ORGANIZING

Organizing Guide For Local Unions

Setting Up An Organizing Program

Phases Of A Typical Organizing Campaign

Targeting And Getting Leads

Research – To Begin A Campaign Or Not?

List Building And Record Keeping

  • Assess Union Support
  • Ensure That Committee Is Representative

One-On-One Communications

  • Are They Supportive
  • Can They Identify Leaders Among The Workers
  • Additional Names And Addresses
  • Have Them Attend A Meeting
  • Join The Organizing Committee
  • Return Visit
  • Call From End Of Shift To As Late As Possible
  • Eat Before Or After Calling Hours
  • Saturdays And Sundays Are Good Days For Visits

The Organizing Committee

  1. Solidifies The Committee
  2. Offers Some Legal Protection

Campaign For Recognition Of The Union

  1. Don’t Surface Too Early With Leaflets And Meetings
  2. Build A List Of Names And Addresses
  3. Chart The Facility
  4. Make House Calls To Potential Committee Members
  • Build A Strong Foundation
  1. Form A Large, Representative Committee
  2. Target At Least 15% Of The Unit For The Committee
  3. Keep Meetings Short And To The Point
  4. Give Out Assignments
  5. Hold People Accountable
  6. Give The Committee And Active Role In:
  1. Soliciting Cards
  2. Handing Out Leaflets
  3. Educating Co-Workers
  • Move The Campaign Quickly
  1. Frontload Staff And Volunteers
  2. Collect Cards/Petitions In As Short A Time As Possible
  • Keep Momentum Building
  1. Continue To Sign Cards/Petitions
  2. Continue To Add To Committee
  3. Save Some Activities For Late In Campaign, Such As Wearing Buttons And T-Shirts
  4. Don’t Have Burn Out By Having Too Many Meetings Early On
  • Make House Calls
  1. No Substitute For One-On-One Conversations
  2. Don’t Call Ahead
  • Design The Campaign For Moderate Workers
  • Don’t Polarize The Workforce
  • Strident Attacks On Employer Often Backfire
  • Present Union In Positive Light
  • Focus On The Middle-Of-The-Road, Undecided Workers
  • Plan
  1. Strategy For Getting A List Of Names And Addresses
  2. Timetable With Goals
  1. Committee Size
  2. Cards Signed
  3. If Goals Aren’t Met, Consider Ending The Campaign
  1. Decide On How Many Staff And Volunteers Will Be Assigned
  2. Plan For Developing Issues Over The Course Of The Campaign
  3. Strategies For Convincing Workers And Preempting Employer Attacks
  4. Schedule For Topics And Meetings
  5. Decisions On Outreach To Community And Media
  6. Strategies For Using Leaflets
  1. Means Of Communicating
  2. Outlet For Committee Leadership
  1. Election Vs. Non-Election Strategy
  • Deciding On Ending A Campaign
  1. Lay Groundwork By Establishing Goals
  2. Involve Committee In Goal Setting
  3. Establish Timeline For Reaching Goals
  • Single Purpose Cards
  1. Serves As A "Showing Of Interest"
  • Dual Purpose Or Membership Card
  • Petitions
  1. Creates Momentum
  2. Requires A More Open Commitment
  • Strategic Advantage To Have Sign-Ups Take Place Over A Short Time
  1. Early Signers Can Get Discouraged
  2. Creates Sense Of Excitement And Momentum As Everyone Signs
  • Never Pressure Anyone To Sign
  • Sign For A Union – Not Just For An Election
  • Keep Asking People To Sign Throughout The Campaign
  1. Supervisors Smile And Ask You How You Are
  2. Promises Are Made
  3. Raises Are Given
  4. Unpopular Supervisors Disappear
  5. Complaints Are Resolved
  6. "One More Chance"
  • Scare Tactics
  1. Loss Of Benefits
  2. Close The Plant
  3. Union Inspired Violence
  4. Strikes
  5. Union Only Interested In Dues Money
  6. "Anti-Union Committee"
  • Tips For Beating The Employer Campaign
  1. Predict
  2. Pre-Empt
  3. Involve Workers In Decision-Making During The Campaign
  4. Take Credit For Improvements Management Makes During The Campaign
  5. Stay On The Offensive
  1. Stick To Your Issues
  2. Don’t Get Stuck Responding To Management’s Campaign
  1. Avoid Misspellings, Sloppiness And Inaccuracies
  • Involve A Committee
  1. It’s Not What You Say But Who Hands It To You
  • Timing
  1. Be Ready To Go At A Moments Notice
  • Don’t Be Defensive
  1. Stick To Your Positive Agenda
  2. Use Verbal Network Of The Committee To Respond To The Employer’s Attack
  • Appeal To Moderates
  • Be Creative
  1. Use Humor, Art, Cartoons, Etc.
  • Put The Workers Out Front
  1. Use Worker Pictures And Statements In The Literature
  • Other Ways To Communicate
  1. Find Fun Ways To Defuse Employer Campaign
  1. Popcorn At Anti-Union Movies
  2. Fortune Cookies
  3. Have Committee Brainstorm Other Appropriate Ways
  1. Try To Involve "Moderates"
  1. Petitions
  2. Stickers
  3. Buttons
  4. T-Shirts
  5. Hats
  1. Be Creative And Use Humor
  1. Build A List Of Union Supporters On Leave And Arrange For Transportation
  2. Phone Banks
  • Last Minute Tricks
  1. Double Paychecks
  2. Stories Of Strikes And Plant Closings
  3. Pleas For Another Change
  • Choose Observers Who Are Popular, Respected And Representative
  • Time Of Elections
  1. Have At Beginning Of Shift
  • Releasing Voters
  1. Releasing Observers
  2. Announcements Over P.A. System
  3. Self-Releasing Through A Posted Schedule
  • Election Location
  1. Board Presumes Elections Should Be Held On The Premises

