HomeWhat We Do
Employment Law Resources
Construction Law Resources
News, Views & Legal Links
Our Attorneys
Contact Us |
A union salting campaign is designed to intimidate or cripple a nonunion contractor. Part
of the plan is to get the employer to say the wrong thing, no matter how inconsequential,
and file unfair labor practice charges with the NLRB.The following sets forth some of
the basic points which should be discussed on an informal, one-to-one basis with the
employees during the upcoming weeks, as well as possible questions which could be asked by
employees and suggested answers to these questions.
Your supervisors should feel free to use your own words when you talk to the employees,
but you should try to stick to the general approach outlined.
- Utilization of both a positive and negative approach. To be most effective, we
want to take both a positive approach -- i.e., based on the Company's past
record and the company's commitment to its employees, it should be clear that a union
is not necessary -- and a negative approach -- i.e., there are bad things about
unions and risks in having a union. Which approach should be emphasized will depend upon
what you perceive would be most effective with the particular employee in question.
- Positive approach. As previously mentioned, this is basically the idea that a
union is not necessary. It should be tied directly to the Company's "track
record," programs which are already underway, and not based on promises of future
benefits. Past problems and mistakes can and should be acknowledged, but it should be
pointed out that the Company has been working on its employee relations and that things
are improving, and you believe that there is a management commitment to make sure things
will improve. You might remind employees of the actions which have recently been initiated
such as the employee survey, improve communication, etc.
Again -- we have to be careful not to promise that specific problems or issues
will be taken care of if the union doesn't get in. (Be prepared to cite specific examples
of what has been accomplished in the last few months.)
- Approaches, in general, to negative points about the union.
Both from the standpoint of establishing your own credibility and keeping within the
bounds of the law, you should point out to the employees that you are not saying that if
the union gets in, all the bad things you have been discussing will automatically
happen. Accordingly, you should point out that, "We are not attempting to scare you -
we are not saying that the negative points we have discussed will necessarily take place
if the union gets in here." You should make sure, however, to point out that these
bad things are real possibilities. You can say something like, "They certainly
are possibilities - real possibilities that you risk happening if the union wins."
The point you want to make is that the employees risk losing something if the union
gets in - risks that aren't there if the Company remains union-free.
- Specific negative points. It is important for you to have a good idea of possible
risks or adverse consequences to employees that bringing in a union may have. There might
be opportunities for you to specifically point out these risks. Feel free to cite any
examples of strikes, plant shutdowns, loss of jobs and union wage concessions that you
have personal knowledge. Alternatively, employees may ask you, "what's there to lose
in having a union?", and you should be in a position to summarize these risks:
a. Hiring restrictions. The union contract requires that certain classifications
of persons do certain work at a jobsite, and require all hourly employees to be union
members. This may require the replacement of some or all of our workforce. Also, the union
may require the company to hire some workers who are not as productive as our employees,
thus adversely affecting the company's efficiency in completing projects.
b. Loss of team approach. Quite often, the operation turns into a "we"
vs. "them" approach. Everyone grabs their "best hold" and the
teamwork and goals of the organization are sometimes lost. The focus changes and the
result is no longer look at what's good for the organization in terms of growth, etc.
Sometimes through the loss of a team approach, operating efficiencies are sharply reduced
which results in reduced profits necessary to pay competitive wages, employee benefits,
job security, etc. The reason the Company has been able to be competitive in its market is
that everyone has worked together well as a team.
c. Possible jeopardizing of Company's competitive position. If the union
succeeds in forcing the company to sign the current union contract, the Company's
competitive position, and indeed its very ability to conduct business in the market that
it does now, would be jeopardized. The Company's competitors would jump at the chance to
grab our customers if there is a strike.
d. Loss of flexibility in work rules and discipline. Working conditions are
usually more formal and rigid under a union contract. The reason is that with a union you
have to go by the book, and it is very hard to make individual exceptions.
e. Loss of informality in communicating with management and working out problems.
Usually there are formal grievance procedures under a contract and the existence of union
stewards, which could make it more difficult for employees to bring their problems
directly to the management. The stewards and the union may or may not agree that an
employee has a legitimate problem. It would be much better for employees to work out
problems directly with management.
f. Possibility of union fines for violating union rules and regulations. The
union has numerous rules and regulations which members have to follow. Penalties,
including fines, suspension, expulsion and other discipline can be taken against union
members who violate rules.
g. Use of union dues to fund salting and targeting.
Return to Union Salting page
Fortney & Klingshirn
4040 Embassy Parkway, Suite 280
Akron, Ohio 44333
telephone 330-665-5445 - fax 665-5446 |