[Excerpt] Andy Banks and Jack Metzgar have made a critically important contribution to untangling the concepts of participation and cooperation, in making the case for labor to be aggressive in areas historically reserved for management and to do so in a way that builds the organizing model of unionism. The concepts of  participation and cooperation  have been brought to the bargaining table in a way similar to ESOPs (Employee Stock Ownership Plans). Rather than recoil and withdraw from the discussion, the authors provide us with an approach that can effectively counter frequently narrow and self-serving management objectives with a program that furthers labor\u27s interests

Swinney, Dan

English

DigitalCommons@ILR

Labor Research Review 
Volume 1 | Number 14 
Participating in Management: Union Organizing 
on a New Terrain 
Article 1 
1989 
Broadening The Arena for Participation & Control 
Dan Swinney 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@ILR. It has been accepted for inclusion 
in Labor Research Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@ILR. For more information, please 
contact catherwood-dig@cornell.edu. 
© 1989 by Labor Research Review 
Broadening The Arena for Participation & Control 
Abstract 
[Excerpt] Andy Banks and Jack Metzgar have made a critically important contribution to untangling the 
concepts of participation and cooperation, in making the case for labor to be aggressive in areas 
historically reserved for management and to do so in a way that builds the organizing model of unionism. 
The concepts of "participation and cooperation" have been brought to the bargaining table in a way 
similar to ESOPs (Employee Stock Ownership Plans). Rather than recoil and withdraw from the 
discussion, the authors provide us with an approach that can effectively counter frequently narrow and 
self-serving management objectives with a program that furthers labor's interests. 
Keywords 
worker participation programs, policy, strategy 
This article is available in Labor Research Review: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/lrr/vol1/iss14/1 
Response 
Broadening 
The Arena for 
Participation 
& Control 
i Dan Swinney 
Andy Banks and Jack Metzgar have made a critically important 
contribution to untangling the concepts of participation and 
cooperation, in making the case for labor to be aggressive in areas 
historically reserved for management and to do so in a way that 
builds the organizing model of unionism. The concepts of "parti-
cipation and cooperation" have been brought to the bargaining 
table in a way similar to ESOPs (Employee Stock Ownership 
Plans). Rather than recoil and withdraw from the discussion, the 
authors provide us with an approach that can effectively counter 
frequently narrow and self-serving management objectives with 
a program that furthers labor's interests. 
I don't find significant difference with their argument but 
instead choose to use it as a springboard to address a fundamen-
tally linked but broader range of issues that must be addressed 
by labor leadership. This broader range of issues involves the 
dynamic and dialectical relationship of organized labor with the 
broader society and its implications for the organizing strategy put 
forward by the authors. 
The Objective Situation 
This general discussion is part of the debate within labor and 
the social movement that has recognized and is adjusting to funda-
Participating in Management 93 
mental shifts in the economy in the last 10 years. The flow and 
ebb cycles of the expanding post-World War II economy have been 
replaced by a long-term period of decline, precipitated by an 
increasingly competitive international economy. From labor's 
position in the front row of the American economy, we have 
become well versed in the new destructiveness of traditional 
business practices, values, and priorities. We have seen the 
"hollow corporation," mismanagement, the costs of seeking the 
highest return in the shortest possible time, and the essential 
economic anarchy that has prevailed in our workplaces and 
communities. Corporate demands for concessions in wages and 
benefits, determined and often successful efforts to break our 
unions, and the willingness to throw away companies, industrial 
sectors and entire communities have led to a dramatic shift in 
labor's objectives and an expanded arsenal of tactics. 
In this context, we have seen some dramatic and successful local 
labor battles that have changed our perspective about what is 
necessarily part of our strategy and what can succeed through the 
energizing of our membership and our communities. We have 
witnessed the Morse Cutting Tool campaign by the UE in New 
Bedford, Massachusetts; the Eastern Airlines campaign waged by 
I AM District 100 since 1984; the buy-out of Seymour Specialty 
