Labor law should define role of work teams - Professionally Speaking

We have entered a critical period in our nation's labor history. Archaic patterns of labor-management conflict are weakening as employers and employees discover the power of teamwork. To catch up with the realities of today's workplace, Congress must act to clarify the lawfulness of employee involvement groups.

Involvement may occur through a quality circle or quality improvement team. Many companies, however, have gone well beyond these rudimentary forms of employee involvement and have substantially altered the traditional workplace culture--particularly the relationship between employees and supervisors. These high-performance organizations or work teams are at greatest risk in the current legal environment.

Unfortunately, most organizations who have adopted these programs have done so without considering the stringent requirements of the National Labor Relations Act. Section 8(a)(2) of the act prohibits an employer from establishing, dominating or interfering with the formation or administration of any labor organization. Employees who meet as a group to discuss seniority, wages, job classifications, job bidding, work schedules or other improvements in working conditions and who transmit ideas about these issues to an employer have formed a labor organization. Section 8(a)(2) attempts to ensure that labor organizations would be independent of employers.

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently held oral arguments for Electromation Inc., a case in which the company's use of employee committees was found to violate Section 8(a)(2). Electromation management used committees to meet with employees to discuss problems and design acceptable solutions. After the Teamsters failed in its attempt to organize Electromation's employees, they filed unfair labor practice charges, alleging that these employee committees had violated the act.

The NLRB listened to arguments from all sides of the issue. Regardless of how the board decides the Electromation case, organized labor will continue to attack employee involvement groups. Labor leaders such as Victor Reuther, one of the founders of the United Auto Workers, openly oppose employee involvement groups.

What is clear from the arguments before the NLRB, the introduction into Congress of the so-called Workplace Fairness Act (the ban on permanent strike replacements), and the introduction of the American Competitiveness Act (a proposal to modify the National Labor Relations Act to permit quality circles) is that the time has come for serious discussion about reforming our nation's labor laws.

As a nation, we must encourage the development of labor-management relationships based on models other than the class conflict built into the National Labor Relations Act. Labor and management have significant common ground.

Labor law must support that common ground, not build barriers. Congress should repeal Section 8(a)(2) of the act. This would allow American employers to fully explore the potentials of employee involvement.

We have seen the results of our present structure. Unions have ceased to be a force in the private sector. That vacuum needs to be filled, and public policy should support mechanisms that encourage employers to fully involve employees.

As long as our nation's primary labor law presumes that the interests of employee and employer inherently conflict, the power of teamwork will not be fully unleashed. Providing employees with the security of striking without fear of permanent replacement should be balanced with incentives for cooperation and teamwork that will lessen the likelihood of a strike. Let us place our adversarial form of collective bargaining on the ash heap. it served us well, but it has outlived its usefulness.

Michael J. Hanlon, Esq., is an attorney with the Philadelphia-based law firm of Blank, Rome, Comisky & Mccauley. He devotes a significant portion of his practice to working with employers to establish employee involvement programs.

COPYRIGHT 1992 Society for Human Resource Management
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group