Union Management Relations in Perspective Unions are very important for fostering change both in the national and international societies. This is a judgment based on the consideration of the managerial features which helps to engender that crucial bond between an employee and his/her employer. Unions which run under management regularly pay attention to their output of work although sometimes they could wield significant influence on the political and social landscapes.

Trade Unions are generally beneficial to employees as its major objective is to protect the workers from any form of exploitation by the company. If for example, a worker finds his pay unfair, he could relate with his coworkers who will jointly demonstrate publicly so as to be given a more befitting pay. Trade unions also help the company management, as they are aware of what the workers need hence they have a better knowledge of their workers and are able to give them an enabling environment fostering efficient work and the maintaining of good standards (Bamber, 2013).

Trade unions have proved crucial in resolutions which are majorly reached via joint bargaining processes as well as talks between unions and employees. The connection existing between an employee and a trade union is known as industrial relations. Trade unions reach their objectives via peaceful negotiations, however, in some cases; they have to carry out tougher actions. Some of the actions include work to rule, picketing, strikes, overtime ban, go slow etc. In the case of strikes, the workers come to a consensus that they wouldn’t come to work. Work to rule means workers become very critical and dish out criticisms over minor occurrences. Go Slow means workers work at slower paces hence reducing production speed. In the case of picketing, workers organize demonstrations with banners and slogans. Overtime, however, means the workers decide not to work causing the company to miss important demand targets. Employers normally would do all they can to prevent any of these situations, as they have serious consequences for a firm such as huge losses or even the firm closing down.

Relations between the management and the unions take place following a process. First, identification of civil liberties and duties must be done. The legal restrictions and safeguards for the management and union representatives are those persons who actively work on this objective. Next is the labor agreement negotiation. In this case, the most effective strategies tactics as well as dispute resolution methods will be considered by the firm. Then the firm will take part in the establishment of the resolved labor agreement. The union checks for management compliance to the agreement’s terms.

Evolution of Labor-Management Relationships

The basic elements making up the medieval labor relations perspective were created in the three-decade long period after the Second World War. The United States came out of the World War with an untouched production base, the only industrialized country to achieve this. Due to this, it reigned supreme over the world’s economy and exerted dominance on important industries and markets. Very little sweat was lost on quality or cost. This led to mammoth managements which churned out standardized products in huge quantities. Well defined policies, practices and regulations as well as detailed labor resolutions guided workplace activities. The concepts of “Fordism” and “Taylorism” were refined and polished further, leading to an air of disengagement among the workforce. As the industries boomed, labor unions weren’t let and this became a general trend across the manufacturing world. Even though the managements were never fully happy with the union concept, they didn’t try to break up their actions and overtime, a tense peace developed between the managements of these mammoth firms and the labor unions. Irrespective of the hard bargaining process, final settlements turned out to be unselfish. Due to this, the managements were allowed to conduct business in whatever way they desire.

These days, the biggest steel manufacturers are not part of the union; automobile manufacturers located in Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio and any other place are nonunion. Even the American coal industry isn’t up to 40% organized. How the conventional U.S labor framework failed was due majorly to two internal flaws. The first was its inability to recognize and adapt to changes going on within the US and other countries. The second was its failure to realize that management and labor were both responsible for producing and spreading wealth.

At the end of the 1900s, the growth of labour unions was stiffly opposed by managements and government alike. Within...

This was most pronounced in the steel works, autoplants and garment factories where the striking members of the union were engaged in bitter scuffle with nonunion workers, private security men and police officers. The AFL remained the biggest force in the organized labor movement. By year 1920, 75% of people who had joined unions were all members. However, all through its existence, the AFL hasn’t found the most beneficial way of working with semiskilled and unskilled workers (Sherk, 2009).
A large percentage of its members were skilled workers in defined trades and crafts. Nevertheless, the technological advancements during the First World War had created a sharp spike in the semiskilled and unskilled worker population within the workforce. These people wanted to become AFL members, but the move wasn’t appreciated by the core AFL members. Certain unions in the AFL, however, understood the importance of coordinating semiskilled and unskilled persons and started to make moves into the steel and auto industries. The resulting union was industrial in nature and comprised of the new unskilled workers as well as the skilled ones within one single industry. Overtime, the workers within the newspaper, rubber, communications and mining industries also got divided into unions. At the end of the day, all these unions separated from the AFL, later forming the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO).

Ever since the Second World War, the labor industry has experienced several changes. One of these was the reduction in public interest and opinion about unions during and in the years succeeding the war. A handful of strikes, which were actually very effective, led to a shift in public opinion against unionism. Arguably the most important event of all, though, was the consolidation of the CIO and the AFL. After several years at each other’s throats, both groups came to the realization that fighting one another was just a waste of resources and effort and merging will make both of them much stronger. On December 5, 1955, both groups merged and called the merger; the AFL-CIO. This group had over 16 million workers as members and became the globe’s largest labor organization. George Meant was its first executive president and he led the organization until 1979 (Schneider, & Stepp, 1999).

When the mid-1980s came, several companies, on realizing that the present changes were not necessarily representing the conventional atmosphere and vibe possessed by a business started experimenting a number of employee engagement techniques, with a number of these techniques having their basis on programs carried out during the ‘60s and ‘70s. Some of these techniques were modified to be parallel systems, in line with the conventional framework and order of hierarchy within companies. For the labor-management relationship, the bargaining procedure and the implementation of agreements were still objective and antagonistic. The massive changes during the early ‘80s didn’t produce any significant improvement. Management and labor both went on as though change wasn’t necessary in the policies, practices and institutions which had been created in the last few decades. It seemed they believed that the only necessary action was cuts and slight changes to the basic system and thus they kept up their peculiar behavior.

Labor Law: Background and Basic Principles

The Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932 was the very first legislation passed which gave rights to the unions and it was widely viewed as a milestone in labor-management relationships. After this act was passed, it became difficult for companies to secure court orders banning picketing, union membership events and strikes. Initially, the courts readily gave out these forms of orders to limit these activities. In 1935, the National Labor Relations Act, popular called the Wagner Act was passed. This act created processes via which workers are able to determine if they want union representation or not. If they decide in favor of union representation, then in line with the Wagner Act, the management of the company has to reach an agreement with the union representatives. Previously, the efforts of the Union were believed to be infringing on the Sherman Act (1980) as they were seen as efforts to monopolize. A number of unfair labor actions by managements were prohibited by The Wagner Act with a number of them being punishing and firing workers due to their support for the union, bribing workers to cast their votes against the union and monitoring union meetings.

The NLRB’s functions are (1) investigating any complaints from the employees or the unions and (2) supervising…