Wire in Connecticut by a UAW local; the SEIU nurses' campaign 
for dignity at Red Cross in Los Angeles, and others. 
In these campaigns, we have started to recognize key issues and 
linkages. First, the problems and conflicts within the workplace 
mirror the sharpening problems in the broader society. Issues of 
management, productivity, efficiency, social cost and benefit, 
control, investment and democracy are of concern to our members 
as well as to the broader public. Organized labor is in a strategic 
position, being on the front line in this battle, to provide an orien-
tation, methodology and organization to the broader movement 
in society. Despite some obvious differences, there are some 
important lessons and inspiration that we can gain from recent 
events in Poland, where workers extended the struggle for wages, 
working conditions and democracy to the overall crisis in society 
and emerged as the most coherent, effective leading center. By 
understanding and utilizing these relationships effectively, labor 
leaders can gain greater strength and energy from their members 
as well as gain community support and influence. And the oppo-
site is true—to not understand and utilize these relationships can 
lead to a loss of strength and defeat on the shopfloor. 
Banks and Metzgar give meticulous attention to the issues of 
participation and cooperation on the shopfloor in organized locals, 
94 Labor Research Review #14 
but do not address the linkages and implications in a community, 
industry or economy-wide context. They do not address the 
essential connections and requirements of building the broader 
coalition that is not only possible, but required in any organizing 
strategy for the 1990s. The lack of attention to these details can 
compromise the effectiveness and dynamism of the strategy they 
advocate. 
On page 3, they provide the broader framework for their position 
in a way which hints the damage a narrow perspective on these 
issues could generate. They write: 
"The workplace is labor's base and, therefore, the key to the 
labor movement meeting its many challenges in the 1990s— 
among them, building stronger worker-to-worker and union-
to-union solidarity; being broadly perceived as a champion 
of the public's interest; and attracting large numbers of new 
workers into its fold. American society cannot be made better 
unless there is a thriving, more powerful labor movement. 
And before labor can help create this better society, it must 
first take care of its crumbling base." (My emphasis.) 
Had I been the author, I would have checked any ambiguity 
that might arise by replacing "perceived" with "recognized" and 
writing the last sentence to read: "And through creating this better 
society, labor will take care of its crumbling base." 
Dan Swinney is Executive Direc-
tor of the Midwest Center for Labor 
Research in Chicago and an editor 
of Labor Research Review. The 
organizer and former Vice Presi-
dent of United Steelworkers Local 
8787, Swinney is also the Acting 
Director of the Federation for 
Industrial Retention and Renewal 
(FIRR), a national confederation 
of labor, community and religious 
organizations serving industrial 
communities. 
Participating in Management 95 
Broader Requirements of Organizing Strategy 
What has emerged in the battles against deindustrialization and 
other corporate offensives in the 1980s, are refined understandings 
of the quality and scope of corporate research in relation to a social 
cost/benefit analysis. Labor-oriented corporate research, as 
described by Banks and Metzgar, not only documents profits and 
available dollars, but evaluates markets, efficiency, and documents 
mismanagement and narrow corporate strategies that threaten 
capacity and community. Social cost/benefit analysis documents 
the linkages between the closing of a company and/or the loss of 
industrial jobs with the loss of jobs in the service sector, with 
declines in retail and tax revenues for cash-starved cities, with 
increases in welfare costs, with dramatic increases in child abuse, 
divorce, alcoholism, and other social concerns. 
This combined corporate and social analysis constitutes an 
independent labor analysis that is a prerequisite for a successful 
defense or offense on the shopfloor or in the community. It is this 
analysis that provides the material basis to form a broad community 
coalition against a particular corporate act or strategy. It is a way 
of showing that labor is not fighting as a special interest whose agen-
da is different from the community, but affirming that our interests 
are public interests and deserving of support. By using this ap-
proach, union members become community heroes on a high moral 
ground. They become motivated like Joe Imperatori at Eastern. 
They create a more difficult environment for a corporate opponent 