Organizing For A First Contract

  • Win A Contract
  • Build A Strong Enough Union To Enforce It
  • Win Further Gains In The Future
  • Engage In Job Actions
    1. Group Grievances
    2. Sign Petitions
    3. Attend Rallies
    4. Wear Buttons And Hats
    5. Confront The Boss
  • Aggressively Assert Worker Rights
    1. Health And Safety Standards
    2. Wage And Hour Regulations
    3. EEO Statutes
  • Reach Out To The Community

 

Back to Table of Contents

Researching Our Union’s Goals:
Through Better Servicing By Staff & Leaders Or Through Organizing Worker Mobilization
(Center for Labor Economics and Research, Florida International University)

The Issue

Leaders of the labor movement are currently going through an intense self-examination. Unions are trying to best decide how the rapid decline in union power and numbers can be reversed. With the overall unionization at 17 percent of the work force (and only 14 percent in the private sector), this debate inside labor has taken on an air of urgency.

One side of the debate says that the best way to win back members and get better contracts is to do what we’ve always been doing except more professionally. This side feels that we are not meeting the members’ expectations and that leaders must be more skilled at winning grievances and arbitrations and servicing the members’ needs. Union officials are here to solve problems.

Another side of the debate feels that one reason unions are not as strong as they used to be is because they have lost their crusading zeal. These unionists feel that the servicing model takes away from the responsibility that the workers in unions have to each other. This side claims that the only way to turn around the labor movement is never to stop organizing worker support for all of the union activities. This group believes union leaders should help workers organize to solve their own problems. They feel that only when workers are mobilized around grievances and contracts will management begin to take unions seriously again.

Is this an important debate? If so, which side should we choose?

The Arguments

Proponents of the organizing model go on to say that only by direct involvement will workers identify the union as theirs. This side says that unions will grow stronger in numbers and accomplish more when members feel they have an actual say in their work and their union. They argue that 80 percent of the work force never file a grievance and therefore don’t identify with the union on the job. They believe that if members are active in all phases of the union they won’t blame others when things go wrong. The union will gain power when its members see themselves and their actions as powerful, not when they act as passive clients.

Those who support the servicing model see the union as an insurance policy against bad management and the monthly dues that workers pay as a fee for this service. They feel it is hard enough to get members to union functions, such as meetings, and that proponents of the organizing model are naïve to assume they can get workers to do more. They also warn that even if unions were successful at mobilizing the workforce to fight for workplace issues, management would retaliate and make life harder for everyone.

Options

Supposing we had to choose today, which approach would you pick? (1) Activating the workforce through the organizing model? Or (2) beefing up current efforts by having more efficient staff and providing more and better services? What are the risks of each, and what are the benefits?

