Abstract
The current context for labor–management partnerships in the USA is unfriendly in almost all ways. Union density, at 11.1 % overall and 6.6 % in the private sector, is at a modern low (US BLS 2015). With few exceptions, there is no significant encouragement of partnerships from either the federal or the state governments. There is no organization or forum that regularly brings together leaders of the labor and business communities for social dialogue about economic or other policies. And many of the “best examples” of partnerships in the last couple of decades have not been sustained. There are still “islands” of success, but they function in spite of the system rather than because of it.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Both statutes are typically referred to by their legislative sponsors’ names in the USA—the Wagner Act in the case of the National Labour Relations Act (NLRA) and the Taft–Hartley Act for the Labour Management Relations Act (LMRA).
- 2.
There is literature on forms of employee participation in the nonunion sector as well as studies that compare participation in union versus nonunion workplaces (see, for example, Kaufman and Taras 2000; Eaton and Voos 1994). However, the term “partnership” is not used for these forms of participation, at least in part because, with very rare exceptions, there is no form of collective representation at the highest levels of the corporation. Further, partnership implies at least some degree of equality in the relationship and we would argue that absent an independent organization (union) or statutory protections, other forms of collective representation are essentially toothless.
- 3.
In terms of policy recommendations, the Commission’s main focus was on the relatively narrow issue of possible limitations placed on employee participation schemes in nonunion companies by the National Labour Relations Act’s (NLRA) prohibition on company unions. The Commission, somewhat controversially, recommended revising that section of the Act.
- 4.
There was also a call for the creation of “a coordinated public–private research group” and better databases for studying all the issues examined by the commission—reflecting the views of scholars associated with the Commission that data on current practice in the USA was incomplete and needed.
- 5.
For the exact wording of the charge and the full list of questions, see US Department of Labour 1996, 122.
- 6.
At the time the AFL-CIO was the only peak labour federation in the USA.
- 7.
A unionised firm is any firm reporting 1 % or more of the workforce as unionised. Eaton and Voos also review several other studies that separate out union and nonunion companies in their use of various worker or financial participation programs, including Quality Circles, indicators of teamwork (job rotations, etc.), gain-sharing, and profit-sharing.
- 8.
They looked at agreements expiring between September 1, 1997, and September 1, 2007. The types of clauses reviewed included (in what the authors identify as a continuum) statements in which the parties agree to cooperate; the establishment of committees; “formal efforts to address traditional issues” such as drug abuse, health care, human relations, and safety; employment security and neutrality; involvement of employees in high-performance work practices (addressing quality, productivity, and customer service); and finally “full partnership.”
- 9.
Their “benchmarks” for partnership included joint work to increase productivity and quality; improvements in productivity and quality to be reflected in compensation, organizational structure, pricing, and investment; joint development of leadership and technical skills of workers; open information sharing; agreement on the process for union recognition of new employee groups; layoffs as a last resort; joint commitment to avoid the use of economic weapons; joint commitment to broad and deep worker participation; and worker involvement in design and application of new technology. These benchmarks were derived from the Collective Bargaining Forum’s 1988 Compact for Change.
- 10.
The greater propensity of management to report higher levels of these activities is common to other surveys of matched pairs. See Eaton (1994) for other examples.
- 11.
For a full discussion of the “escape” option in a labour relations context, see Walton et al. (1994).
- 12.
Parts of the facility have been adapted for the production of the Tesla all-electric car, which is a low-volume nonunion operation.
- 13.
These states are Indiana and Michigan; this was especially shocking in Michigan, which was once near the top of union density states in the USA and (remains) the home of the historic powerhouse of the US labour movement, the United Auto Workers (UAW). Although for the most part, national labour law preempts the states from enacting laws that effect private sector labour relations, the LMRA did allow states to pass what are known, perversely, in the USA as “right to work” laws. These laws directly impact union institutional security in that they prohibit agreements that make union membership or dues collection via payroll deduction mandatory.
- 14.
