Employer Opposition to Organizing

New findings from Dr. Kate Bronfenbrenner provide a comprehensive, independent analysis of employer behavior in union representation elections supervised by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Her research identifies the range and incidence of legal and illegal coercive tactics used by employers NLRB elections and the ineffectiveness of current labor law to protect and enforce workers’ rights during the process.

Dr. Bronfenbrenner’s report also compares employer behavior in this study’s period to previous studies that she and her research teams have conducted over the last 20 years.

In the last two decades, private-sector employer opposition to workers seeking their legal right to union representation has intensified. Compared to the 1990s, employers are more than twice as likely to use 10 or more tactics in their anti-union campaigns, with a greater focus on more coercive and punitive tactics designed to intensely monitor and punish union activity. Employers have increased their use of more punitive tactics (“sticks”) such as plant closing threats and actual plant closings, discharges, harassment, disciplinary actions, surveillance, and alteration of benefits and conditions. While at the same time, employers are less likely to offer “carrots,” such as granting of unscheduled raises, positive personnel changes, bribes, special favors, social events, promises of improvement, and employee involvement programs.

It has become standard practice for workers to be subjected by corporations to threats, interrogation, harassment, surveillance, and retaliation for supporting a union. An analysis of the 1999-2003 data on NLRB election campaigns finds that:

Employers continue to punish workers for supporting a union

It has become standard practice for workers to be subjected by corporations to threats, interrogation, harassment, surveillance, and retaliation for supporting a union. An analysis of the 1999-2003 data on NLRB election campaigns finds that:

· 63%of employers interrogate workers in mandatory one-on-one meetings with their supervisors about support for the union;

· 54% of employers threaten workers in such meetings;

· 57% of employers threaten to close the worksite;

· 47% of employers threaten to cut wages and benefits; and

· 34% of employers fire workers.

Many employers resist collective bargaining long after workers form their union

· One year after a successful election, 52% of newly formed unions had no collective bargaining agreement.

· Two years after an election, 37% of newly formed unions still had no labor agreement.

Source:  No Holds Barred: The Intensification of Employer Opposition to Organizing BY KATE BRONFENBRENNER