highly correlated with arm injuries.”

Step 4: Cite Evidence Showing the Other Side is Wrong. In their statement, baseball said, “Nobody wants to see pitchers get hurt in this game, which is why MLB is currently undergoing a significant comprehensive research study into the causes of this long-term increase, interviewing prominent medical experts across baseball which to date has been consistent with an independent analysis by Johns Hopkins University that found no evidence to support that the introduction of the pitch clock has increased injuries.

“In fact, JHU found no evidence that pitchers who worked quickly in 2023 were more likely to sustain an injury than those who worked less quickly on average. JHU also found no evidence that pitchers who sped up their pace were more likely to sustain an injury than those who did not.”

The MLBPA referred to the number of injuries suffered by significant players at the start of the 2024 season. Gerrit Cole (elbow inflammation), Lucas Giolito (internal brace surgery), Eduardo Rodriguez (lat strain), Anthony DeSclafani (flexor tendon surgery), Trevor Stephan (Tommy John surgery), and others were among the pitchers to suffer notable injuries during Spring Training, and the union contends the increased strain resulting from pitching more quickly is the cause.

Step 5: Cling To Your Position and Continue to Blame the Other Side. Since the initial statements, both the MLBPA and MLB continue to tout their positions. Neither side appears to be ready to engage in real studies to determine the cause. In the meantime, more pitchers are getting hurt and the use of the pitch clock continues.

Step 6: Do Nothing and See If the Problem Soves Itself. Here is a hint: It Won’t. Problems rarely disappear on their own.

Could the Players’ Union be right, and the pitch clock is the problem? They might be, or they could be wrong.

Could MLB be right, and the increased strain on pitchers’ elbows and shoulders resulting from sharper, more forceful deliveries be correct? They might be, or they could be wrong.

What we do know is the problem has continued, and injuries continue to occur.

Traditional methods such as these are not likely to resolve significant labor-management issues, whether they are on the playing field, the factory floor, or an office. The goal of each side becomes victory, and that supersedes trying to solve the matter. At best, perhaps the sides will find some compromise that only serves to push things aside without solving the problem.

There has got to be a better way. In my next blog, we will look at how the sides could effectively attempt to resolve the issue for the benefit of baseball and the players,

_______________________________________________________

CALMC activities, including our blog, are made possible in part by the continuing support of our members, such as

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 683

Central Ohio Chapter, National Association of Electrical Contractors

Our activities are also made possible in part by a grant from the City of Columbus.

Contact us for more information about Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee or to become a member.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Commitment Is Important But So Is Support!

Posted on April 14, 2024 by CALMC Blog

We’ve blogged before about the importance commitment plays with the success of labor-management committees but we haven’t written as much about the need for support.  Support can be from within the committee or outside the committee but is definitely as important as the need for commitment.  While we hear a lot from labor-management committee members about the concern for commitment, they sometimes don’t realize how much support they will need too especially as they work together more and more.

Not only does labor-management training help teach new techniques and help with relationship building, it also gives committee members time to voice concerns and start thinking about how they will function as a committee.  They start laying some foundation on committee operations such as how and when they will meet, behaviors they expect from themselves and other members during meetings, identifying their mission or what work they will do and who they will do it for and how it will be done.  Committee members also set expectations of what that work can be and what it isn’t so they don’t waste valuable time on things they can’t do anything about.  A couple other foundation pieces are identifying a vision of the future and developing goals to achieve that vision through the problems and projects they work on together.  But that all requires support and that support must come from within the committee itself, inside the organization and outside the organization as well.

When it comes to support, labor-management committees provide support to their constituents by helping with any contractual and non-contractual issues they may encounter.  When constituents know the labor-management committee is supporting them, constituents return the support.  The committee also supports itself when members support committee decisions.  Consensus plays a big role in that.  We tell groups consensus is better than any other decision-making method because it allows everyone to have a voice and we want a process where everyone supports the decisions.  Traditional decision-making methods, like voting, only create winners and losers. We want something where everyone wins and that’s consensus.  That means the committee needs to hear from everyone on their thoughts, particularly if it’s a difficult item.  It’s important everyone is able to support the decision as if it’s their first choice and, this part is key, everyone can sell it to their constituents.  If everyone is not in agreement and cannot sell the decision to constituents then there is no consensus.  The one thing a labor-management committee does not want is the meeting after the meeting with someone saying why they couldn’t support the decision.

