Union Effects on Employee Relation in Great Britain - Essay Example

Union Effects on Employee Relation in Great Britain Right from time, being a trade unionist or a member of a trade union has been one of the most dangerous adventures in the work life of an employee. It is even becoming more dangerous today than ever before; and this is not peculiar to any particular country or industry – it is so the world over. The actors involved in trade unions, i.e. the employer, the employee, the government, the citizens and workers’ representatives are always at loggerheads among. There has been no love lost among these actors. One common and obvious thing whenever there is any contentious issue to iron out, it is always the unionised worker and the union leaders who suffer the most. They suffer in the hands of the employers and the government respectively. In a country like Nigeria, for instance, both before and since the current democratic government took up the mantle of leadership, the government has, in its bid to restructure the country’s battered economy, applied certain measures over and over again, each time bringing untold hardship on the Nigerian workers. An example of such measures is the continual increase in the prices of various petroleum products, notably gasoline, kerosene, gas, diesel and other lubricants. Each time this is done, [It has been done six times within six years], the prices of virtually everything except workers’ salary would go up by over a hundred per cent. The transporters would increase their transport fares, market people would do the same on food stuffs, landlords, estate agents, farmers, schools and college; all these and other service providers, including manufacturers would follow suit and increase the prices of their products and services, without any consideration for the worker, who bears the effect of inflation. When the situation is like this, the workers plight become very pathetic because of the concomitant high cost of living and spiraling inflation the worker is left to grapple with as his pocket depletes quickly with his static salary. Many workers have had to continue to suffer in silence for fear of being sacked and thrown into the over-populated labour market, where many unemployed graduates are waiting in the wings to grab any job opportunity, no matter how small the pay, just to make ends meet. Government has remained insensitive about the plight of the worker with their arbitrary increases in petroleum product prices, even when no palliatives are ever put in place to cushion the effect of their policies on the work. Protests and nationwide strikes declared by the Labour Congress has always been the workers’ only resort, but this has always be perceived as opposition of the government, [short of being labeled a treason] and the reaction of the government has been to unleash police terror on the protesting workers, arrests and detention of union leaders are ordered. Apart from these, the worker faces such punitive measures as cut in salary suspension [without pay], and outright dismissal are additional punishments the worker faces in the hand of the employer at the end of strikes and protests. Generally, most employers perceive unionism as opposition to the progress and well being of their organisations. Whenever there is a conflict between workers and their employers, and the union comes in to mediate, there is always a stalemate, or where some agreements are struck through collective bargaining, such agreements are hardly respected to the full by the employers. Unionised employees are usually seen as disloyal to their employers. A wrong perception by the employers. Many unionised workers are constantly dismissed, sacked, suspended, suppressed or threatened at the slightest chance by the employers. Whenever an employer reneges on a collective bargaining agreement, the consequence could be either strike, which initially would start with workers’ warning in the form of ‘go-slow’ whereby the workers would do little or no work, but sit almost idle in the workplace. This could lead to picketing and eventually, outright strike, with the backing of the workers’ unions. When issues get out of hand in this way, the police, tear gas, guns and police dogs would come in. There would be injuries, assaults, arrests, detentions, loss of jobs and even loss of life of the workers, [in most cases]. At the end of everything, the question is “What is the way out?” Recently, Agency report has it that a total of 145 people worldwide were killed due to their trade union activities in 2005; 16 more than the previous year. *[ICFTU]1. The report which covers 136 countries from all five continents also documents over 700 violent attacks on trade unionists and nearly 500 death threats. According to affiliate of the International Labour Organisation, [ILO], which represents 145 million workers in 234 affiliated organizations in 154 countries and territories. Trade unionists in many countries continue to face imprisonment, dismissal and discrimination, while legal obstacles to trade union organizing and collective bargaining are being used to deny millions of workers their rights. ICFTU’s General Secretary, Guy Ryder, is quoted as saying “This year’s [2005] survey reveals just how far governments and employers are prepared to go in suppressing workers’ rights to seek a competitive market.” Mr Ryder added that “Globalisation must be put on a completely different path, with social concerns and ending exploitation at the center rather than at the margins.” New statistical charts in the survey point to different patterns of repression in different regions of the world. The Americas – Haiti, Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, Colombia, etc, stand out as the region with the highest number of murders and death threats of workers and union leaders. Asia – Pacific region has the highest number of trade unionist behind bars. The Middle East, [Trade Unions are totally banned in