that has historically depended on anonymity and public ignorance. 
This point is correctly stressed by Banks and Metzgar. 
But it is important to define the requirements of this analysis in 
its breadth, depth and integrity. The authors correctly argue for 
our commitment to increase productivity, improve quality, and cut 
costs in the shop. To act in the public's interest requires not reduc-
ing this analysis to just the individual firm, but extending it to the 
industry sector as a whole and to the rest of the economy. We need 
to acknowledge the limits of focusing on only the particular com-
pany or department, knowing that at certain times these interests 
can be in conflict with legitimate broader interests of labor and 
the public. In these situations, our approach can't be timid, and 
we can't sacrifice those we represent. Creative bargaining, com-
bined with militancy and the ability to mobilize, will find adequate 
quid pro quos in compensation, control and ownership, or other 
solutions that offer equal value. Those solutions may also emerge 
from a context that is broader than the particular shop. The refusal 
96 Labor Research Review #14 
to recognize broader interests and define our relationship to them 
can result in a loss of a particular campaign. The ability to see 
the broader linkages can lead to victory in the short run and sur-
prising strength on other issues in the long run. 
This principle has been developed in the framework of industry-
wide bargaining strategies and has even greater potential in 
current conditions for strengthening labor, not weakening it. In 
the same sense we must begin to more sharply define "community 
interests/' knowing that we need to address not only the issues 
of preserving jobs, but those of racial and sexual discrimination 
and legitimate demands for affirmative action. 
We need to define our campaigns in light of moral issues as a 
means of building our ties with the religious community. We need 
to find ways to define the national and international implications 
when possible. In today's international economy, these inter-
national linkages are common sense and can lead to important 
leverage—as they did in the campaign around the closing of Trico 
in Buffalo that led to links with Mexican labor, or in the campaign 
against the closing of 3M by the OCAW local in Freehold, New 
Jersey, that led to links with black South African workers. 
This doesn't mean that we look at these issues and linkages as 
a social shopping list that needs to be tagged on to each campaign. 
Such a mechanical approach will weaken rather than assist us. 
But labor leadership needs to define these issues and their 
connection with creativity. In this way, we begin to give specific 
definition to the broader public interests we represent and, in 
doing s4 define potential coalitions in very specific terms, 
strengthening and extending labor's interests and values beyond 
the plant gate. 
The efforts of the Midwest Center for Labor Research (MCLR) 
to create an "Early Warning Network Against Plant Closings" in 
Chicago has generated information on companies that are in 
danger of closing due to aging owners with no successor. Such 
owners have children who don't want to leave the suburbs and 
go into the ' 'ghetto'' to work or who otherwise have no desire to 
run a small manufacturing company, even though it is profitable. 
These frequently small companies simply need a new owner, if 
they are to survive and provide jobs and stability in Chicago's 
industrial communities. As MCLR studied ownership issues, we 
also became aware of the exclusion of African-Americans and 
Latinos from ownership of manufacturing companies. In 1982, 
only 73 of some 14,000 manufacturing companies in the Chicago 
area were owned by African-Americans or Latinos! 
In response to these findings, MCLR has formed a subsidiary 
Participating in Management 97 
that matches these companies at risk with African-American and 
Latino entrepreneurs who are committed to keeping the jobs in 
Chicago and treating labor with respect. By serving as broker in 
these situations, we maximize the leverage that labor can have 
in preserving the company. We link labor's interests in a signifi-
cant way with the interests of the minority community and lay 
the basis for a broad, popular alliance—one that will not only save 
jobs but will enhance the prestige and influence of labor, which 
in turn will strengthen its ability to organize the unorganized and 
win its battles on the shopfloor. Of course, these efforts are in 
their infancy, and many difficulties lie ahead, but the potential 
is obvious and exciting. 
Participation as a Step Toward Control 
Banks and Metzgar stress the organizing potential of the issue 
of participation. Of at least equal importance is the role of parti-
