councilor.org
| Source | Sid Shniad |
| Date | 99/12/09/23:26 |
| International Confederation of Trade Unions (ICFTU) Annual survey of violations of trade union rights, 1999 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA POPULATION : 269 400 000 / CAPITAL : WASHINGTON / ILO CORE CONVENTIONS RATIFIED : 105 Sacking of union supporters commonplace The right to organise and right to strike are not adequately protected in United States labour legislation. The law is unable to protect workers when the employer is deter-mined to destroy or prevent union representation. At least one in 10 union supporters campaigning to form a union is illegally fired. For every 30 people who vote for a union in elections in any one year, one will be illegally fired. At least one worker will be illegally fired in 25 per cent of all union-organising campaigns. A poll conducted in 1994 found that 79 per cent of Americans believe workers are likely to get fired if they try to organise a union at their workplace. The NLRB is estimated to have a backlog of almost 25,000 cases involving unfair labour practices committed by employers opposing trade union activity. Double standards in law US labour legislation allows for double standards with respect to the rights of employers and of workers. In nine out of 10 union representation elections employers use mandatory closed-door meetings conducted on their own property during work to campaign aggressively against collective bargaining and trade unions. Supervisors not eligible to be represented by the trade union may have to participate in a vicious and intimidating campaign against the union. Employees who support trade unions are identified and often isolated from other workers. Some employers engage consultants, detectives and security firms to assist in anti-union campaigns. Often their activities include surveillance of union activists in order to discredit them. In some cases court, medical and credit records of union activists are obtained and the family lives of activists are studied for possible weaknesses. Except in rare circumstances, trade union representatives are denied access to the employer's property to meet employees during non- working time. During organising campaigns, threats of arrest against union representatives and their expulsion from the employer's property deny workers any reasonable opportunity to consider freely the advantages of union membership. The government-conducted election used to determine if workers want union representation is usually held on the employer's premises the place where most anti-union intimidation has occurred. Lack of effective redress for workers The procedures of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the body which governs indus trial relations in most of the private sector, do not provide workers with effective redress in the face of abuses by employers. Many workers, including those fired illegally, do not use available legal procedures because they take too long and fail to provide adequate compensation or redress the wrong done to them. It takes an average of 557 days for the NLRB to resolve a case. In 1998, 62 workers illegally fired during a union organising campaign that took place 19 years earlier finally received a financial settlement arising from the illegal activity of their former employer. One study found that, where employees are ordered reinstated, only 40 per cent actually return to work and only 20 per cent remain employed for more than two years. The workers that do quit give unfair treatment as their main reason for leaving. Should the NLRB determine that an employer has committed sufficient unfair labour practices so that a fair election to decide union representation was impossible, it may order a new election. The prospect of a new election rarely deters an employer from committing the same, or worse, illegal tactics. Employees at the Four Points Hotel in Waterbury, Connecticut, were permitted a second representation election in 1995 based on the company’s unfair labour practices including dismissing employees for union activity. Although the workers voted for union representation the company continues to prevent its employees from exercising their rights. Closures in response to organising Although it is illegal for employers to threaten to close or move their operations in response to union organising activity, a study released in 1996 found that employers threaten to close their plants in over half of all organising campaigns, and in industries such as manufacturing where this threat is most credible this violation occurs in over 60 per cent of all campaigns. Where 0 collective agreements are negotiated for the first time 18 per cent employers threaten to close their facilities and 12 per cent of the employers actually follow through with their threats. The National Labor Relations Act requires the NLRB to seek injunctions in a federal court against trade unions committing certain kinds of unfair labour practices. There is no corresponding obligation when the unfair labour practices are committed by employers. Unlawful acts by employers who deny trade union rights to their employees often accomplish their intended goal before any proceedings are concluded. Basic union rights denied to many Because trade union organising in the United States often involves excessive and costly litigation, the right to join trade unions and participate in collective bargaining is in practice denied to large segments of the American workforce. Throughout the period under review, the management of the New Otani Hotel and Garden in Los Angeles continued its anti-union campaign in an effort to halt a seven- year union organising drive. Employers regularly challenge the results when the union wins a representation vote, regard-less of the margin of victory. The government will spend months, and sometimes years, exam-ining what are often minor or frivolous charges before ordering a company to bargain with the union. In the meantime, union supporters quit or are fired, and new workers are hired, often after the employer has screened out what it deems to be potential union supporters, sometimes by using psychological and other tests. Throughout 1998, 5,000 workers at the Avondale Shipyard in New Orleans were denied their