some countries], 11 workers were killed due to their union activities – seven of them in Lebanon when the army fired live ammunition at participants in a trade union protest march. Apart from the aforementioned countries, several others, including Belarus, Burma, Cambodia, China, Iran, Nigeria, The Philippines, Turkey, Venezuela and Zimbabwe were featured prominently in the survey of 2005. Fourteen people were killed in the Philippines when a bulldozer and armoured personnel carriers were used to break through a picket, and in Cambodia, the government is accused of a high level cover up following the murders of labour leaders Chea Vichea and Ros Sovannareth. A perceived threat to the country’s share of global trade was apparently the motivation for the killings. A report by an ILO commission of inquiry describes the difficulties faced by independent trade unions and the intimidating tactics including violence used against witnesses called to appear before the commission [which found Belarus guilty of serious violations of freedom of association]. Georgia is also highlighted in the survey, due to harassment and detention of union representatives, detention of leaders, obstruction of union activities and illegal seizure of trade union assets by the government. In Namibia [*an EPZ]2, attack dogs were used to subdue workers at a Malaysian-owned textile factory where one of the female workers was severely bitten during a protest. The same factory has a history of violating fundamental workers’ rights. In Bangladesh, women workers who attempted to form a union in a garment factory received death threats from the Managing Director, who subsequently hired criminals to beat up many of the women, leaving 25 of them badly injured. Thugs were used to deny entry to the factory to 186 unionised workers [Lockout] Other employer tactics include banning workers who were elected as union representatives from using the toilets at work, sacking 34 members of a newly-formed unions and marching them out of the factory at gun-point and the violent beating and subsequent dismissal of union leaders. In the African continent, the Cameroon government continued efforts to divide the union movement by favouring workers; organizations which it saw as being easier to control, whilst refusing to register trade unions which it saw as too independent. China is one of the countries identified as a major cause for concern. Freedom of association is still denied to the country’s vast workforce by a government which only recognizes the official union that once again proved ineffective in protecting workers’ rights. Two people received lengthy prison sentences for advocating independent trade unions on the Internet. Numerous workers’ protests were dealt with violently by the police with many participants facing detention. The health of two prominent trade union leaders imprisoned since March 2002, Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yungliang badly deteriorated after they were denied medical attention. Australia comes under fire for its drive to replace collective agreements with individual workplace agreements and for tabling new legislation aimed at severely curtailing the right of union representatives to visit workplaces. Several employers have threatened to sack workers for refusing to leave the union and sign individual agreements. Other industrialized countries, apart from Australia cited for serious deficiencies in labour legislation include Canada, Germany and Japan. Some employers took matters even further with Wal Mart, which has turned union busting into an art form interfering in a union election by engaging in surveillance of the employees’ union activities, interrogating them about union support, moving employees in and out of departments to dilute union support, and offering incentives to workers to vote against unionization on the eve of union elections. Notwithstanding, Wal Mart’s opposition to its employees organizing, Canadian unions managed to organize the first ever unionised Wal Mart store in Jonquiere Quebec in September 2004. Putting the above revelations and scenarios into consideration, it is obvious why workers are reluctant to join unions, whatever the benefit – wage premium, or whatever. With the general wrong perception by employers and governments of unionism and their employees’ membership, workers would be reluctant to belong. No worker would like to be brutalised, harassed, intimidated, persecuted, tear-gassed, arrested, detained, imprisoned or even murdered, as the case may be, just because s/he belongs to a trade union. Fear of loss of job and their means of livelihood, which more often than not put their family members and dependants under unnecessary depression and hardship, is one of the reasons why workers shun or are reluctant to join trade unions. “Life has no duplicate…” as the saying goes. As such, it is better to remain a nonmember of a trade union, than to join at the danger of losing one’s life or being put behind bars and away from loved ones, kits and kin. Below is a chart I have drawn up based on the information provide above for clearly view of incidents of violence against workers and union leaders by employers and governments over the last three years: Country Year Type of Incidence Violent Dismissal Prison Death threat Murder detention 136 worldwide 2004 129 136 worldwide 2005 700 Various 145 Various Middle East 2005 Various Various Various 100s *11 Colombia 2005 Various Various 99 Latin America 2005 Various Various Various 15 Various The Philippines 2005 Various Various 14 Belarus 2005 Various Various Georgia 2005 Various Various Ukraine 2005 Various Namibia 2005 Various Various Fiji, India, Sri Lanka 2005 Various Various Various Nigeria 2005 Various Various various Various Bangladesh 2005 186 workers suffered Haiti, Dominican Republic 2005 Various 34 workers Union leader Cameroon 2005 Various Republic of Congo 2005 Various China 2005 Various Many 2 Australia 2005 Various