3 ms·
Am I right in thinking this arrangement maximally benefits the employer and tends towards a single union situation? When a union fails to represent its members
by Normal_gaussian 8y ago
Am I right in thinking this arrangement maximally benefits the employer and tends towards a single union situation?
When a union fails to represent its members, they should form another union. If they do so, they will be forced to renegotiate their contracts - which allows the employer to influence a "best contract" thereby choosing a winning union; thus a union can't fall too far out with the employer for fear of being supplanted by a new union. Even though the employee remains the voting piece, they lose an awful lot of power.
- giancarlostoro 8y agoWhat about companies with offices accross the country where it would make sense to have an union per office? It can already be hard to be heard at "HQ" by being in another state imagine the heads of the union are in another state and unresponsive.
- pranjalv123 8y agoit's only members of a particular "bargaining unit" that are required to pay fair share fees - in other words, if the union helps negotiate your contract, you pay a fee. You could certainly have unions in different offices with different leadership; or even some unionized offices and some non-union offices.
- Spooky23 8y agoUsually there is a union local that represents a business unit, geography, or job title. It gets wonky for national organizations with all of the different rules, especially as former backwater places like the South have become more prominent economically.