In the USA, contract administration refers to enforcement of the collective agreement through the grievance system in which the parties employ private arbitrators to resolve disputes.
References
Adler, P. S. (1995). ‘Democratic Taylorism’: The Toyota production system at NUMMI. In S. Babson (Ed.), Lean work: Empowerment and exploitation in the global auto industry (pp. 207–219). Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Brock, J., & Lipsky, D. B. (Eds.). (2003). Going public: The role of Labour-Management Relations in delivering quality government services. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Chansler, P. A., Swamidass, P. M., & Cammann, C. (2003). Self-managing work teams: An empirical study of group cohesiveness in “Natural Work Groups” at a Harley-Davidson Motor Company plant. Small Group Research, 34, 101–120.
Commission on the Future of Worker–Management Relations (1994a). Fact Finding Report. Washington: US Department of Labour.
Commission on the Future of Worker–Management Relations (1994b). Report and Recommendations. Washington: US Department of Labour, December 1994. Available at http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1004&context=key_workplace.
Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J. (1988). Tracing a transformation in industrial relations: A case study of Xerox and ACTWU (pp. 1–27). Washington: US Department of Labour.
Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., Brooks, D., & Mulloy, M. (2015). Inside the Ford-UAW transformation: Pivotal events in valuing work and delivering results. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., & Kochan, T. (2004). Taking stock: Collective bargaining at the turn of the century. Industrial & Labour Relations Review, 58(1), 3–26.
Dilts, D. A. (1993). Labour-management cooperation in the public sector. Journal of Collective Negotiations in the Public Sector, 22(4), 305–311.
Douglas, P. (1921). Shop committees: Substitute for or supplement to trade unions? Journal of Political Economy, 29, 89–107.
Eaton, A. E. (1995). Educating for AT&T, CWA and IBEW's workplace of the future. Proceedings of the Forty-Seventh Annual Meeting of the Industrial Relations Research Association (pp. 383–390). Washington, DC.
Eaton, A. E. (1994). Factors contributing to the survival of participative programs in unionized settings. Industrial and Labour Relations Review, 47(3), 371–389.
Eaton, A. E. (1997). The new American workplace: Big deal or too little, too late? In B. Nissen (Ed.), Unions and workplace reorganization (pp. 57–77). Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Eaton, A. E., & Rubinstein, S. A. (2006). Tracking local unions involved in managerial decision-making. Labour Studies Journal, 31(2), 1–30.
Eaton, A. E., & Voos, P. (1994). Productivity enhancing innovations in work organization, compensation, and employee participation in the union versus non-union sectors. Advances in Industrial and Labour Relations, 6(6), 63–109.
Eaton, S., Rubinstein, S., & McKersie, R. (2004). Building and sustaining labour-management partnerships: Recent experiences in the U. S. Advances in Industrial and Labour Relations, 13, 139–159.
Gittell, J. H. (2003). The Southwest Airlines Way: Using the power of relationships to achieve high performance. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Golden, C. S., & Parker, V. (1949). Causes of industrial peace under collective bargaining. New York: Harper and Bros.
Golden, C. S., & Ruttenberg, H. (1942). Dynamics of industrial democracy. New York: Harper and Bros.
Gray, G. R., Myers, D. W., & Myers, P. S. (1999). Cooperative provisions in labour agreements: A new paradigm. Monthly Labour Review, 122(1), 2945.
Gudza, H. P. (1984). Industrial democracy: Made in the USA. Monthly Labour Review, 107, 27.
Hecksher, C., & Schurman, S. (1997). Can labour-management cooperation deliver jobs and justice? Industrial Relations, 28(4), 323–330.
Jacoby, S. M. (1983). Union-management cooperation in the United States: Lessons from the 1920s. Industrial and Labour Relations Review, 37(1), 18–33.
Johansson, E. (2014).Improving government through labour-management collaboration and employee ingenuity. Washington: Jobs With Justice Education Fund. http://www.jwj.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/140122publicpartnershipreport.pdf.