right to collective bargaining as their employer continued to use the court system to avoid complying with an NLRB ruling that it must bargain with its employees who voted for union representation in 1993. The employer had succeeded in delaying the vote count in this election for 44 months until February 1997. Since the election, the NLRB has issued approximately 400 complaints against the company including discriminatory dismissals, demotions, transfers and redundancies as well as unlawful surveillance and intimidation of union supporters and has ordered the company to reinstate 28 illegally terminated employees. Thus far, these remedies have been insufficient to get the company to respect the rights of its employees. Obstacles to bargaining The options available to employers to discourage workers from exercising their trade union rights do not end if a union is certified. It is estimated that approximately one third of employers engaged in bad faith or "surface" bargaining with newly-certified unions. Forty per cent of negotiations for a first collective agreement fail. One study showed that in a quarter of the remaining cases where a first collective agreement was achieved, the union was unable to negotiate a subsequent agreement. Throughout 1998 drivers and loading dock workers employed by the Overnite Transportation Co. have had to contend with blatant surface bargaining by their employer. Since organising activity began at the national trucking company, workers employed at 38 out of 165 terminals have voted for union representation in separate elections. Because these elections include most of the largest terminals, the union now represents approximately 45 per cent of the company’s workforce eligible for union representation. Despite scores of collective bargaining sessions and the issuing of numerous complaints by the NLRB against the company for its refusal to bargain, no collective agreement has been reached at any union represented terminal. Refusing to enter into serious negotiations is part of a larger company response to union activity which has also included illegal discharges and the illegal closing of several union-represented terminals. The NLRB has issued complaints alleging approximately 1000 separate and serious unfair labour practices committed by the company. 6 Restrictions on workers’ activity - freedom for employers The law, and various administrative and judicial decisions, place a variety of restrictions on the ability of workers to engage in "concerted activity" including restrictions on intermittent strikes, secondary boycotts and other forms of mutual aid as well as on various kinds of "on-the- job" activity. However, the law gives employers the "free play of economic forces". If employers cannot get what they want through collective bargaining, they can unilaterally impose their terms, lock out their employees, and transfer work to another location, or even to another legal entity. Throughout 1998, 250 workers employed at Crown Central Petroleum’s refinery in Pasadena Texas remained locked out of work. In October 1996 company supervisors escorted the union members from the facility during contract negotiations and began to run the plant using sala-ried personnel and personnel supplied by outside contractors. Broadcast technicians at ABC, a company owned by the Disney Corporation, found themselves locked out by the company when they returned to work following a one-day strike. The company attempted to shift production of some of its television news programmes to the United Kingdom. Throughout 1998 employees at the Hi-Tech Cable plant in Starkville, Mississippi continued to work without a collective agreement. Their company had been purchased by another firm, Southwire Co., in 1992. Following the expiration of the existing collective agreement the new owners declared an impasse in negotiations and unilaterally implemented changes in terms of employment - including 12-hour days without overtime, the elimination of mandatory arbitra-tion and the elimination of grievance procedures during working hours - in a deliberate attempt to destroy the union. In the construction industry, it is a common and legal practice for employers to create separ-ate non-union companies and thereby avoid negotiated commitments. Replacing strikers - permanently Recent surveys of employers with impending negotiations have found that upwards of 80 per cent are committed to, or contemplating, replacing workers if they can’t get a deal they like. Under the law, employers can hire replacement workers during an economic strike. Although the dismissal of strikers is banned, the use of permanent replacements is, in practice, virtually indistinguishable from dismissal. Employer-provoked strikes More and more employers have deliberately provoked strikes to get rid of trade unions. Unacceptable demands are made of workers and are often accompanied by arrangements for the recruiting and training of strike-breakers. Permanent replacement workers can vote in a decertification election to eliminate union recognition. Should the company and the union reach an agreement during a strike, striking workers do not automatically return to work. The law only gives strikers the right to return to work as jobs become available. Throughout 1998, employees of the walnut producer co-operative Diamond Walnut, in Stockton, California, continued a strike that began in 1991. Also throughout the year employees of the Best Western Grosvenor Resort in Lake Buena Vista, Florida, continued a strike begun in September 1996. In June 1997 an Administrative Law Judge found that Detroit News and Knight-Ridder had unlawfully provoked a strike which began on 13 July 1995, involving 2,600 employees of the Detroit News, owned by media conglomerate Knight-Ridder, and the Detroit Free Press, owned by media conglomerate Gannett. The newspapers were ordered to reinstate the striking wor-kers but appealed to the NLRB. In September 1998 the NLRB ordered the companies to re-hire the strikers. The newspapers are appealing this decision and continue to refuse to rehire most of the striking workers. 