Assignment On Industrial Relations in the United States of America

Submitted to: Fr. Bernard Bara

Submitted by: Sujit Dutta Mazumdar PGDM HR- IV (Roll: 57)

Introduction

Industrial relations constitute one of the most delicate and complex problems of the modern industrial society. This phenomenon of a new complex industrial set-up is directly attributable to the emergence of Industrial Revolution. The pre-industrial revolution period was characterized by a simple process of manufacture, small scale investment, local markets and small number of persons employed. All this led to close proximity between the manager and the managed. Due to personal and direct relationship between the employer and the employee it was easier to secure cooperation of the latter. Any grievance or misunderstanding on the part of either party could be promptly removed. Also, there was no interference by the State in the economic activities of the people. Under such a set-up industrial relations were simple, direct and personal. This situation underwent a marked change with the advent of industrial revolution size of the business increased needing investment of enormous financial and human resources, there emerged a new class of professional managers causing divorce between ownership and management, and relations between the employer and the employer became estranged and gradually antagonistic. This new set-up rendered the old philosophy of industrial relation irrelevant and gave rise to complex, indirect, and impersonal industrial relations. In the broad sense, industrial relations cover all such relationships that a business enterprise maintains with various sections of the society such as workers, state, customers and public who come into its contact whereas in the narrow sense, it refers to all types of relationships between employer and employees, trade union and management, works and union and between workers and workers. It also includes all sorts of relationships at both formal and informal levels in the organization. The industrial relations in USA have been governed by process of collective bargaining with the emergence of unions in the 17th Century. During the phase of Industrialization in 19th Century, to safeguard the public interest from the effects of industrial conflicts the U.S. Congress the supreme legislative body has over the period taken actions to impose limitations on irresponsible individualism and to provide legislative framework for resolution of disputes.

The broader economic and political context in which organizational and industrial relations developed has been one that places a high value on the role of the free market and minimizes government intervention in private enterprise. This ethos was particularly strong during the period of rapid industrialization between the late 1800s and the 1920s. The economic and social shock of the Great Depression modified this position considerably, however, and since then the American public has expected the government to play a more active role in regulating economic policy and industrial relations practices. Still, the view favoring decentralized institutions, industrial self-governance, and free enterprise has kept industrial relations focused at the level of the firm. Given these values, it is not surprising that the greatest conflicts in American industrial relations tend to arise over efforts to unionize a company and over negotiation of the specific terms of an employment contract. The value Americans place on individualism and mobility also helps explain why turnover rates tend to be higher in American firms than in many other countries and why cooperative labourmanagement relations are difficult to sustain. Labor unions are legally recognized as representatives of workers in many industries in the United States. Their activity today centers on collective bargaining over wages, benefits, and working conditions for their membership, and on representing their members in disputes with management over violations of contract provisions. Larger unions also typically engage in lobbying activities and electioneering at the state and federal level. The American Labour movement is organized in various levels i.e. Local Unions (Operating in Plant Levels) Intermediate Bodies (Working in Regional Levels) National Unions

The union at the Local Level:

It is a basic unit of labour organization. Generally works as collector of fees and dues. The local unions may have the power to call strike and negotiating agreements without formal approval of the national union.

The officers of the Local Union are usually elected.

The union at the National Level:

Size of the National Union depends on the size and number of the unions at the local level. It has the complete autonomy to call strikes, negotiate agreements and organize new local unions.

At the National Level, two central organization of union in the United States of America are emerged namely:

I.

AFL (American Federation of Labour), 1886

The American Federation of Labor (AFL) was one of the first federations of labor unions in the United States. The AFL was the largest union grouping in the United States for the first half of the 20th century, even after the creation of the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) by unions that were expelled by AFL (American Federation of Labour), 1886 in 1935 over its opposition to industrial unionism. The main goal of AFL was to get better work pay, shorter hours, and better working conditions, better pay for its membership, and the right to collective bargaining. The main function of AFL is that it mainly concentrates on job oriented issues rather than industrial union. AFL favored unions comprised of skilled workers and advised against "industrial unions" that included unskilled workers. Calling for union recognition and collective bargaining to secure control of the workplace. Shorter hours and higher wages and opposed most government intervention and rejected socialism or government ownership.

II.

CIO (Congress of Industrial Organization), 1935

As we know that one of the great conflicts within the labor movement existed between the craft unions and the industrial unions. When the American Federation of Labor indicated reluctance to organize unskilled workers then John L. Lewis created the Committee for Industrial Organization within the AFL in 1935.Union presidents, including John L. Lewis of the United Mine Workers, founded the Committee for Industrial Organization in November 1935. Fed up with the refusal of the American Federation of Labor (AFL) to organize unskilled and semiskilled factory workers, Lewis and his allies provided the money and organizational framework for their mobilization and unionization. The committee formalized its break with the AFL when it held its first convention in 1938, renaming itself the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO).