Consensus does take time but the outcome is way worth it because people have an opportunity to speak up, problems are better explored, and facts and information are gathered which can actually help make it easier to come to consensus.  We tell groups if you can’t come to consensus maybe it’s time to get more information and that usually helps most of the time.

Not all problems will require consensus decision-making but they do require support for and from the committee.  Sometimes quick decisions will be needed but a group can re-visit if needed to determine if the decision was the right one.  Some decisions such as critical incidences will require management to make a decision but, again, the committee can re-visit the decision to see if tweaking needs to be done.  One of the hardest things for people to understand is no decision is cut in stone.  Decisions can be and should be reviewed to make sure the decision is relevant or if something is different that requires changes to be made.

Outside committee support is needed from both the union side and management side.  We worked with a labor-management committee that was working on an extremely difficult issue. The committee was a model for labor-management committees.  They worked extremely well together and were capable of working on significant issues very effectively but we found out with this issue there wasn’t external support for it.  We received phone calls from both upper management and upper union leadership concerned about the contractual implications this issue would have for them.  Neither upper labor or upper management wanted the committee to work on the issue.  They were both afraid of the consequences that could happen.    Once both sides understood why the committee wanted to work on the issue and how it could benefit both sides upper leaders were ready to support the committee and their work.

This episode confirmed the need for regular communication from the committee to leadership on both sides so there would be continued support for the projects the committee wanted to work on.  Without that support, the labor-management committee would lack credibility and it would have been extremely difficult to accomplish any goals they had.  In the end, both sides agreed on a pilot for contractual language that would eventually be written into the organization’s labor agreement.

Outside support can go beyond organizations.  Support can be community wide support to help workplaces thrive and grow.  One of our colleagues worked with a small community that was concerned jobs stayed in the community.  The community’s mayor brought workplace leaders together, union and management, to find out about the problems they faced and what could be done to help them.  With everyone together in one room, they discussed their needs.  One was lack of certain supplies.  When some leaders heard that they said they could provide the supplies, then another identified their need and someone responded on how they could help and on and on it went.  The group decided they needed to meet on a regular basis.  It helped to save many jobs for that community but it also, once again, demonstrated how communication helped provide support and how important a role support can be for any organization.

Community support isn’t just about towns.  It can be a community of like professionals who make sure support is available for constituents.  Just as a labor-management committee can provide support for their constituents, so can labor practitioners make sure support is available for labor and management to work together.  In Ohio, we’re lucky enough not only to have federal mediators (FMCS) but also state mediators for the public sector (State Employment Relations Board (SERB).  Both groups of professionals do an amazing job but they’re also limited as to the amount of time they can spend with labor and management committees.  That’s where we, CALMC, comes in.  Community labor-management committees such as CALMC are not new.  Years ago, community labor-management committees were established to help communities maintain jobs instead watching businesses close.  Community labor-management committees have provided support to workplaces in many different ways.  That support has included leaders helping other leaders, like the small community above, on issues that faced them such as healthcare needs or other contractual issues they encountered and had concerns or questions about.  Community labor-management committees like us have also provided training and other resources to help labor and management in union or non-union environments work together for the good of their workplaces and the community.  Community labor-management committees can spend the time FMCS and SERB can’t which helps those committees that either need or want the additional support.  Community labor-management committees usually don’t provide mediation support that FMCS and SERB provide.  Going forward, as more workers decide to organize and workplaces have more new hires that may not be as familiar with labor practices or want an environment where everyone works together either in a unionized or non-unionized setting, support will be critical to helping both the workplace and the workers succeed.  Community labor-management committees, FMCS and, in Ohio, SERB must provide that one important element – support!

CALMC activities, including our blog, are made possible in part by the continuing support of our members, such as

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 683

Central Ohio Chapter, National Association of Electrical Contractors

 

Our activities are also made possible in part by a grant from the City of Columbus.

Contact us for more information about Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee or to become a member.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Unions for College Sports Teams

Posted on April 7, 2024 by CALMC Blog

Have you been watching college basketball? The NCAA Tournament is wrapping up Monday after drawing record audiences for both the men’s and women’s games.

We also may be seeing the start of “the next big thing” in college basketball and other sports, as athletes are beginning to form unions.

While professional athletes are almost all members of a union, there have only been a few attempts to organize college teams. Earlier this month, the Dartmouth College men’s basketball team voted 13-2 to unionize with Service Employees International Union Local 560. The repercussions of this decision were almost immediate.