 

Discussion Questions
  1. If you had to vote now for either the organizing model or the service model for your union, which would you choose? Why? Which model does your union follow?

    2.  

  2. What is happening to the labor movement today? How does this affect you in your union? Explain.

    3.  

  3. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the grievance-arbitration procedure? Do you feel that his process adequately addresses the needs of the union and the workers you represent? Will gaining more professional skills solve the problems you identified in the last question?

    4.  

  4. Does following an organizing model mean that you do not service our members?

    5.  

  5. What do the terms "empowerment" and "solidarity" mean, and how do they help unions in a practical sense? Which model is more relevant to their meanings? Explain.

 

Organizing Model

Service Model
  1. Stimulates and involves members in problem solving in group process or collective action.
  2. Not limited to the bargaining process.
  3. Committed to education, communications and participation in union.
  4. Develops and depends on members’ skills and abilities.
  5. Information sharing & open communication channels.
  6. Decentralized organizational structure.
  7. Independent of management, proactive.

 

  
  1. Union leadership solves problems for members on basis of complaints or requests.
  2. Total reliance on grievance and negotiations process.
  3. Passive membership.
  4. Reliance on specialists, experts and union staff.
  5. Closed and/or secretive communications channels.
  6. Centralized and top heavy organizational structure.
  7. Dependent on management, reactive.

 

 

Back to Table of Contents

Building An Organizing Model Of Union Structure:
Mobilization CWA
(Center for Labor Economics and Research, Florida International University)

In 1986, the 120,000 Communication Workers of America (CWA) who worked for AT&T experienced firsthand the problems unions face when they strike a highly automated company in an industry that has recently been deregulated. CWA was bargaining its first contract with AT&T since a federal court broke up the huge Bell System telecommunications empire.

The company demanded severe wage and benefit concessions and job security give backs that threatened the union’s membership base. After negotiations failed, the union went on strike for over a month. The AT&T strike was almost doomed from the beginning, partially because high-tech companies such as AT&T take many weeks before they even begin to show the effects of a work stoppage and partially because much of the work force did not have a clear understanding of the union’s issues, goals, and strategies. The union was clearly losing the strike when about 30 percent of the bargaining unit crossed the picketline. The union signed a concessionary agreement, but many people felt the union was fortunate when the company settled the contract at all.

It is easy to understand the union’s apprehension, when, in 1989 the contract was due to expire and was up for renegotiation. If anything, the company had more of an advantage because it knew its get-tough strategies could work and that the unionized work force was demoralized and pessimistic over the previous contract battle. CWA knew it faced an almost impossible task when it decided that its only chance at victory at AT&T was to rebuild its union structure based on an organizing model of unionism.

MOBILIZATION CWA

The American Heritage Dictionary’s second definition of the word mobilize is "to assemble, prepare, or put into operation for war or similar emergency". In 1989, the CWA had such an emergency when its contact with AT&T expired. But this time the union was ready. CWA initiated what it called Mobilization CWA, where stewards and other specially trained "mobilizers" were assigned to get the 120,000 AT&T workers involved in the campaign for a better contract.

Like the dictionary definition, Mobilization CWA also had three elements: organize, educate, and act. CWA first organized a structure where it identified and trained one steward or mobilizer for every 10 to 20 workers. Next, the union educated the members about the key issues in negotiations (job security, a decent standard of living, and maintenance of health care coverage) by talking to each worker one-to-one and giving them well-researched fact sheets on each issue. Finally, CWA members acted by providing the union with feedback on the campaign and by engaging themselves in several nationwide work site actions. After each action or set of action, Mobilization CWA would recycle, educating Mobilization activists on new issues, tactics, and strategies, and pulling off more workplace activities designed to increase the pressure on AT&T management.

These actions started slow and built in intensity as the May 28, 1989 expiration date came closer. First, tens of thousands of postcards were collected and sent to AT&T Chairman Robert Allen. Next, at every AT&T work site in the country, CWA members would wear red shirts on Thursday. Next, AT&T members developed an "electronic picketline" whereby Chairman Allen’s phone lines were jammed when the mobilization network got the word out that angry members should call Allen collect and let him know how they felt about the company’s latest contract offer. On another occasion, all AT&T workers nationwide stood up at their workstations at the same time because they were participating in "Take a Stand Day". On another day, tens of thousands of AT&T workers showed up to work wearing bloody bandages, walking on crutches, and riding wheelchairs to protest management’s efforts to roll back health-care coverage.