cipation as a step towards gaining control in the company. And 
as with the issues of productivity, quality and cost reduction, 
participation and control fit dynamically within the agenda of the 
broader social movement. 
In the 50s and 60s, labor was content to know that if there were 
layoffs, they were temporary. If the owner got in trouble, someone 
else would buy the company and life would continue. If you lost 
your job one day, you could often get a job the next day. Industrial 
communities were stable and predictable. Management and 
con\~ol issues didn't seem to be worth the bother. What mattered 
was improving our share of the pie. "Redistribution of wealth" 
demands dominated the labor and community movements. In the 
70s and 80s, company after company has been dismantled by 
larger companies or individual owners who have changed their 
business strategies. This has led to the "dismantling" of entire 
communities. Today issues of management and control have 
become survival issues in the workplace and in the community. 
"Participation" is a prerequisite for knowing what is essential 
in managing and controlling a company, whether it is through 
ownership or exercising bargaining power. Guided by a compre-
hensive understanding of the company or community, active 
participation trains workers and community members, union and 
community leaders on the key requirements of management and 
control. It gives each confidence and the capacity to provide 
effective leadership in the void of trusted, public leadership that 
is increasingly obvious in our society. The workplace is the best 
school for training and gaining credentials that qualify leaders and 
98 Labor Research Review #14 
organizations for greater influence in our society and for more 
ambitious projects. 
Banks' and Metzgar's approach to entering the minefield of 
participation and involvement in management issues is not only 
a blueprint for workplace organizing but for operating within the 
broader community. Recognizing this critical linkage in a straight-
forward way doesn't dilute our organizing on the shopfloor. It 
strengthens the determination of our organizers, giving them 
greater strength in winning immmediate objectives and opening 
up the potential to expand their influence beyond the traditional 
boundaries of labor organization. 
Conclusion 
Increasingly the issues of broader public control, recognition 
of social interests in arenas traditionally controlled exclusively by 
business, and public management are emerging in local commu-
nities throughout the country. This has emerged with the Steel 
Valley Authority in Pittsburgh, tenant management of public 
housing in St. Louis and Chicago, a new St. Paul, Minnesota, 
ordinance governing use of public development dollars, and 
citizen-supported labor campaigns to buy companies in Connecticut 
and West Virginia. These are some of the campaigns that will lead 
to a broad national fight for public control and public manage-
ment in the public interest. 
Banks and Metzgar provide the key elements of an approach 
that has a profoundly positive influence on our organizing 
strategies in organized shops. It has even greater impact when 
applied to a broader arena. It contributes to the essential orienta-
tion that can place the labor movement squarely in the broader 
struggle against the disinvestment and mismanagement of our 
society and in the struggle to extend democracy. • 
Participating in Management 99 
WHEN WE GUT YOUR 103 
CLASSIFICATIONS AHP WORK RULES, 
YOOU LOSE SHOP-FLOOR INFLUENCE 
AND SENIORITY R I6HT5 . YOU'LL 
ALSO SUFFER FROM SPEEp-UPANP ! 
FAVORITISM. BUT REST ASSURER 
YOU'LL 66 TCEATeP WHH PI6NIT// , 
Jm gg^^mm^ 
AS A MATTE* OF FACT, \ l 
IV£ 60T A BOX OF IT 1 • 
RIGHT HERE/ 7 • 
*^~\l . \**~j&r H 
I yJ^i «^w 1 
I i JBRwi£$F& 1 
1 


Broadening The Arena for Participation & Control

[Excerpt] Andy Banks and Jack Metzgar have made a critically important contribution to untangling the concepts of participation and cooperation, in making the case for labor to be aggressive in areas historically reserved for management and to do so in a way that builds the organizing model of unionism. The concepts of "participation and cooperation" have been brought to the bargaining table in a way similar to ESOPs (Employee Stock Ownership Plans). Rather than recoil and withdraw from the discussion, the authors provide us with an approach that can effectively counter frequently narrow and self-serving management objectives with a program that furthers labor's interests.Issue_14___Article_16.pdf: 109 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

eCommons (Cornell Univ.)

https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1142&amp;context=lrr

Broadening The Arena for Participation & Control

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@ILR

eCommons (Cornell Univ.)