On Labor reports Dartmouth is resisting the effort, including engaging in a potentially illegal approach. Spokesperson Jana Barnello explained that the college would defy any NLRB order requiring it to bargain with the players’ union, the nation’s first for college athletes. The school’s appeal of an NLRB regional director’s decision classifying the athletes as employees is still pending before the full board.

If the board rejects Dartmouth’s appeal, Barnello stated that the school will continue to refuse to bargain with the union in order to spark unfair labor practice proceedings. By taking these steps, the school hopes to get the matter reviewed by a federal court. I would assume they also hope it will simply go away.

The position of the college boils down to an argument over the status of college athletes, as Dartmouth contends players are not employees of the college. Bloomberg Law reports Ms.  Barnello said Monday that the college would defy any National Labor Relations Board order requiring it to. The Ivy League school’s appeal of an NLRB regional director’s decision classifying the athletes as employees is pending before the full board.

She said, “While we continue to negotiate in good faith with multiple unions representing Dartmouth employees, our responsibility to future generations of students means we must explore all our legal options for challenging the regional director’s legal error,”

Barnello said the college would take this option, calling it “an unprecedented step in our long history of labor negotiations.”

The ramifications of having players considered to be legally protected employees even prompted a Congressional hearing. Republicans and university athletics representatives testifying at two House Education and the Workforce subcommittees sounded alarms about college athletes organizing in its wake.

Bloomberg writes “The NLRB ruling also dealt another blow to the NCAA, which has been fighting a multi-pronged legal battle against attempts to give athletes more labor and employment rights.”

Local 560 President Chris Peck said in a statement that the union is “disappointed” by the school’s stance and called on Dartmouth to bargain.

“An $8 billion institution is saying it will ignore the law to avoid negotiating over wages and other working conditions with the young men who exercised their right to form a union. Dartmouth College is snubbing its nose at the National Labor Relations Board and refusing to follow its directives,” Peck said. “It isn’t right and it contravenes Dartmouth’s stated values.”

As you might expect, the anti-labor faction of the Republican party is not happy with the idea of unionized college athletes. “The Biden NLRB is the most activist, pro-union government agency in history, and it has taken this opportunity to declare student athletes to be employees,” Rep. Burgess Owens (R-Utah.) said in opening remarks at the hearing. This “is an existential threat to the future of college sports on many campuses,” said Owens, who chairs the Higher Education and Workforce Development subcommittee.

There are also potential unintended consequences to permitting college athletes to unionize.

“The NLRB’s regional director’s decision in Dartmouth was so broad that NCAA Division II and III student-athletes, college students who participate in non-athletic clubs, and actually high school students could be deemed employees,” said Jill Bodensteiner, director of athletics at Saint Joseph’s University.

Although this seems like a massive leap of logic, Bodensteiner accurately noted that the decision to classify the players as employees could also change depending on the makeup of the board, allowing it to “flip back and forth every four years.” This also applies to many of the gains made by labor during the Biden administration.

Other potential complications Bodensteiner cited in her testimony include how college athletes’ substantial financial aid and scholarships are currently tax exempt, but wages would be subject to federal, state, and local taxes.

Supporters of the NLRB’s decision in the Dartmouth players’ case disputed the lawmakers’ and witnesses’ framing of the issues, however.

Mark Gaston Pearce, who served as NLRB chairman in the Northwestern case that denied college students the right to organize, said using that decision to make a case against students’ rights to organize are not “exactly accurate.”

“The board never addressed whether or not these football players were in fact employees; what they did was decide the case based on jurisdiction,” Pearce said.

Northwestern was the only private school in its division, and there may not have been a “reasonable, cooperative, and sensible” atmosphere for collective bargaining, he added. Moreover, the board was “not ready to be able to insert themselves in a situation where it may be chaotic, given the dynamics of a private sector school within a sea of public sector schools,” he said.

However, Pearce noted things have changed over the last nine years, and now believes college athletes should have a “seat at the table” to negotiate working conditions, such as how long they can practice and how much traveling they should do in order to keep good academic standing, he said.

The Bloomberg article contends the US Supreme Court’s 2021 landmark NCAA v. Alston case opened the door to student athlete compensation, and the NLRB extended unionization rights to students working as research and teaching assistants in its 2016 decision in Columbia University. Most recently, board attorneys are arguing the NCAA, the University of Southern California, and the Pac-12 Conference jointly violated federal labor law, Pearce said.