The final straw for management came when it learned that millions of palm cards had been printed explaining how consumers could bypass AT&T operators to use a competing long-distance company. Rumor had it that CWA was going to use its mobilization network to distribute these cards nationwide to family members and other trade-union members. The new contract was signed without a strike and without concessions.

 

Discussion Questions 

  1. Were the 1986 AT&T contract negotiations conducted using the service model or the organizing model of unionism? Explain how.

    2.  

  2. What problems do unions face after a strike during which a significant portion of its members crossed the picketline?

    3.  

  3. How did high technology work to management’s favor in the 1986 strike?

    4.  

  4. In which ways did the local union structure change after CWA implemented its mobilization program?

    5.  

  5. How did CWA organize, educate, and act in the 1989 contract campaign?

    6.  

  6. What was the union’s alternative to striking in 1989? Could CWA have accomplished this by keeping a service model structure? Explain your answer.

    7.  

  7. Could a mobilization/organizing model structure help your union? Explain.

    8.  

  8. How would you change your union structure to accommodate an organizing model?

    9.  

  9. List the things that would have to happen before your local could reasonably be expected to change to an organizing model structure.

 

Back to Table of Contents

Union Control at Randall
A Case Study
(Center for Labor Economics and Research, Florida International University)

The Randall Company in Blythville, Arkansas employs about 300 workers represented by UAW Local 1249. The automotive-parts manufacturer had broken the union’s strike in 1977, and management had unilaterally imposed work rules, frozen wages, and voided the union’s right to dues checkoff. Arkansas is a right-to-work state, and only 20 workers belonged to the union when in early 1984 it began a campaign around product quality.

Based on rumors that the Big Three auto companies were going to drop suppliers who had poor quality records, the union approached management with a proposal to improve product quality. Part of the proposal included the protection of a union contract. Management turned down the union proposal, and Local 1249 responded by creating what it called a Quality Audit Team (QAT). The union took tow months to select and train 30 of the most trusted workers from key areas and from all shifts who were identified by their UAW T-shirts that proclaimed "Safety, Quality, and Union Rights".

By using these QAT members to involve the rest of the Randall work force in systematically monitoring quality, the QAT pieced together its own detailed weekly inventory of the quality of all parts and where these parts were shipped. When Randall management was informed of specific product-quality problems and refused to remedy the situation, the QAT kept a record of the incident. Many of Randall’s customers are companies that are also represented by UAW locals. These UAW locals were informed by Local 1249 of the defective merchandise that management had forced its quality-conscious work force to ship. Eventually, Randall customers discovered management’s complacency with quality, and over 700 customer complaints were received by management in less than a year. The union was even able to bring up the issue during UAW-GM negotiations, documenting for General Motors that a major GM supplier, Randall, was shipping it defective parts.

As the quality campaign against Randall management intensified, so did the enthusiasm of the workers for their union. By the end of 1984, the QAT had involved so many Randall workers in the campaign that 85 percent of the employees had signed union membership cards and over 100 were paying their dues on a regular basis. When Randall management gave the workers unilateral pay increases of $1.20 per hour over two years, they knew their collective effort at management quality control was beginning to pay off.

 

Randall Case Study Questions 

  1. What made the Quality Audit Teams at Randall so successful?

    2.  

  2. In what ways was the organization of Quality Audit Teams at Randall similar to traditional union structure?

    3.  

  3. Analyze the Randall case in terms of the organizing model of unionism and then in terms of the servicing model of unionism. Would the outcomes have been the same?

    4.  

  4. Why was quality such an effective issue in mobilizing the membership at Randall for the rank and file? For the union?

    5.  

  5. What does the Randall case suggest about the relationship between different local unions and between each local union and the International Union?

    6.  

  6. What if management at Randall came to the union and said, "We’ve had enough. Let’s have a joint quality program." What terms of cooperation should the union impose if they agree to have a joint program with management? What would management insist be different in a joint QAT program?

    7.  

  7. If, as a condition of cooperation, management said that the union must be less adversarial and the union agreed, how difficult would it be for the union to reinstitute an adversarial approach? Why?