The AFL-CIO Merger

U.S. federation of labour unions formed in 1955 by the merger of the AFL and the CIO. The AFL was founded in 1886 as a loose federation of craft unions under the leadership of Samuel Gompers. Member unions retained autonomy and received protection of their workers and jurisdiction over a certain industrial territory. The CIO was founded in 1935 as the Committee for Industrial Organization by a splinter group of AFL unions whose leaders believed in organizing skilled and unskilled workers across entire industries; at its first convention in 1938, it adopted its current name and elected John L. Lewis president. For two decades the AFL and CIO were bitter rivals for the leadership of the U.S. labour movement, but they formed an alliance in the increasingly conservative, anti-labour climate of the postwar era, and in 1955 they merged under the leadership of George Meany. AFL-CIO membership reached 17 million in the late 1970s but declined from the 1980s as the U.S. manufacturing sector shrank. AFL-CIO activities include recruiting and organizing members, conducting educational campaigns, and supporting political candidates and legislation deemed beneficial to labour.

Role of Government

Until 1920, Governments role only remained confined to measures designed to prevent any distress being caused to the public due to industrial dispute but industrialization grew so was the policies of the government.

The Government undertook legislations which aimed at: The promotion of sound trade unionism and its practices. The provision of statutory and voluntary procedures for settlement of labour dispute. The encouragement of free collective bargaining with self-correct mechanism.

Important laws passed by the government:

Norris La Guardia Act, 1932

President Herbert Hoover was the founder of this Act in the year 1932. The Norris La Guardia Act (also known as the Anti-Injunction Bill) was a 1932 United States federal law that banned yellow-dog contracts, barred the federal courts from issuing injunctions against nonviolent labor disputes, and created a positive right of noninterference by employers against workers joining trade unions.

Wagner Act, 1935

The Wagner Act of 1935 guarantees the right of workers to organize, and outlines the legal framework for labor union and management relations. The Act created the National Labor Relations Board, which manages union-management relations.

The Wagner Act also defines and prohibits five unfair labor practices (others have been added since 1935). These include:

Interfering with, restraining or coercing employees in the exercise of their rights (including the freedom to join or organize labor organizations and to bargain collectively for wages or working conditions).

Controlling or interfering with the creation or administration of a labor organization. Discriminating against employees to discourage or encourage support for a labor organization. Discriminating against (i.e. firing) employees who file charges or gives testimony under the Wagner Act. Refusing to bargain collectively with representatives of employees.

Taft- Hartley Act, 1947

The Taft-Hartley Act (61 Stat. 136), also known as the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, was created after a great number of large-scale strikes had nearly disabled the automobile, steel, and packing industries, among others. These work stoppages had caused a ripple effect through the economy, leading to public panic. The Taft-Hartley Act, an amendment to the Wagner Act of 1935, was designed to benefit all parties to a labor agreement, employer, employees, and the labor union. It was clear that this new act was designed to level the unfair playing field formerly tipped in favor of labor unions. This act placed restrictions on unions that were already imposed on the employer. For example, the act made it illegal to restrain or coerce employees wishing to exercise their rights to self-organization. Also made illegal were secondary strikes, secondary boycotts, and sympathy strikes, which were designed to influence employers other than those with whom the union had a contract. Many union leaders and supporters were unhappy with these new laws, and would

seek repeal or revision on many different occasions. The act gave the employer a First Amendment right to free speech that had been severely limited by the former laws. This change allowed the employer to speak out against unionization as long as the speech did not contain threats or promises to employees. The act also limited the liability of employers based on acts of managers or supervisors to those who would be considered part of these supervisors' official duty. Therefore an employer could not be held liable for a supervisor who was harassing union members for reasons unrelated to the supervisor's actual job duties.

Landrum Griffin Act, 1959

This act is passed by the U.S. Congress, officially known as the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act. It resulted from hearings of the Senate committee on improper activities in the fields of labor and management, which uncovered evidence of collusion between dishonest employers and union officials, the use of violence by certain segments of labor leadership, and the diversion and misuse of labor union funds by high-ranking officials. The act provided for the regulation of internal union affairs, including the regulation and control of union funds. Former members of the Communist party and former convicts are prevented from holding a union office for a period of five years after resigning their Communist party membership or being released from prison. Union members are protected against abuses by a bill of rights that includes guarantees of freedom of speech and periodic secret elections. Officially called the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, it instituted federal penalties for labour officials who misused union funds or prevented union members from exercising their legal rights.

Civil Service Reform Act, 1978

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA) applies to labor organizations which represents employees in most agencies of the executive branch of the Federal Government. The legislation, however, contains two themes that at times are inconsistent with one another. First, the act seeks greater accountability of federal

employees for their performance. It does so by increasing the discretion and authority of federal managers. The provisions related to job performance reflected public and congressional concerns about the performance of federal agencies. Second, the act emphasizes protection of the rights of federal employees from abuses by federal managers. This aspect of the act was a response to the constitutional crisis of the Watergate scandals and President Richard Nixon's abuse of the civil service system. To increase the accountability of federal employees, the act gives federal managers and politically appointed officials greater control over personnel policy. The highestranking civil servants become part of a Senior Executive Service over which agency officials assert greater authority in assignment and pay. The act authorizes merit pay and bonuses that give senior officials greater control over middle-level managers. Under the act, pay, job retention, and discipline depend on job performance. In addition, the act increases the ability of each government agency to create its own standards and procedures within the framework of the act.