ILR Impact Brief - It’s a Paradox: Union Workers Less Satisfied but Less Likely to Quit

[Excerpt] Existing economic models of human behavior do not adequately deal with the seeming inconsistency between union members’ attitudes about their jobs and their subsequent actions. A more promising explanation might derive from job satisfaction theory, which suggests that union members have a particular set of values, expectations, and frames of reference that they use to evaluate the outcomes of their work effort. Individuals who join unions may place higher value on wages and benefits, which are the focus of most collectively- bargained contracts, than do non-union workers; historically, unions have delivered in this regard. Unionized workers may be more dissatisfied because of a more adversarial climate (e.g., testy supervisory and interpersonal relations, narrowly-defined jobs) but are less likely to quit because the things they value most—good wages and benefits—are provided

Union Leadership and Member Attitudes: A Multi-Level Analysis

[Excerpt] Analyses of union leadership roles show that union presidents should have both a within-union focus and an external focus. The authors combined multi-level survey data from 3,871 union members in 248 local teachers’ unions with archival and field staff data to examine relationships between leadership and members’ perceptions of union instrumentality and justice, union commitment, and participation. The results showed significant union-level effects on members’ beliefs about, and attitudes toward, their unions, attributable to the presidents’ internal and external leadership, wage outcomes, and union characteristics. Relationships between internally focused leadership and members’ loyalty and willingness to work for the union were partially mediated by perceptions of union instrumentality and justice. These perceptions fully mediated the relationship between externally focused leadership and union loyalty

Organizational Renewal: The Management of Large-Scale Organizational Change in Norwegian Firms

A study of large organizational change projects was done in 228 private and public sector firms across Norway to examine the causes and consequences of renewal efforts and the strategies used by firm level management and union leaders to involve the workforce in the planning, design and execution of change. The research focus was on management\u27s choice of different forms of worker participation and their effects on the project outcomes. Data came from structured interviews with the top manager and an elected employee representative in each firm. The results showed that most major changes occurred in organizational structures and administration, undertaken primarily to increase efficiency and as a response to financial difficulties. In the private sector, the planning and design phases of change projects were dominated by top management, with very little involvement by non-managerial employees. Public sector employees played a larger role in the early phases of the projects, mostly through their elected representatives in legally prescribed forums. In both the private and public sector, there was more worker participation in the execution of change, both through elected representatives and more direct worker involvement of an ad hoc, firm-specific, nature. Neither the extent nor form of participation contributed to the success of the change projects. Instead, the project outcomes were primarily a function of external pressures experienced by the organization, the importance of renewal for organizational survival, and the flexibility of management and labor to accommodate to change. Resistance to change did not decrease as a function of worker participation, but it was influenced by the degree of labor-management agreement in the firm