Bodensteiner also believes classifying student athletes as employees could also be detrimental to international students, who may no longer be eligible for a student visa.

Classifying student athletes as employees is at odds with the work limitations of the F-1 student visa, the category most heavily used by the roughly 20,000 international athletes enrolled at US colleges and universities, attorneys say.

Bloomberg reports the F-1 visa only allows for limited work opportunities, including 20 hours of work on campus or 40 hours when classes aren’t in session. That limit matches the restrictions on weekly athletic activities during a playing season under the NCAA bylaws.

Robert Seiger, a partner at Fox Rothschild LLP notes, “For lack of a better word, it upends a class of visa holders,” he said. “If you’re taking students and reclassifying them as employees, then in the simplest terms, those athletes are no longer considered to be students and therefore are ineligible for the F-1.”

There likely won’t be immediate effects for international Dartmouth players on student visas while the case is appealed.

Bloomberg reports foreign college athletes’ unique status was highlighted by the proliferation of name, image, and likeness (NIL) policies in recent years, including the NCAA’s adoption of broad rules on compensation deals after a loss at the US Supreme Court.

While the new NIL landscape meant significant deals for many star athletes, foreign players for the most part were prevented from cashing in because of their visas’ work restrictions.

Legislation (S. 2554, H.R. 4948) introduced by Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Rep. Lori Trahan (D-Mass.), would allow international athletes to sign the same NIL deals as their US teammates without having their F-1 visa status affected, even in the case that college athletes are classified as employees of their schools or athletic associations. This legislation has not advanced in either chamber.

The employment status of college athletes is also the basis of two other pending cases, one before an NLRB administrative law judge concerning unionization efforts at the University of Southern California and another in the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit involving compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

We are at the beginning stages of this controversy, and it will be interesting to follow its implications. As Ksenia Maiorova, a partner at Green and Spiegel LLC, summarized, “It’s a sign of what’s to come,” said. “Most legal professionals in this space believe the classification of NCAA student athletes as employees is inevitable.”

_______________________________________________

CALMC activities, including our blog, are made possible in part by the continuing support of our members, such as

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 683

Central Ohio Chapter, National Association of Electrical Contractors

Our activities are also made possible in part by a grant from the City of Columbus.

Contact us for more information about Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee or to become a member.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Two Important Historical Anniversaries For Labor

Posted on March 31, 2024 by CALMC Blog

Two historical anniversaries that represent female workers came up this last week.  Both of these anniversaries represent the power of women even if it’s not under the good circumstances.  One of them was the anniversary of the death of the woman who inspired the Rosie the Riveter song, Rosalind Walter, and the other was the anniversary of the tragic fire of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory where over 140 workers, mostly women and young girls, were killed.

The first one is about Rosie the Riveter and Rosie is an iconic symbol for women in labor and what women have done during times of struggle. The We Can Do It poster is well-known with a picture of a woman with a polka dot bandana around her head and fist up.  The poster was used by the U. S. government to encourage thousands of women to take up factory jobs during World War II as men went off to war.  Between the years of 1940 and 1945, the number of women in the workforce went up 10% with many of them working in aircraft factories.  Sometime during 1942 or 1943, a song was written and recorded about Rosie the Riveter and that’s where Rosalind Walter comes in.  Rosalind Walter worked at an aircraft factory near her home.  In 1942, a national columnist wrote about her being one of many women who was helping the war effort by working in a factory.    Although others have been credited for being the model for the We Can Do It poster, the story of Rosalind Walter is definitely the inspiration behind the song. The songwriters shortened her name from Rosalind to Rosie.  Rosalind Walter used her We Can Do It spirit to become a major benefactor for PBS or the Public Broadcasting System before her death in March, 2020.  She believed it was extremely important for people to be well informed and decided public broadcasting was the best approach to accomplish that.  Today, we recognize the poster as Rosie the Riveter which came from the story and song about Rosalind Walter and is now representative of many women in the workforce.

The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire is the other historical anniversary and, unfortunately, has become a tragic symbol of work life in the U. S.  It is considered one of the worst workplace tragedies that ever occurred in the U. S.  On March 25, 1911, more than 140 workers, mostly women and some children, were killed in this disaster because of the deliberate lack of safety precautions taken by the factory owners.