Several Canada 2005 Various violations of workers’ rights Germany 2005 Various violations of workers’ rights Japan 2005 Various violations of workers’ rights USA 2005 Various violations of workers’ rights The USA is yet to ratify the core international conventions on freedom of association and right to collective bargaining. It is also cited for widespread violations. Employers routinely engage union-busting companies to deter workers from voting for union representation and used “captive audience” meetings of workers, as a platform to threaten that workplace would be shut down if the workforce opted to join unions. On the contrary, unionism should not be perceived by employers and governments as anti-progress and opposition tools employed by workers to gain advantage over them, but as a “lubricant” [McCarthy 1967] in the management of employee relations. Linked employer – employee data from the 1998 Workplace Relation Survey [WERS 98], allows for the general applicability of this proposition to be tested in a more rigorous way than has been possible to date. The worker is always at the receiving end in the hands of the employer and the government when the issue is on trade unionism. Contentious issues such as workers’ wages, bonuses, pension schemes and collective bargaining agreements are things which bring about conflicts between the parties. Most employers and governments would prefer the elimination of unionism or trade union in the workplace and the society. They prefer a situation where the worker will constantly be short changed on wages and salaries, pensions and perks, including working hours and days. The worker is continuously under the threat of sack, dismissal, suspension from duty without pay, intimidation and even assaults by employers, their agents, government and their agents. Joining of Trade Union should be the right of every worker, whereby issues pertaining to their rights and welfare are jointly discussed with the employers or governments as the case may be, with the help and support of their trade unions. If a worker is made to speak all on his own, his rights, welfare will be compromised and abused by their “adversaries”. How often does an employer give his workers a raise in pay for instance? If at all, what is the percentage and does it always reflect current situations in the society in terms of inflation, cost of living, viz. accommodation, electricity, water, and other basic amenities used daily by the worker? More often than not, such issues are rarely put into consideration by employers who are constantly concerned with turnovers and profits for their businesses. When casualties occur during violent conflicts between workers and their employers and workers are injured, they are left to cater for themselves and take care of their injuries with no support from the employers. And possibly, at the end of the whole thing, dismissal or other punitive measures would be meted out to the employee. Government on the other hand could get up one day and decide to make some policies detrimental to the worker’s welfare without making any alternative arrangement to cushion the effect of such policies. An example is a case where a government decides to sell any of its agencies to a private organisation and would not consider what would become the fate of the workers in such an agency, if it were sold. In most cases, the buyer would retrench the old workers after purchasing the agency, with little or nothing for the worker, in terms of compensation, gratuity, and pension. This leads to prolonged dispute between government and workers and the worker would be left to suffer the after effect of such prolonged dispute. In some societies, like where I come from, it could take years to reach a compromise when union is involved and worse when the worker fights as a lone ranger. The same is the case when there are mergers and acquisitions. The workers entitlements are delayed unnecessarily causing them and their families untold hardships. Industries such as the Banking, Petroleum, Aviation and Textile have retrenched hundreds of thousands of their workers with their entitlements still unsettled for one reason or the other by the old and new managements. The strengths of such retrenched workers have been the voices of their respective trade unions and that of the National Labour Congress when have stood to fight for their members’ rights and entitlements. This has not been without violence here and there, police threats, detentions and even court summons here and there. But in as much as the workers’ rights are protected by their unions, there is every need for every worker to join the trade union relevant to his line of business, trade or profession whether the employers or government are in support or not. In Europe, Great Britain is know to have the best and most well organised labour unions in the world. Issues concerning the welfare of the workers are given good attention. Strikes have never been known to be violent as is the case elsewhere in the world. Workers’ welfare are reported to be fair and data on the unemployed is always up-to-date and the correct number is regularly obtained through the payment collection by the unemployed through the social welfare scheme where the unemployed are paid their unemployment allowances by the government. ________________________________________________________________________ *International Confederation of Free Trade Unions *Export Processing Zone REFERENCE: Airey C., Hales, J. Hamilton, R. Koroyessis, C., McKernan, A. And Purdon, S., The Workplace Employee Relation Survey Ajex Bryson, Union Effects on Employee Relation in Great Britain, 2005 Aldershot: Ashgate 1999, pp 65 – 96 Bryson A. Working with Dinosaurs? Bryson A. The Foundation of “Partnership?” “Business Day” “Financial Standard” John Williamson Jr, The Leader – Manager, 1986 “NewAge” Union Effects on Employee Trust in Management, National Institute Economic Review, 2001, 176, 91 - 104 Read More