0 The employees of CF&I Steel in Boulder Colorado (now known as Rocky Mountain Steel), a subsidiary of Oregon Steel Mills, Inc., were permanently replaced following a strike that began in October 1997. The company refused the union’s unconditional offer to return to work in December 1997 and continued to operate with permanent replacements throughout 1998. Following a strike that began in September 1998, 1,500 workers employed at Continental General Tire, Inc. in Charlotte, North Carolina were replaced. The company, owned by German tyre maker Continental AG, began preparations for contract negotiations by fortifying the plant, hiring armed guards and by recruiting stikebreakers. These strikes were provoked by employers whose enterprises were successful demanding big cuts in existing wages, working conditions and benefits in contracts established through collective bargaining. The duration of these strikes, and the corresponding hardship for the striking workers, was caused by the legal use of strike-breakers by the employers. In the case of the Diamond Walnut dispute, the employer even required workers to train their replace-ments. These strikes, although among the longest, were only a few of the cases in which employers used replacement workers in violation of the right to strike. Employers obstruct collective agreements Strike-breakers are not only used to destroy established collective bargaining relationships but also to prevent trade unions from achieving a first agreement. In March 1997 employees at Magnetic Speciality Inc. in Marietta, Ohio, went on strike for the purpose of obtaining trade union recognition and were promptly replaced. The workers at this facility had voted for union representation in an NLRB supervised election in August 1995. The company had ignored three NLRB orders to recognise the union and illegally dismissed some union supporters. During the strike the company used private security guards to intimidate the strikers, threatened to dismiss strikers and unilaterally altered work rules, job classifications and other terms of employment without fulfilling its obligation to consult the union. In October 1997 a federal court ordered the company to recognise the union. Although a collective agreement was reached in January 1999, it took four years including a 22 month strike for the workers to obtain union recognition. In January 1998 following months of negotiations for a first contract, employees of Jet Equipment Inc., a distributor located in Auburn Washington and owned by Swiss based Walter Meier Holding Company, organised a strike and were replaced. Extreme exploitation An under-funded labour inspectorate and inadequate penalties for employers who violate the law mean that legally established labour standards covering wages and hours, child labour and workplace safety are inadequately enforced. This, together with the failure of US law to pro-tect trade union rights, has led to an increasing number of instances of extreme exploitation. Some of the most extreme exploitation takes place in territories under the control of the U.S. government. Since the 1980’s the U.S. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands has developed a garment industry based on the ability of these islands to ship products duty free and without quotas to the US. This status, together with local control of wage and immigra-tion laws, has had the practical effect of introducing a system of indentured servitude into the territory. Local authorities permit foreign-owned companies to recruit thousands of foreign workers, mainly young women from Thailand, China, the Philippines and Bangladesh. The workers are recruited by private agencies who demand exorbitant fees from these workers. Fees are either paid in advance or are deducted from pay in an arrangement that requires the workers to remain in the employ of the same manufacturer who in turn has a relationship with the recruiting agency. 8 In addition to the abuse of fee-charging, these foreign workers are routinely required to sign employment contracts where they agree to refrain from asking for wage increases, seeking other work and from joining a union. The workers are informed that contract violations will result in dismissal as well as deportation and that the workers concerned must pay the travel expenses to return to their home country. Groups excluded from national labour legislation National labour legislation does not cover agricultural, domestic workers and certain kinds of supervisory workers. Moreover, the concept of "employee" as used in the law does not accord protection to "independent contractors" even where they have no separate economic identity independent of a particular employer. Throughout 1998 over 2000 migrant and seasonal farmworkers employed on farms that supply the Mount Olive Pickle Company have sought to obtain recognition for their trade union from this company which, in the absence of any legal framework to protect their rights, is the only organisation capable of engaging in meaningful collective bargaining or in according effective trade union recognition. Public sector - also facing a lack of protection The inadequacy of laws is not limited to the private sector. Approximately 40 per cent of all public sector workers, nearly seven million people, are still denied basic collective bargaining rights. At the national level, only postal workers enjoy such rights and 94 per cent of the pos-tal workers are represented by trade unions. Over two million employees of the federal govern-ment are governed by the 1978 Federal Labor Relations Act which outlaws strikes, proscribes collective bargaining over hours, wages and economic benefits, and imposes an excessive definition of management rights which further limits the scope of collective bargaining rights. While the situation varies from state to state, the absence of proper legal protection of trade union rights in the public sector is reflected in bans on strikes, bans on collective agreements, provisions for their invalidation, limitations on the scope of collective bargaining and discrimination against national trade union organisations. Thirteen states only allow collective bargaining for certain public employees and 14 states do not allow it at all. Nearly seven million of the total of 14.9 million state and local government employees in the United States are denied the right to bargain collectively. |
Copyright (c) 1998, Joongpil Cho