Kaufman, B. E., & Taras, D. G. (2000). Nonunion employee representation: History, contemporary practice, and policy. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.
Kochan, T., Eaton, A. E., McKersie, R. B., & Adler, P. S. (2013). Healing together: The labour-management partnership at Kaiser Permanente. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Kochan, T., Adler, P. S., McKersie, R., Eaton A. E., & Phyllis Segal and Paul Gerhart (2008). The potential and precariousness of partnership: The case of the Kaiser Permanente labour management partnership. Industrial Relations, 47(1), 36–65.
Kochan, T., Bluestone, B., & Peace N. (2015). Massachusetts education partnership: Results and research from the first two years. Massachusetts Education Partnership.
Lafer, G. (2013). The legislative attack on American wages and labour standards, 2011–12, Report of the Economic Policy Institute, October, 31, 2013. http://www.epi.org/publication/attack-on-american-labour-standards/.
Lazonick, W. (2009). Sustainable prosperity in the new economy?: Business organization and high-tech employment in the United States. Kalamazoo: WE Upjohn Institute.
Leone, R. D., & Eleey, M. F. (1983). The origins and operations of area labour-management committees. Monthly Labour Review, 106, 37–41. http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1983/05/rpt3full.pdf.
Levine, D., Adler, P. S., & Goldoftas, B. (1995). NUMMI: A case study. In D. Levine (Ed.), Reinventing the workplace: How business and employees can both win (pp. 10–35). Brookings Institution: Washington.
Levine, D., & Tyson, L. (1990). Participation, productivity, and the firm’s environment. In A. Blinder (Ed.), Paying for productivity: A look at evidence. Washington: Brookings Institute.
Mangum, G. L., & McNabb, R. S. (1997). The rise, fall, and replacement of industry wide bargaining in the basic steel industry. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.
Nadworny, M. J. (1955). Scientific management and the unions, 1900–1932: A historical analysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
NW Natural Gas Accord (2015). Retrieved from: https://www.nwnatural.com/AboutNWNatural/TheCompany/Careers/EmploymentPrograms.
Nissen, B. (1997). Unions and workplace reorganization. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Preuss, G., & Frost, A. (2003). The rise and decline of labour-management cooperation: Lessons from health care in the Twin Cities. California Management Review, 45(2), 85–106.
Reid, P. C. (1990). Well made in America: Lessons from Harley-Davidson on being the best. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rubinstein, S. A. (2000). The impact of co-management on quality performance: The case of the Saturn Corporation. Industrial and Labour Relations Review, 53(2), 197–218.
Rubinstein, S. A. (2001). The local union revisited: New voices from the front lines. Industrial Relations, 40(3), 405–35.
Rubinstein S. A., & McCarthy, J. E. (2011). Reforming public school systems through sustained union-management collaboration, Center for American Progress. Washington, DC.
Rubinstein, S. A., & Kochan, T. (2001). Learning from Saturn: Possibilities for corporate governance and employee relations. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Rubinstein, S. A., & McCarthy, J. E. (2012). Public school reform through union-management collaboration. Advances in Industrial and Labour Relations, 20, 1–50.
Rubinstein S.A. (2003). Partnerships of steel - Forging high involvement work systems in the US steel industry: A view from the local unions. Advances in industrial and labour relations (Vol. 12).
Rubinstein, S. A., & McCarthy, J. E. (2014). Teachers unions and management partnerships: How working together improves student achievement,. Center for American Progress. Washington, DC.
Sheahan, M. (1997). Participating in union-management initiatives to build the union. In B. Nissen (Ed.), Unions and workplace reorganization (pp. 110–129). Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Slichter, S., Healy, J. J., & Livernash, E. R. (1960). The impact of collective bargaining on management. Washington: Brookings Institution.
US BLS (2015). Economic news release: Union members summary. January 23. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm.
US Department of Labour (1996). Working together for public service, Report of the US Secretary of Labour’s Task Force on Excellence in State and Local Government Through Labour-Management Cooperation.
