The decline in union representation is not only a phenomenon affecting the United Auto Workers (UAW) of the United States, but it also affects many other workers’ unions in developed countries. Part of the decline is attributed to generational differences among most union members, their leaders, and new potential recruits who are looking for a different kind of engagement with employers and other stakeholder entities (Cregan and Brown 334). As unions decline in size, special interest groups that hold activist agenda are increasing in number. While a special interest group can actually have less registered members than a typical labour union, its influence is not restricted to particular company regulations and workers. Special interest groups have broader appeal and the ability to increase affiliation rapidly. In this regard, the decline of unions is not a loss to society, but an eventual evolution process that gives in to new forms of individual worker representation in a collective way that does not require actual membership.
The UAW got into this position because it all along championed for better wages and benefits for workers without working on mechanisms to increase the competitiveness of the firm (Kristal 362). An unfortunate thing with trade unions and other worker representation groups is that they view the employer as the only factor worth manipulating to gain better work arrangements and compensation. A union fails to look at business environments and their underlying competitive needs. They fail to analyse the competition and the overall factors affecting the activities of the firms externally. For example, they fail to consider the political, environmental, social, technology, legal, and economic features that shape the external business environment (Kristal 385).
It is inherently difficult for unions to assume a proactive role of helping employers remain competitive, earn more revenue as a result of increased market share, and be able to foot the wage and benefits bill, as a result of the blinded focus of unions. Another causative factor that led to the current position of the UAW is the overall decline in the competitiveness of the United States economy. Industry-wide subsidies and laws that protect workers, irrespective of their labour input, make it difficult for employers to run lean companies. As an example, the auto industry consisted of companies that were facing the same problems, despite the fact that these companies had different owners and business leaders. The collective running of the industry by government policy on job protection and industry competitiveness failed to consider the changing global outlook of the auto industry; where emerging economies are becoming more attractive manufacturing destinations, while most developed countries like the United States are losing their competitive edge because of sustained high wages and slow growth rates of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Kristal 370).
Labour unions in the private sector can do a number of things to increase their influence. One of the things to do would be to get into contractual agreements with employers so that unions become shareholders of their respective companies. As shareholders, unions will have union rights as protected by the law. They will also have shareholder rights as recognized by the company to influence the decisions of the board and the directors of the company about its labour policies. They can also become proactive and prevent leadership misconduct and implementation of wrong strategies that may jeopardize a company’s growth prospects, causing a decline in its ability to honour labour union demands.
Another strategy would be to get younger workers signing up for union membership. This would entail a review of union policies and marketing objectives to increase relevancy of unions to the younger population of workers. Union representation is losing its appeal to young workers because of generational differences between workers and the majority of union leaderships. Young workers face different generational challenges that may not be currently addressed by unions. Additionally, young workers may not see job security as more lucrative than contracts that have guaranteed benefits and compensation (Kristal 362). Such workers would opt for certainty when negotiating for employment terms than to rely on the potential benefits that unions may negotiate when companies and economies are doing well. Therefore, unions have to change their way of doing business and incorporate strategies that ensure their members benefits, especially the collective bargaining remaining relevant to a new generation of workers (Cregan and Brown 340).
The decline of UAW and private sector unionism is a good thing when viewed as a consequence of organisational change. Private companies need to remain agile to change the status of their competitiveness. At the same time, they need to be able to run lean operations. Saving on costs is a universally applicable form of increasing competitiveness; however, costs can only be saved to a given point, after which cost-saving no longer becomes viable. As private companies, the cost of labour and its associated benefits costs vary, but it follows a general industry trend (Mehta and Theodore 3).
Meanwhile, the decline of unions does not signify a loss of the employee relationship, but merely signifies a societal change. Employee relationships with companies will continue to thrive through other forms of representation, such as legal ones, where employees are protected by contracts and laws on individual labour rights. On the other hand, there is a growing influence of stakeholder groups on the affairs of private companies. The stakeholder groups stand for various social, economic, and environmental interests and they direct their attention to any company or industry, irrespective of its union affiliation. In this regard, the actual decline in union membership in the United States will not result in a total loss of worker representation, as any violations of labour rights could be taken up by stakeholder interest groups.
The decline in union membership is a good thing if it persists because while unions are often vocal about working conditions and compensation, their influence is only at an industry level. At a national level, they rely on the joint representation of several unions with mixed interests. A collective union representation for a country is not as effective as the clout of special interest groups that can grow affiliation rapidly from any member of the public. This happens because of the mixed interests in unions (Anzia 425).
Yes, non-union workers should care about what happens to unions. Non-union workers are affected by industry trends that arise out of union activities (Welch and Bernstein 653). A decrease in the competitiveness of industries due to a relentless pursuit of higher wages and more benefits by unions may not affect new workers in the short run, but it eventually leads to reduced abilities for firms to employ more workers or increase their wages. Union lobbying to the government can also cause the enactment of laws that affect non-union workers, thus the need to care about what happens to unions.
Works Cited
Anzia, Sarah F. “Election Timing and the Electoral Influence of Interest Groups.” The Journal of Politics 73.2 (2011): 412-427. Print.
Cregan, Christina and Michelle Brown. “The Influence of Union Membership Status on Workers’ Willingness to Participate in Joint Consultation.” Human Relations 63.3 (2010): 331-348. Print.
Kristal, Tali. “The Capitalist Machine: Computerization, Workers’ Power, and the Decline in Labor’s Share within U.S. Industries.” American Sociological Review 78.3 (2013): 361-389. Print.
Mehta, Chirad and Nik Theodore. Undermining the Right to Organize: Employer Behavior during Union Representation Campaigns. Illinois: Center for Urban Economic Development, 2005. Print.
Welch, D and A Bernstein. “Twilight of the UAW.” Business Week 10 April 2006: 62-64. Print.