 

Back to Table of Contents

Mazda Contract Campaign
UAW Local 3000
(Labor Education Program, University of North Texas)

Background

The Mazda plant in Flat Rock, Michigan opened in 1985. It was from its inception Japanese-style, lean production plant. The UAW organized the plant when Mazda agreed not to resist the union in its organizing effort. At the time the union was organized, the plant employed 800 workers. By 1988, the plant had grown to 3000 workers, most of whom had not participated in the organizing drive nor in the negotiations that followed the union gaining recognition. The workforce that was recruited was young, with the average age in the thirties, and for the most part was recruited from outside of the auto industry.

Initially, the union leadership in the plant was appointed by the UAW. By 1988 a split occurred within the union, with one faction wanting to cooperate with Mazda in its "team concept", fearing that to resist would lead to layoffs or even plant closure. The other faction wanted to challenge management and its false promise of a better work environment. The first election for union office ended in a tie, so the union had to conduct a second election, which the faction that wanted to resist management won by the narrowest of margins. Despite the clear differences in views of the two opposing factions, less than half the members voted in the election.

The Team Concept

Mazda was managed along the lines of traditional Japanese-style management. Workers were organized into teams and utilized techniques such as Kaizon, Just-in-Time, and Program Work Sheets, in management’s drive for continuous improvement in the production process. Work was tightly controlled by management through the use of the program work sheets, which detailed how a job was to be performed. Suggestions elicited through the quality circles often led to changes in the work sheets. In addition, despite management’s commitment to employee involvement, management often unilaterally made changes in the work sheets as more efficient methods were discovered.

The promise of "team concept" was for workers to have more control over their jobs and the opportunity to participate more fully in the decisions of the company. The reality was a work situation described as "industrial aerobics" and a very high injury rate among the workers. Team leaders, appointed by management through a point system, were widely viewed as junior foremen. Spot-relief workers were eliminated, although there were temporary workers available for relief. Team leaders filled in for absences. The system was designed to perform the maximum amount of work with the minimum amount of people

The Bargaining Campaign

The new union leadership immediately faced the prospect of bargaining a new contract with Mazda. With the help of Region 1A of the UAW, the local began a series of mandatory meetings for the officers of the union to analyze their strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT analysis) in order to develop a strategy for bargaining. They set goals and timetables that would be attainable only if they were successful in building increasing involvement of the rank and file members into the bargaining process.

Their first action was to conduct a survey of their membership. Instead of mailing the survey, or having members complete it at a union meeting, the union chose to conduct the survey at the plant utilizing the team structure as a means of contacting each worker. This was possible because each team had a coordinator who was a member of the union. By utilizing the coordinators to conduct the survey, 2400 out of the 3000 workers filled out the questionnaire. Not only did the union collect valuable information about workers’ views on conditions in the plant, but it was then in a position to present back to the workers the results of the survey to help support positions it was taking at the bargaining table.

The union escalated the pressure by the workers on management by initiating a mass grievance on the use of temporary workers. By utilizing the team structure, they were able to get over 90 percent of the workers to sign the grievance. As bargaining continued, the union continued with actions that involved workers taking action to support the union.

When it came time to conduct the strike-authorization vote, the union again opted to conduct the vote at the plant using one-on-one techniques. Ninety-two percent of the members voted with 94 percent authorizing a strike. During the rest of bargaining, the union continued to have workers take actions in support of their bargaining position. The contract was settled without a strike with significant gains for the union, including hiring additional relief workers and limits on the use of temporaries.

 

Discussion Questions 

  1. Why do you think Mazda management initiated team concept? What is management’s objective in striving for continuous improvement? What role is there for the union in this model of employee involvement?

    2.  

  2. What difficulties does a union bargaining team face when it has a divided, apathetic membership? Does an employer-dominated team-concept style of employee involvement have an effect on the unity of the union?

    3.  

  3. How did the union respond to the structure of the team concept? Could it have conducted this campaign utilizing traditional union structures and strategies?

    4.  

  4. What did the union hope to accomplish by conducting the survey and the strike vote at the plant? How do you think that the workers felt about the union conducting these activities at the plant? What risks did the union take by these activities?

    5.  

  5. What do you think happened to union activity after the contract was signed?

    6.  

  6. How does this situation compare to the situation facing your local?

 

Top
Next Section - Negotiations
Back to Table of Contents