Voos, P. B., & Cheng, T. Y. (1989). What do managers mean by cooperative labour relations? Labour Studies Journal, 14(1), 3–18.
Walton, R., Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., & McKersie, R. (1994). Strategic negotiations: A theory of change in labour-management relations. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Weil, D. (1999). Are mandated health and safety committees supplement for or substitutes to labour unions? Industrial and Labour Relations Review, 52(3), 339–360.
Weil, D. (2014). The fissured workplace: Why work became so bad for so many and what can be done to improve it. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Acknowledgment
Portions of this chapter draw on text developed by a team of scholars for an amicus brief that included all three co-authors of this chapter. We have primarily utilised text developed by one of the three co-authors that was not in the final brief due to space limitations. We express our appreciation to the full group, which is as follows: Paul Adler, James Brudney, Margaret Carr, Willard Carr, Marion Crain, Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld, Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt, Adrienne E. Eaton, Matthew W. Finkin, Catherine Fisk, Sanford M. Jacoby, Thomas A. Kochan, Wilma Liebman, Martin H. Malin, Robert B. McKersie, Saul A. Rubinstein, and Katherine Stone.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix 1: Publications of the Bureau of Labour–Management Relations and Cooperative Programs, US Department of Labour
Appendix 1: Publications of the Bureau of Labour–Management Relations and Cooperative Programs, US Department of Labour
Topical Studies
-
The Operation of Area Labour–Management Committees, by Richard D. Leone, Michael F. Eleey, David Watkins, and Joel Gershenfeld (1981)
-
Starting Labour–Management Quality of Work Life Programs, by Michael Brower (1982)
-
Labour–Management Cooperation: Perspectives from the Labour Movement (1984)
-
From Control to Commitment in the Workplace, by Richard E. Walton (1985)
-
Institutionalizing and Diffusing Innovations in Industrial Relations, by Thomas A. Kochan (1988)
-
The Changing Role of First-Line Supervisors and Middle Managers, by Janice Anne Klein (1988)
-
The Changing Role of Union Leaders, by Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld and Robert McKersie, and Kirsten R. Wever (1988)
-
The Role of Labour–Management Committees in Safeguarding Worker Safety and Health, by Ruth Ruttenberg (1988)
-
Labour–Management Conflict and Cooperation: The Role of Shop Floor Leaders, by Stephen Herzenberg, Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld, and John Chalykoff (1988)
Case Studies
-
Employee Involvement Fuels Dramatic Turnaround at Ford’s Louisville Assembly Plant, by Michal Smith (1986)
-
Western Airlines and Its Four Major Unions, by Kirsten R. Wever (1986)
-
Tracing a Transformation in Industrial Relations: The Case of Xerox and ACTWU, by Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld (1988)
-
Forging a Partnership through Employee Involvement: The Case of the GM Hydra-matic Willow Run Plant and UAW Local 735 Joint Activities, by Denise Tanguay Hoyer (1988)
-
Riding the Road to Recovery at Harley-Davidson, by Thomas H Roadley (1988)
-
Aladdin’s Magic: The Company’s Magic Is No Secret: Communicating, Sharing Information Are Keys to Success, by Michal Smith (1988)
-
Labour Compact Key to New Employee–Management Partnership at Dayton Power and Light, by Phyllis Lehmann McIntosh (1988)
-
Cooperative Partnership: A New Beginning for National Steel Corporation and the United Steelworkers of America (1989)
-
Human Resource Policies and Practices in American Firms, by John Thomas Delaney, David Lewin and Casey Ichniowski (1989)
-
A Unique Labour–Management Partnership Has Made Dade County Public Schools a Model in Educational Reform, by Donna St. John (1989)
Copyright information
© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Eaton, A.E., Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., Rubinstein, S.A. (2016). Labour–Management Partnership in the USA: Islands of Success in a Hostile Context. In: Johnstone, S., Wilkinson, A. (eds) Developing Positive Employment Relations. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-42772-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-42772-4_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-42770-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-42772-4
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)