The shirtwaist was a popular clothing item at the time and Triangle became a leading maker of them.  Triangle was owned by two men who had immigrated to the United States in the early 1890s. One had experience working in a sweatshop in the garment industry and the other was more of a business man.  Together they would make Triangle a successful operation and earn the title, Shirtwaist Kings.  It helped both men live extravagant lifestyles which included arriving at the shop in chauffeur driven cars.

In 1902, the owners moved their business to a new building in Greenwich Village in New York City.  They started with the eighth floor of the building but by 1908 they were able to expand to the ninth and tenth floors with the owner that had garment experience designing the layout of the sewing room so workers would limit conversations which would help increase production.  Triangle was another garment industry sweat shop.  The workers, who were mostly immigrants, too, worked long hours for little pay.  Some worked for subcontractors which probably meant even less pay.  The environment was unsanitary, and even though the equipment was supposedly state-of-the-art, conditions were considered dangerous.  Because workers were suspected of stealing, bags would be inspected as they left at night and one of the exit doors was required to be locked.

By 1909, the Triangle workers had had enough and went on strike.  The owners took it quite personally considering they, too, had worked in such conditions.  They did not want a union in their shop and hired police and thugs to beat and cause disruption on the picket line. But as the strike went on into the next year, the owners relented and shortened work hours and increased pay but without a union.

A year after the strike ended, on March 25, 1911, fire started on the eighth floor.  The owners were in their offices on the 10th floor when they were alerted and quickly escaped by climbing onto rooftops. Workers on the eighth floor were able to go down stairs and an elevator but workers on the ninth floor were stuck.  Flames blocked the exits, and of the 200 workers on that floor, 146 of them were killed.  Some having jumped to their death.  Girls as young as 14 were the victims.  Many were the breadwinners for their family.

Immediately following the fire, the owners began a campaign to show business would continue and they invited reporters to their lavish homes to tell how they had done everything they could to protect the workers.  But the public saw through it and were quite angry.  In the end, the owners went to trial but only received a slap-on-the-wrist.  They were able to re-build their operation but it wasn’t as successful as it had been before the fire.

A year after the fire, they settled with the victims’ families by paying a week’s wage which amounted to $75 for each family. Later that year, the owners were fined for similar actions that caused the tragedy and eventually closed the business in 1918.

While the fire was extremely tragic, it did, however, lead to some good and has made people aware of what needs to happen for safe workplaces.  Following the fire’s investigation, state and federal labor codes and legislation were passed.  In fact, Senator Robert Wagner, who was part of the Triangle fire investigation, wrote federal labor legislation based on that investigation which encouraged the growth of unions and labor laws that protect workers today. Recently, a memorial has been dedicated to honor the victims of that horrible experience and to remind people of the need for workers’ rights and safety.

CALMC activities, including our blog, are made possible in part by the continuing support of our members, such as

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 683

Central Ohio Chapter, National Association of Electrical Contractors

 

Our activities are also made possible in part by a grant from the City of Columbus.

Contact us for more information about Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee or to become a member.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Four Takeaways from Labor-Management News This Week

Posted on March 24, 2024 by CALMC Blog

There has been a lot happening with labor and management in the last couple of weeks, so we would like to highlight four of them. Some show positive results for both labor and management, one is a sign of things that may be coming, and the other is  trip back into a dark past (and possible future)

Progress at Starbucks

We will start with a positive. After years of brutal resistance, this week Starbucks announced they will begin negotiations with their employee union, Workers United. Several reports indicate the company has agreed to sit down with workers representing its 400 unionized stores in late April and start hammering out principles for a labor accord.

Both sides said the bargaining sessions were meant to create a framework for collective bargaining agreements at the stores represented by the union, Workers United. Each union store will have its own delegate, although those taking part in the in-person talks have yet to be determined.

In a statement to HuffPost, Starbucks said specific arrangements still needed to be worked out, but called the bargaining dates “a further demonstration of our joint commitment to a positive working relationship.” Starbucks also called it ” a further demonstration of our joint commitment to a positive working relationship.”

The union added, “We remain committed to charting a new path forward with Starbucks and are making progress on bargaining details.”

Workers United noted that any agreements that result from the talks would still be subject to ratification by the individual stores.

HuffPost reports the union has a list of bargaining demands that includes base pay of $20 per hour, expanded paid time off, guarantees for consistent scheduling and a fair process for organizing stores.

