{"title":"Unions and the New Management","authors":"E. Lawler, S. Mohrman","doi":"10.5465/AME.1987.4275643","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The union movement in the United States is in trouble. Indicators of its health show it is very ill. The only debatable point is whether the illness is terminal or simply represents another one of the down cycles from which the union movement has suffered during its lifetime. The severity of the illness is best illustrated by declining membership: Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that union membership has fallen from 23%(, of the workforce in 1980 to 18.8%, in 1984, the lowest in recent history and the lowest of any other free industrial nation, with the possible exception of Spain. This decline represents a loss of 2.7 million union members. As recently as the 1950s, over 30, of the workforce belonged to unions. Data from decertification and certification elections point to a significant decline as unions lose an increasing number of elections. The reasons commonly cited for the decline in union membership are many and varied. Some reflect trends in the economy: globalization resulting in the decline of traditionally unionized industries such as automobiles, garments, food processing, and steel; a sharp growth in the service sector, which is harder to organize; the emergence of nonunion competition in newly deregulated industries such as airlines and trucking; and a decrease in demand and/or overproduction in industries, e.g., meat packing. Other threats to unions include automation, the changing legal situation with respect to union organizing and employee rights and, finally, the changing expectations of the new workforce. Unions are not the only institutions threatened. The changing environment has made its impact on the viability of many businesses themselves and on the way in which they are managed. In fact, management's actions in adjusting to an altered environment have constituted further threats to the health of unions. Believing unions to be an encumbrance to competing effectively in a rapidly changing global economy, some managements resort to antiunion tactics with increased intensity, sophistication, and success. More important, from our perspective, management is trying to create a new way of managing, one more suitable to a rapidly changing economy, increasingly advanced technologies, and a better educated, more sophisticated workforce. This new approach to managing includes greater responsiveness to employee needs for involvement, responsibility, and meaningful work. As part of the new way of managing, these organizations accept responsibility for creating a positive and motivating work environment for their employees. In doing so, they discover that the result is a stronger, more competitive enterprise. The increased adoption of involvement-oriented management approaches raises the question of what role there is for unions. The role unions once filled is not viable in the new management environment: they must change or continue to decline. Should we worry about their decline and possible extinction? We take the position that society should be very concerned about the rapid weakening of organized labor. It potentially eliminates effective input by a major stakeholder, labor, into the decisions shaping businesses of the future. In the past, unions have been the primary voice for workers. Now their survival depends on finding a new role, given the changes that have taken place. Before we can discuss some of the changes that unions will have to make, we first need to consider the success in fulfilling their traditional role. We will then look at the \"new management\" to which unions must adjust.","PeriodicalId":337734,"journal":{"name":"Academy of Management Executive","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1987-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"42","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academy of Management Executive","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5465/AME.1987.4275643","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 42
Abstract
