When Smart Managers Deal With Unions, They Remember Shakespeare. This is a draft of my latest newsletter article for managers in unionized companies.
“All the world’s a stage,” Shakespeare famously wrote in As You Like It, “And all the men and women merely players: They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts.” Smart managers in a union shop know that they manage most effectively if they understand both their role and the role of the union.
What role does the union steward play? The critical roles are communicator, facilitator, protector and provider to union members. If effective the steward will win re-election and perhaps advance his union career; if he fails, he is often voted out.
The steward’s role is a “reactionary” one. In other words, management initiates most actions and the steward can protest or appeal those actions if it believes they violate the contract. Here is how a shop steward’s manual describes the role:
“The problems of management are not your problem. It is not up to [the steward] to make the workers toe the line or to increase efficiency. That’s the bosses’ worry. [The steward’s] job is to protect the workers and to get their grievances settled quickly and satisfactorily.”
Generally, the union cannot protest management’s right to act (most contracts contain a broad management rights clause that explicitly protects this right) but can protest the effects of management action. For example, a company and union might agree that management has the right to make work assignments, but it must consider seniority when making the decision. The union will fail if it protests the right to make an assignment, but might win if it shows management failed to properly consider seniority. This is how union contract provisions typically work.
However, smart managers know that the right to act does not always mean that management should act. A smart manager considers the steward’s role in the workplace when making a decision. Even where action is required, he will make sure that he carefully considers how he will implement the action.
One manager I trained recently relayed this example of how she accounted for the union steward’s political role in a discipline situation. The manager was faced with an attendance infraction that justified progressive discipline; the incident could have justified a suspension, but based on the employee’s work record the manager concluded that a written warning was probably the most appropriate penalty. However, when writing up the incident the manager went ahead and wrote it up as a suspension. She communicated to the steward that she intended to suspend the employee. The steward argued forcefully that the suspension was too severe – the manager then agreed with the steward, reduced the punishment and later (when communicating the punishment to the employee) gave the steward credit for reducing the penalty. The manager avoided a grievance and got the discipline she wanted, the steward got credit for protecting the member, and the employee was relieved to have the penalty reduced.
This example obviously would not work in every company, or even in one company more than once or twice (eventually every punishment will get reduced). I’m also not suggesting that this process requires the company to “manufacture” representation opportunities on the part of the union – the vast majority of the time the union’s representation will be very real and very effective. However, it vividly illustrates how a good manager can both accomplish his goals and allow the steward to fulfill his role to members. The same principles apply to any compromise situation – it is important to consider how to accomplish the business objective while giving the steward the opportunity to “save face” if there is a concession. All this can be accomplished if a manager simply understands his role, as well as the role of the steward, in the union shop.