Although this is viewed as another sign the coffee chain and the union may be on the cusp of a new, productive relationship, there is still much to be done. Both sides will need to enter bargaining with a positive attitude toward good faith bargaining. If either party displays the hostility that has marred their relationship in the past, negotiations will be difficult. We will hope for the best.

More Public Support for Unions

A study by the Ough Foundation found majorities of Americans see the large reduction in the share of workers represented by unions over the past several decades as a bad thing for both the country and working people in the United States. 54% of U.S. adults say the decline has been bad for the country, and 59% say this has been bad for working people.

The study includes demographic from various groups and political affiliations. It is very comprehensive, and we suggest you take a look at the report (linked above) for more details.

Not surprisingly, a majority of conservative Republicans (60%) say the decline in organized labor membership has been at least somewhat good for working people, including 24% who say this has been very good. Liberal Democrats are particularly likely to say the decline in organized labor has been very bad for working people: 45% say this, compared with 21% of conservative and moderate Democrats

These results are reflected in the anti-union attitudes demonstrated in a Southern, conservative state.

New Anti-Union Legislation Pending in Georgia

GOP lawmakers in Georgia passed a bill Wednesday to punish employers that make it easier for workers to form unions, sending the legislation to Republican Gov. Brian Kemp for his signature.

Dave Jameison of HuffPost reports the legislation would bar companies from receiving state economic incentives if they voluntarily recognize a union instead of requiring employees to vote in a secret-ballot election. It is aimed at discouraging a process known as “card check,” whereby workers can unionize simply by showing that there’s majority support in the form of signed union cards.

The legislation passed the state Senate last month by a vote of 31-23. It cleared the House last week 96-78. Both votes fell mostly along party lines.

Although Kemp has indicated that he backs the legislation, it is likely to face legal challenges on the grounds that it conflicts with federal labor law. Long-standing interpretation of the National Labor Relations Act, the 1935 law governing private sector collective bargaining, allows for employers to recognize a union and immediately start bargaining when employees have made their wishes clear.

Voluntary recognition is favored by Unions due to the history of election processes that are damaged with intimidation and abuse. Jameison notes that during the campaign period, workers often get corralled into employers’ propagandistic captive-audience meetings, while union leaders end up singled out for retaliation and even firings. The process can also lead to long delays and litigation.

Employer groups and Republican lawmakers have pushed back against voluntary recognition for years, claiming that workers are bullied into signing union cards.

The Georgia bill is part of a broader GOP effort to hold unions back amid an uptick in organizing and work stoppages lately. In a speech to the Georgia Chamber of Commerce in January, Kemp bemoaned the large worker strikes of 2023 and said that “activists” were trying to “attack job creators” and “see the free market brought to a screeching halt.”

Liz Shuler, the president of the AFL-CIO labor federation, called the bill “appalling,” saying that it “attacks the fundamental freedoms” of both workers and employers. She also said that it violates “long-held precedent” under the National Labor Relations Act.

Benjamin Sachs, a labor law professor at Harvard Law School, told HuffPost that he believes the Georgia and Tennessee legislation would probably be preempted by federal law. Sachs doesn’t see a “market-based reason” for Georgia to try to block card check.

Another Frequently Used Tactic during Bargaining Seen in Ohio

Last week a tactic that us associated with traditional negotiations reared its head in Ohio. The State and their lagest employee union, the Ohio Civil Service Employees Association (OCSEA) are engaged in bargaining for their new contract. This week, informational picketing took place at a number of locations around the state.

This process involves union members setting up picket lines at state offices and facilities. They are not on strike, but are there to make a point.

The main reasons unions use informational picketing are:

– To raise public awareness and gain support for their cause or position. Informational picketing allows unions to share information with the public about issues like low wages, lack of benefits, or unfair labor practices by the employer. This can put pressure on the employer by garnering public sympathy.

– To apply pressure on the employer during contract negotiations. Even though this does not involve a work stoppage, it can disrupt operations. This is used to give unions leverage at the bargaining table.

– To build solidarity and mobilize union members. Picketing allows union members to visibly demonstrate their unity and commitment to the cause, which can strengthen the union’s bargaining position.

One of the locations for picketing was the Manfield Correctional Institution, a close security men’s prison. The Richland Source reported a group of local OCSEA members, including workers from MANCI and the Richland Correctional Institution, as well as two other state agencies stood along Ohio Route 13 on Monday to demonstrate solidarity for a new statewide union contract.