The union movement in the United States is in trouble. Indicators of its health show it is very ill. The only debatable point is whether the illness is terminal or simply represents another one of the down cycles from which the union movement has suffered during its lifetime. The severity of the illness is best illustrated by declining membership: Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that union membership has fallen from 23%(, of the workforce in 1980 to 18.8%, in 1984, the lowest in recent history and the lowest of any other free industrial nation, with the possible exception of Spain. This decline represents a loss of 2.7 million union members. As recently as the 1950s, over 30, of the workforce belonged to unions. Data from decertification and certification elections point to a significant decline as unions lose an increasing number of elections. The reasons commonly cited for the decline in union membership are many and varied. Some reflect trends in the economy: globalization resulting in the decline of traditionally unionized industries such as automobiles, garments, food processing, and steel; a sharp growth in the service sector, which is harder to organize; the emergence of nonunion competition in newly deregulated industries such as airlines and trucking; and a decrease in demand and/or overproduction in industries, e.g., meat packing. Other threats to unions include automation, the changing legal situation with respect to union organizing and employee rights and, finally, the changing expectations of the new workforce. Unions are not the only institutions threatened. The changing environment has made its impact on the viability of many businesses themselves and on the way in which they are managed. In fact, management's actions in adjusting to an altered environment have constituted further threats to the health of unions. Believing unions to be an encumbrance to competing effectively in a rapidly changing global economy, some managements resort to antiunion tactics with increased intensity, sophistication, and success. More important, from our perspective, management is trying to create a new way of managing, one more suitable to a rapidly changing economy, increasingly advanced technologies, and a better educated, more sophisticated workforce. This new approach to managing includes greater responsiveness to employee needs for involvement, responsibility, and meaningful work. As part of the new way of managing, these organizations accept responsibility for creating a positive and motivating work environment for their employees. In doing so, they discover that the result is a stronger, more competitive enterprise. The increased adoption of involvement-oriented management approaches raises the question of what role there is for unions. The role unions once filled is not viable in the new management environment: they must change or continue to decline. Should we worry about their decline and possible extinction? We take the position that society should be very concerned about the rapid weakening of organized labor. It potentially eliminates effective input by a major stakeholder, labor, into the decisions shaping businesses of the future. In the past, unions have been the primary voice for workers. Now their survival depends on finding a new role, given the changes that have taken place. Before we can discuss some of the changes that unions will have to make, we first need to consider the success in fulfilling their traditional role. We will then look at the "new management" to which unions must adjust.
美国的工会运动陷入了困境。它的健康指标显示它病得很重。唯一有争议的一点是,这种疾病是终末期的,还是仅仅代表了工会运动在其生命周期中遭受的另一个衰退周期。工会会员人数的减少最能说明这种疾病的严重性:美国劳工统计局(Bureau of Labor Statistics)的数据显示,工会会员人数占劳动力的比例从1980年的23%下降到1984年的18.8%,这是近代史上最低的,也是其他自由工业国家中最低的,西班牙可能除外。这一下降意味着270万工会成员的损失。就在最近的20世纪50年代,超过30%的劳动力属于工会。来自取消认证和认证选举的数据表明,随着工会在越来越多的选举中失败,工会数量显著下降。工会成员减少的原因通常被引用为多种多样。有些反映了经济趋势:全球化导致汽车、服装、食品加工和钢铁等传统工会行业的衰落;服务业的急剧增长,很难组织起来;在航空和卡车运输等刚刚解除管制的行业中出现了非工会竞争;需求减少和/或工业生产过剩,如肉类加工。工会面临的其他威胁包括自动化、工会组织和雇员权利方面法律状况的变化,以及新劳动力期望的变化。工会并不是唯一受到威胁的机构。不断变化的环境对许多企业本身的生存能力及其管理方式产生了影响。事实上,管理部门为适应变化的环境而采取的行动对工会的健康构成了进一步的威胁。一些管理层认为工会是在快速变化的全球经济中有效竞争的障碍,因此采取了越来越激烈、越来越复杂和越来越成功的反工会策略。更重要的是,从我们的角度来看,管理层正在努力创造一种新的管理方式,一种更适合快速变化的经济、日益先进的技术和受过更好教育、更成熟的劳动力的管理方式。这种新的管理方法包括对员工参与、责任和有意义的工作的需求作出更大的反应。作为新管理方式的一部分,这些组织承担了为员工创造积极和激励的工作环境的责任。在这样做的过程中,他们发现结果是一个更强大、更有竞争力的企业。越来越多地采用以参与为导向的管理方法,这就提出了工会应该发挥什么作用的问题。工会曾经扮演的角色在新的管理环境中已不可行:它们必须改变,否则将继续衰落。我们应该担心它们的减少和可能的灭绝吗?我们的立场是,社会应该非常关注有组织的劳工的迅速削弱。它潜在地消除了主要利益相关者(劳动力)对塑造未来业务的决策的有效投入。过去,工会一直是工人的主要代言人。现在,考虑到已经发生的变化,它们的生存取决于找到一个新的角色。在我们讨论工会必须做出的一些改变之前,我们首先需要考虑在履行其传统角色方面取得的成功。然后,我们将看看工会必须适应的“新管理”。