James Beverly, Jr., a former employee if the institution and the current staff representative for the Ohio Civil Service Employees Association stated, “We are here to inform the public we are in contract negotiations. The state is not willing to negotiate and make things right with public employees.

“(Workers) at 20 other (Ohio) prisons are doing the same thing at the same time across the state because they feel this is the right thing to do to try to express their concerns about what they’re facing every day,” he said.

Ironically, the Mansfield Correctional Institution was conducting a hiring event on Monday to try to fill existing vacancies at the prison. Ben Valentine, a MANCI correctional officer and president of the local union, said they are about 80 correctional officers below where they feel the staffing level should be.

We can not measure the effectiveness of this picketing, but my belief is that it will have little real influence on the outcome of bargaining. The main benefit could be encouraging their members to stay the course should bargaining continue to be difficult.

The event may send up a warning sign to the citizens of Ohio. The negotiated agreement between the State and OCSEA will expire March 31. At this writing, the parties are engaged in Fact Finding, an advisory arbitration process. That means the parties will have the opportunity to vote on the fact finder’s proposal, and could reject it completely. If this occurs, a strike is possible for members of the union not employed in essential positions, such as prison guards.

We will follow this situation and keep everyone posted. Hopefully, these negotiations can end with an agreement.

______________________________-

CALMC activities, including our blog, are made possible in part by the continuing support of our members, such as

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 683

Central Ohio Chapter, National Association of Electrical Contractors

Our activities are also made possible in part by a grant from the City of Columbus.

Contact us for more information about Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee or to become a member.

Posted in CALMC, Labor-Management Cooperation, Public Sector, Right to Organize, Systemic change, Trends in Labor-Management Relations | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Labor-Management Committees Don’t Just Help The Workplace

Posted on March 17, 2024 by CALMC Blog

UAW recently posted on Twitter a link to an interview Shawn Fain, UAW president, did with the media outlet, The Nation.  In the interview, Shawn tells how the focus needs to shift toward people instead of on businesses.  While his comments are more aligned toward political and business decisions, his remarks are reflective about the overall need for change and a greater focus on the human element. That’s where labor-management committees can help lead the way.

Labor-management committees allow people a voice.  That voice can come from either side but it gives people a chance to become more involved in decisions that impact them.  One of the tools we encourage labor-management committees to use is one that has its origins from bargaining but can be used to help resolve issues in labor-management committee meetings and it can bring that focus back toward people not just in the workplace and provide a mechanism to resolve their issues.

The tool we encourage labor-management committees to use is the interest-based process.  It’s been around but it’s taken a back seat for awhile as a more traditional approach has been used that aligns more closely with a win-lose pattern.  In bargaining, interest-based has sometimes been called win-win or IBB but the concept of using it as a problem-solving technique is the same.  The process helps both labor and management come together on solutions by identifying and examining their interests.  Interests are fears, wants, or concerns.  When labor and management hear why the other side has a particular interest, it helps them understand better what the problem is about.  They usually find out, too, they have some common interests and they’re usually surprised how much in common they really have.  Those common interests help them to come up with the solutions both sides can support.  Instead of using power, rights or a few people to decide problem resolution, objective criteria are used that also help both sides.  The criteria are identified by both sides.  Identifying common interests and applying objective criteria to possible solutions helps for some huge accomplishments but it also helps with relationship building.

When the interest-based process is used, people learn more about each other.  They gain a greater understanding of both the problems and the people.  They learn to identify with each other.  They have a much greater perspective of what is occurring and that all helps build a trusting relationship.

There is a catch.  It’s not a fast process especially the first few times using it.  Because it’s so different than most people are accustomed to it requires groups to go slow and follow the steps that are part of the process.  It sometimes is best to use a facilitator until the group becomes more comfortable or creating a poster that can be placed in front of everyone to remind them of the steps.  What’s even more important, though, is both labor and management must be committed to learning and using the process.  Without that commitment from either side, it probably won’t work.  It requires work and patience and that can be hard especially in the instantaneous world that exists now but it is definitely worth it.   But that may be part of how it brings people together as they recognize the commitment each brings and the willingness to learn.

Labor-management can help lead the way because the interest-based process doesn’t have to be used only in labor-management settings.  As leaders on both sides become familiar with the process and use it, they can take it to other settings such as community settings and help others have the same results.  Not only can community problems be resolved but those in communities can also learn about each other.  Perspectives can change, a greater realization of commonalities can occur, and instead of focusing on disagreements, there can be a greater focus on agreements.  When people use the interest-based process and become more familiar with it, they end up helping each other succeed and that puts everyone in a better place to focus on helping each other.

This also helps to substantiate why labor-management committees in the workplace are so important.  Not only can they help the workplace but they set an example for others to follow.  With so many new people involved in labor-management settings, it’s important to help them understand the role they can play to make things better not just for themselves and their workplace but for others and their communities.   Let’s not lose sight about the importance of labor-management committees.

CALMC activities, including our blog, are made possible in part by the continuing support of our members, such as

Our activities are also made possible in part by a grant from the City of Columbus.

Contact us for more information about Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee or to become a member.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A Breakthrough at Starbucks

Posted on March 10, 2024 by CALMC Blog

A couple of weeks ago we wrote about the difficulty newly recognized unions face when negotiating their first contract. Many of the companies use a variety of techniques to try to block or stall negotiation of a fist contract, including the use of high-priced union busting law firms, techniques designed to make it difficult to conduct bargaining, or discipline and dismissal of workers who lead the process.

This week, there was good news on this front. Dave Jamieson reports on Huffington Post that on February 27, Starbucks and Workers United, the union representing workers at hundreds of its stores, said they had agreed upon a “path forward” to negotiate collective bargaining agreements and develop “a fair process for workers to organize.”

Workers United and the company described this as a major breakthrough after two years of nonstop organizing and legal battles. Roughly 400 of Starbucks’ 9,000 corporate-owned U.S. stores have joined the union since late 2021 in one of the most high-profile labor campaigns in years. None of these locals has been able to reach an agreement.

In a letter to employees, Sara Kelly, Starbucks’ top human resources officer, said, “I want to let you know that we have reached an important milestone. We have agreed with Workers United that we will begin discussions on a foundational framework designed to achieve collective bargaining agreements, including a fair process for organizing, and the resolution of some outstanding litigation.

“It is a clear demonstration of our intent to build a constructive relationship with Workers United in the interests of our partners,” Kelly wrote.

Starbucks said it hoped to negotiate contracts for union stores by the end of the year.

Starbucks said that, As a show of “good faith,” they would extend credit card tipping and other company-wide benefits that were announced in 2022 but withheld from stores where organizing was being attempted. Jameson reports the company previously maintained that withholding the benefits was consistent with its reading of labor law, but the union as well as labor prosecutors said doing so was illegal retaliation.

The union and the company said the breakthrough came during mediation sessions meant to resolve an intellectual property lawsuit the company filed against the union. Starbucks had claimed Starbucks Workers United had violated its trademarks through its name and logo, and was “diluting” its brand. Apparently, they believed their customers would not be smart enough to distinguish between the company and the union.

Starbucks has repeatedly said it would prefer to have a “direct” relationship with its baristas and opposed the union This means they wanted to talk directly to employees and not have to speak to a union. Workers who tried this approach were ignored or punished in retaliation for their behavior in promoting the union. NLRB administrative law judges have ruled in dozens of cases that Starbucks violated labor law by firing and punishing union activists ― findings that dented Starbucks’ image as a progressive company and decent employer.

Dozens of complaints against Starbucks are still pending at the National Labor Relations Board. It’s not clear what impact, if any, the agreement announced Tuesday might have on those cases.

We reported the unions that had the most success in securing their first labor contracts used pressure on the company through strikes, protests and public involvement. At Starbucks, this included efforts on college campuses to force schools to cut ties with the coffee chain due the labor disputes. They would not let the public forget the way the company was treating its employees.

This has apparently paid off tor Starbucks Workers United, which said on Twitter that the new agreement was “made possible by thousands and thousands of us joining together and speaking out.”

Both the Union and the Company caution that “plenty of work lies ahead,”  as the union called it a “giant step forward.” We look forward to following how the process goes from here and to seeing the first negotiated contract between the parties.

__________________________________

CALMC activities, including our blog, are made possible in part by the continuing support of our members, such as

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 683

Central Ohio Chapter, National Association of Electrical Contractors

Our activities are also made possible in part by a grant from the City of Columbus.

Contact us for more information about Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee or to become a member.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment