Human relations in the shop steward system

Citation preview

HUMAN RELATIONS IN THE SHOP STEWARD SYSTEM

A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the School of Public Administration The University of Southern California

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science

fey William Albert Smith August 1950

UMI Number: EP64504

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

Dissertation Publishing

UMI EP64504 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code

ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 10 6 - 1346

Pu.

'*1

SC.*V-

T his thesis, w ritten by

under the guidance of h.x&... F a c u lty Com m ittee, and approved by a ll its members, has been presented to and accepted by the C ouncil on G raduate Study and Research in p a r t ia l f u l f i l l ­ ment of the requirements f o r the degree of

D ate .

Faculty Committee

Chairman

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I.

II.

III.

PAGE

INTRODUCTION .................................. Definition

1

Problem

..................................

1

The a p p r o a c h ..............................

2

Background ................................

6

STEWARD AND THE C O N T R A C T .....................

10

F u n c t i o n s ................................

11

Policing the contract... ..................

18

Clinico-cooperative approach .............

25

Steward-foreman relations

...............

31

Steward-union relationship ...............

36

BUILDING THE U N I O N ...........................

39

Recruiting new members.. ..................

40

The strike situation .....................

43

Dues c o l l e c t i o n ..............

44

Political action .........................

46

Educational functions . .

..............

48

. . . . . . ...................

50

PRACTICAL A S P E C T S ...........................

52

Committees IV.

1

The steward as a s u p e r v i s o r .............

53

.....................

56

Problem of t r a i n i n g .....................

59

Democratic leadership

65

Internal discipline

..................

CHAPTER

PAGE Steward’schanging role

V.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

..................

. . .

.........

. .

68 75

S u m m a r y ..................................

75

C o n c l u s i o n s ..............................

77

BIBLIOGRAPHY

......................................

82

APPENDIX I ..........................................

86

APPENDIX I I ........................................

97

APPENDIX I I I ........................................

105

APPENDIX I V ........................................

107

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION Definition.

A regularly employed worker who has

been appointed by the union or elected by his fellowworkers to act as the primary labor union representative on the work level is called a union shop steward.1

He is

the chief supervisor of union activity at the worker level. A typical shop steward manual describes him this way: Congratulations, Shop Steward! You are the chief architect of the union in your plant, the protector of the union contract, the director of communications between each individual worker in your department and the management of your plant, and between the workers you represent and your union. Problem.

The purpose of this thesis is three-fold:

(1) to show that the union shop steward has an important role in the administration of labor-management relations; (2) to show that this role is variable in both scope and emphasis; and (3) to show that human relations are at the

Some labor unions refer to the shop steward as the 11shop committeeman," "union committeeman," "grievanceman," or "chapel chairman," however, the duties of each are es­ sentially the same. ^ Shop Steward1s Manual, pamphlet (Machinists Build­ ing, Washington 1, D.C.: Research Department, International Association of Machinists), p. 7*

2 center of his over-all activities. This study presents a group of findings; an evalua­ tion of those findings; and conclusions drawn from them. Wherever the development of collective bargaining through a labor union has been followed by the setting up of a shop-steward system, the shop steward has potentially be­ come one of the most important human factors shaping the day-to-day relationships which result from the management of men in group working situations.

As collective bargain­

ing in the industrial sense becomes more and more establish­ ed and mature, it becomes increasingly important that there be a fundamental understanding of the part played by the union steward in the interaction between worker, union, and management.

It is hoped that this study will lend itself

to the extension of such an understanding. The approach.

The following labor unions were con­

tacted in the Los Angeles metropolitan area for the purpose of this study: The United Steelworkers of America, C.I.O., (USAC.IO) . The United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement workers of America, C.I.O., (UAW-CIO). The United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum, and Plastic Work­ ers of America, C.I.O., (URCLPWA-CIO).

3 The United'Packinghouse Workers of America, C.I.O., (UPWA-CIO). The Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, C.I.O. The International Brotherhood of Teamsters > Chauf­ feurs, Warehousemen and Helpers, A.P.L. The

Building Trades Council, A.F.L.

The United Public Workers of America. The International Association of Machinists. Personnel working with, and the facilities of, the Central Labor Council, A.P.L., and the Regional Headquarters, C.I.O. were also utilized. The labor organizations named above were selected from among a larger group.

The final selection was made,

somewhat arbitrarily, after a brief preliminary survey of theshop-steward system employed in been made.

each organization had

This selection was made with the feelingthat

the shop-steward systems chosen were representative enough, and at the same time, offered enough variation to adequate­ ly carry out the purposes of this study.

During the devel­

opment of the investigation this initial attitude continued to appear valid and no further modification of the original selections was made. The method used in gathering the information and data from these sources was substantially as follows: Contact was made with union officials on the staff or

4

policy-making level in each of these organizations.

An

attempt was made to arrive at some sort of a theoretical definition of the role and function of the shop steward in the labor union under consideration.

Without exception.,

in each organization, an individual was found somewhere (the official position each had varied considerably) along the union hierarchy who was intimately familiar with the problems centering about the shop steward, the role the shop steward played in meeting these problems, and carrying out his other functions.

All available literature printed

by these unions which pertained in any way to shop stewards was either acquired directly, or else borrowed and excerpt­ ed for pertinent material. As the study progressed, it became necessary to at­ tempt to correlate the theoretical definition of the stew­ ard's role and function with what was actually practiced on the job.

The feeling expressed by most union officials

was that since many of the duties and the method of carry­ ing out these duties for a shop steward were fairly well defined in the contract and union literature, a uniformity of action and attitude on the part of the stewards would occur in the performance of those duties.

Discussions with

individual stewards on the job, however, indicated that shop stewards reflect as strongly as individuals in other walks of life their own personal attitudes in dealing with

5 the problems which come before them--a seemingly universal human characteristic.

Two stewards acting under the same

contract may handle similar situations differently even though there exists a prescribed method in the contract or shop steward manual for treating that particular situation. Evaluations of practice are hazy at best, primarily because of the infinite variation which is possible in the implementation of any theory.

In order to facilitate a

comparison between theory and practice, a questionnaire was devised and sent out through the various union organizations to shop stewards on the job.

The findings from these ques­

tionnaires will be discussed in detail in another section of this study.

Coupled with the use of personal contacts

and questionnaires was a study of related material found in published works, in texts, and in periodicals. In this study the problem has been approached pri­ marily through labor unions and the facilities made avail­ able by them.

The shop steward, as such, is a union repre­

sentative and a part of the union organization.

The at­

titude of management toward him, and managements evaluation of him was felt to have an indirect bearing upon this study in much the same manner that this study indirectly touches upon the role and function of the foreman.

For this reason

there will be no systematic treatment here of the attitude of management toward the shop-steward system except as it

6

is touched upon incidentally in connection with some other phase.

Of course, management's and labor's mutual attitude

toward each other always vitally effects the functioning or malfunctioning of any system of interaction between them. In this respect, the shop-steward systems are no exception. Background.

In this country, the development of the

use of the shop-steward system paralleled the rise of labor unionism on an industry-wide basis.

Coupled with this was

the development of the use of the written contract as a tech­ nique for defining the agreement arrived at in collective bargaining between representatives of the workers and repre­ sentatives of management. There is a marked tendency for collective bargain­ ing to be viewed as a permanent part of industrial relations. An important causal factor here is the inclination for many working men to feel that most of their problems have enough mutuality and commonness to indicate the necessity for a group approach to their problems rather than an individual approach.

The development of strong labor unions can be ex­

plained by examining many factors in their development rang­ ing from the impact of the individual personalities of some labor organizers to a consideration of the legal and con­ stitutional system under which the nation operates. It is not the purpose of this study to discuss these

7 underlying factors.

Irrespective of the reasons for it,

the fact is inescapable that labor unions have become a strong, permanent, social, economic and political force in the United States.

Organised labor visualizes many

functions for itself in this over-all picture, and in many situations, the implementation of, and responsibility for carrying out these functions rests squarely upon the should­ ers of the shop steward.

In the unions that use the shop-

steward system, the steward is the primary link on the "grass roots” level between the union hierarchy and the worker.

The steward has the unique position of being part­

ly worker, partly labor union official.

The proportions in

this mixture vary considerably and will be discussed through­ out this study. The shop-steward system is found most often in the unions organized on an industry-wide basis. less prevalent in the craft unions.

It is much

The independent unions

vary, and usually fall somewhere between these extremes. The craft unions, in particular, are generally ill-adapted to use a shop-steward system.

In those unions, members are

frequently moving from one location to another and are usual­ ly scattered among many shops.

Stable organization at the

worker-level where continual day-to-day contact is essential proves very difficult.

Many functions carried out by the

shop stewards in the industry-wide unions are handled for

8 the craft unions by full-time, union-paid business repre­ sentatives who have under their jurisdiction a number of shops and outside work-locations where they investigate working conditions (’’police the contract”).

They handle

grievances which have not been settled in the shop, and contact the workers who belong to their local on union matters.

His activities in this area are usually closely

defined in the contract. tern in the A.F.L.

This is usually an accepted pat­

Where a steward is used in the above

situation, he works in close conjunction with the business representative. In unions organized on the industry-wide pattern in mass-production establishments, a shop-steward system fits neatly into the working situation.

All of the union work­

ers in a plant in this case belong to the same union, and shop stewards (union supervisors) are usually set up to match the management organization.

There is a steward on

each shift for each shift foreman, a departmental steward for each general foreman, etc.

The labor union

sees for itself two primary functions.

usually

The first of these

3 Unless otherwise stated, use of the term ’’labor union” throughout the remainder of this study will be limit­ ed to mean primarily a typical labor union which is organ­ ized on an industry-wide basis, and utilizes a shop-steward system. This is done to facilitate handling of the theoretic­ al material. It must be remembered, however, that in actual practice unions do not fit a stereotype, but rather, repre­ sent various blends and mixtures of these factors.

9 is collective bargaining which involves the negotiation, initiation, and enforcement of a collective bargaining agreement while acting as a representative for the worker. The second function is to promote the growth and develop­ ment of a strong labor organization. with the other.

Each is interelated

Coupled with these broad objectives are

many so-called lesser activities which include categories such as education, political action and recreation.

CHAPTER II

STEWARD AND THE CONTRACT Collective bargaining as participated in by repre­ sentatives of the union and management varies considerably in the scope and range of objectives sought by each.

Col­

lective bargaining is an alternative to using sheer force, in the ’’survival of the fittest’1 sense, to decide what the relationship between the worker and his employer should be. The union has something to offer which the employer needs-labor.

The employer has something to offer which working­

men need--jobs.

Both groups today generally recognize a

mutual need for each other.

In the process of negotiations

a balance is looked for between the wants of labor and the wants of management.

These issues involve the determina­

tion of wage rates, job classifications, working condi­ tions, grievance procedure, vacations, seniority, promo­ tion, etc.

The agreements reached are usually drawn up

in a written contract which has a specific length of time to run.

The written contract reflects an increasingly

legalistic approach to labor-management relations.

A pre­

determined policy for as many detailed situations as pos­ sible seems to be the current tendency in the making of a contract.

An attempt is made to strictly define the actual

11 relationships in problem situations rather than to define a mutual spirit or attitude toward each other which could be applied to any specific situation. After agreement on the terms, the contract is put into effect within the jurisdiction it encompasses.

It

must be enforced from that time until it runs out or is superceded by another contract.

The particular enforcement

attitude applied to the contract by either labor or manage­ ment will fall somewhere between strict or liberal extremes and is a day-to-day process.

Inseparably related to en- '

forcement of the contract Is the grievance procedure which plays an important part in the over-all picture.

Where a

shop-steward system exists, the steward is the primary enforcer of the contract from the union point of view and is the initiator in almost all formal grievance matters.

A

major part of his.over-all function is to ”put life into the contract,” and he is frequently termed "the watchdog for the union.” Coupled with the contract phase of labor activity come the other union functions already cited:

promotion

of the labor movement as such; plus, educational, political, recreational, and financial activities. Functions.

The diop steward promotes and carries

out at the worker-level, union policy related to the above

12 mentioned activities and functions.

Because each func­

tion is concerned with the shaping and channeling of human activity in one form or another, each category in­ volves human inter-relationships.

The shop steward* then,

finds himself interacting with these human situations wherever they arise.

Varying with the particular situation,

his attitude toward them will range from an approach of ex­ treme legalism to one of extreme informalism.

His role and

function is such that in determining the optimum approach to any of these situations his individual discretion is constantly brought into play.

This aspect shows itself

clearly when viewing the role of the steward in his rela­ tionship to the collective bargaining agreement.

Before

this phase is examined in detail a consideration of the process by which a worker becomes a shop steward and the personal criteria involved must be made. In a majority of the union shops investigated the steward is elected by the members of the working group he represents and he himself is a member of that group.

ii

The length of his term of office usually varies from one

ii

The number of workers a shop steward represents varies considerably. In the printing crafts each “chapel11 elects a chapel chairman. In the garment trades, a shop chairman often represents a whole floor. In the UAW, there is one shop steward for every thirty to fifty workers. In steel and rubber, stewards may represent entire departments of many hundred employees. (See S. T. Williamson, and

13 to five years.

The method of election varies from a

simple selection by the group at an Informal gathering to formal meetings with nominations from the floor and election by a secret ballot.

An emphasis is placed in

nearly all unions on the fact that the stewards are "democratically elected from among their fellow-workers." Many practical factors come into play, however, which cause actual practice to vary from this norm.

In well-

entrenched unions which have used the shop-steward system for several years the election of the steward tends to be quite "democratic."

There seems to be the natural tendency

in these groups to continue in office any steward who has been handling the job efficiently inasmuch as the steward’s function is, in reality, fairly complex and specialized. An experienced steward is often as valuable to the company as to the union. In a newly-organized shop the pattern usually found is that the first stewards are appointed by the union or are elected with the suggestion of the union as to which man would probably be the most desirable.

Close union

control is maintained in this respect until the local shop

^ (continued) Herbert Harris, Trends in Collective Bargaining (New York: The Twentieth Century Fund^ 1945)> p. 118.

14 is felt to have matured enough to carry itself a l o n e . 5 In many primary organizing situations professional union personnel help develop the stewards into effective union representatives.

The steward is looked upon as the key

figure in the hierarchical ‘structure of the union. the ’’backbone11 of the union.

He is

His position is analagous to

that of the precinct captain in a well-developed political party.

For this reason maximum effort and attention is

usually given by the union to achieving an effective group of shop stewards from the outset.

In commenting upon the

qualifications for election as a shop steward one manual states: Every good standing member is eligible to serve as a shop steward. But* in choosing a steward, It is highly desirable to choose one who has shown more than casual interest in the union and has been a member long enough to have obtained a knowl­ edge of working conditions.6 The shop steward is to the union roughly what the foreman is to management. these.:

The differences are primarily

a foreman is most often chosen for his technical

skill on the job--he's the ’’best worker in the department.”

^ Very often, however, a union will insist upon democratically selecting and organizing its shop stewards from the very beginning of the union in a particular shop even though this does, in fact, seriously hamper effective initial organization in many instances.

£

° Shop Steward's Manual, op. cit., p. 10.

15 A steward is most often chosen for his ability to deal with people.

A foreman is most often appointed by his

superiors and steps up into the quasi-management class while a steward is most often elected by his fellow-workers and remains a representative of these workers.

In the

minds of most workers the foreman jls management and the steward _is the union.7

These distinctions are significant

in examining the criteria for selection of a man to be a shop steward.

A steward will nearly always be a man who

is personally popular with the majority of his fellow-workers.

This most certainly would be the case where he is

democratically elected.

In contrast to this a foreman may,

or may not, have personal popularity because in his selec­ tion at least his fellow-workers have had little or nothing to say in the decision.

The most popular man Is not neces­

sarily the best supervisor, of course, and for this reason the democratic selection system by which a shop steward is chosen might produce one who is a poor supervisor.

Several

7 During the field work for this study, union officials stressed this point over and over again. It is also emphasized in most shop steward manuals. (See John A. Despol, nThe Duties of a Shop Steward,*’ un­ published speech, delivered to Extension Class of the Institute of Industrial Relations, University of Califor­ nia at Los Angeles, February 4, 1948, p. 3).-

16 labor leaders suggested in this respect that all too often stewards are elected who are immensely popular with their fellows but who make poor stewards from the standpoint of carrying out the functions and duties accompanying the posi­ tion.

Contrasting authors on this subject point out:

Although the steward comes to his new office as a rank-and-file worker, in all probability he has already achieved some special record that sets him above his fellows. He may have played an especially active p a r t .in the organizing campaign, or he may have held unofficial leadership before organizing began--perhaps as an ethnic spokesman, a skilled craftsman, a reliable friend in need, a good fellow, a forceful personality.^ . . . the best and most capable employees are not always chosen for stewardship. Their election may have been on the basis of personal popularity with the workers, campaign promises to be tough with the boss, or the plain fact that no top-notch man happened to want to be a candidate.9 A broad generalization, however, can be made stating that since shop stewards are chosen more nearly because of their human relations qualities than is their foreman counterpart, (whose primary selection-determining characteristic is his technical skill) the average steward is probably better suited to deal with problems of human relations than is the

® Benjamin M. Selekman, Labor Relations and Human Rela­ tions (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 19^1 ), p. 60. 9 Glenn Gardiner, When Foreman and Steward Bargain (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 19^5)> P* 39*

17 average foreman. The training that a new shop steward receives to meet his new duties varies greatly.

The most frequent

criticism given by both labor and management concerning the steward is that he is often poorly trained in the handling of the complex factors involved in labor-management rela­ tions.

Aside .from training given by union officials or

information received from the outgoing steward most of the instruction concerning the intricacies of his new job comes from shop steward manuals.

The manuals printed by the

unions studied in this study were, without exception, of a very high quality.

They were readable, well-written in a

casual style, and at the same time gave nearly all the neces­ sary pertinent material which was general in nature.

Nearly

all labor unions hold monthly or bi-monthly shop steward meetings which are an additional source of training. Most labor organizations seemed to recognize the problem of training and were working out methods whereby a more adequate training could be given to a shop steward following his selection to the post.

One novel arrange­

ment for training shop stewards was worked out recently by union machinists, ironworkers, and electricians in the Motor Products Corporation, Chicago.

With full cooperation

of the company's management the training program consisted of a nine-week ’’grievance clinic” sponsored by the unions

18 and conducted by the University of Illinois.

Management

agreed to allow the steward one-half hour from work one day each week to attend classes in a company conference room.

The remainder of the class was on the stewards' own

time.

Class discussions centered on the procedures for

handling worker grievances under the labor-management agree­ ment.

Techniques for preventing grievances and for meeting

the human relations problems which confront stewards in the shop situation were emphasized. Policing the contract.

The actual complexity of the

problems which the steward must face and the multitudinous duties he should perform can be appreciated by examining the role he has in relation to the contract.

The following

statement is addressed to the steward and is taken from a shop steward manual: When your local negotiating committee signs the contract with management, the committee's work is over but yours has just begun. The contract, as it stands, is just so many words on paper. It's up to you to police it, enforce it, put it to work by making sure its provisions are carried out, make it a living reality.1!

10 "Training Programs for Shop Stewards," Personnel,

26 No. 2:76, September, 19^9* How To Win For The Union--A Handbook for UAW-CIO Stewards and Committeemen, pamphlet "["1324 Maccabbees Build­ ing, Detroit 2, Michigan: UAW-CIO, Education Department, revised, June, 19^5)> P* 24.

19 One of his primary duties then is the policing and enforcip ing of the contract. The typical contract reflects today’s general trend toward detailing the conditions expressed in it.

Instead of being left to bargaining when

the problem situation arises more and more conditions are put down in black and white.

This increased detail re­

flects essentially a legalistic approach.

It is an approach

which attempts to define in as many specific situations as possible just what the rights of, or restrictions on, each party are as interpreted by those who effected the contract. This legalism and the increasingly legal attitude toward industrial relations in-general is mirrored in the role the shop steward must play in order to carry out his duties. The following characteristics are ones which the ’’ideal11 shop steward should have.

Above all, a shop stew­

ard must have an accurate and concise knowledge of the contract itself.

He must know its provisions and the

rights and restrictions it sets up in relation to the group with whom the steward works.

It is equally important that

he know what is not in the contract.

These involve also

12 It should be mentioned here and kept in mind throughout the description of his duties that the union activities a steward can engage in on the job are usually closely defined in the collective bargaining agreement. Many of his specifically ’’steward” activities are carried on off the job, during lunch-hour, or rest periods.

20 a thorough knowledge of the precedents In certain situa­ tions and the various legislative provisions which govern many of the interpretations put on the document.

He should

be technically skillful in his knowledge of the contract to the degree that he should be able to know what parts can be stretched and what ones cannot. Following his investigation of the contract itself he must acquire a thorough factual knowledge of each worker in his department so that he can apply the contract's terms to these men.

The information he needs concerning each

worker relates to classification, seniority, wage rate, the skills of each worker and similar other elements.

This

knowledge in order to be useful, in turn, requires an under­ standing of the department itself, the operations performed, the equipment available, the lighting, safety, and sanitation conditions, etc.

The steward can compare the actual working

situation and that which is called for in the contract with this technical knowledge at his command.

Using the factors

which have been indicated the steward has the position of evaluating what seem to be violations of the contract. These all relate in turn to one of-,the steward's most im­ portant functions, that of grievance procedure. The steward is usually the first stage in the formal grievance procedure.

At this point the steward acts similar

to a judge in the first instance.

He has the responsibility

21 in most cases of deciding whether a grievance advanced by a worker is either a legitimate breach of the contract or whether it represents an unfair practice by management, (even though not specifically defined in the contract). The rule of thumb provided in most manuals to determine if a dispute constitutes a valid grievance is: contract been violated? fairly?1^

(2)

(l) Has the

Has the company acted un­

Most contracts have the machinery for handling

grievances and the powers of the shop steward in relation to this procedure.

A typical definition of the term

’’grievance" is, “any dispute between the Company and the Union, or between the Company and any employee concerning the effect, interpretation, application, claim of breach or violation of the Agreement, or any other dispute which may arise between the parties. A competent steward will keep written records of all grievances which are brought to him including a record of the final disposition of each.

Continual emphasis is placed

upon the necessity for the shop steward to'keep detailed written records at all stages through the grievance pro­ cedure.

In all of these matters the steward should seek

The Steward's Job in the URCLPWA-CIO, pamphlet (United Rubber Worker's Building, High at Mill Street> Akron 8, Ohio: URCLPWA-CIO Department of Education), p. 21. 14 Shop Steward's Manual, op. cit., p. 31*

22 out the 11factsM concerning particular situations wherever possible. Under the legalistic approach, grievance procedures become a kind of sieve for sifting disputes.

From foremen

and stewards to top officials on both sides, administrators seek to separate the valid complaint from the invalid, the legitimate grievance from the "gripe."

Legitimacy, however,

is simply equated with defensible status under a specific provision of the agreement.

Foremen and stewards are charg­

ed with gathering all the facts regarding any complaint presented to them.

But "facts" in this connection comprise

only those objective, tangible, even measurable data that can demonstrate whether the specific provision of the con­ tract has been breached as claimed or not.

The complaint

with merit thus emerges as the one for which some degree of such support can be secured.^ When any doubt exists concerning the proper handling of a situation the steward should contact the next higher union official.

Most stewards attempt to clear all griev­

ance matters involving a new precedent, however minute, through higher union officials.

This is done to eliminate

the possibility of establishing some immediate precedent

-*-5 Selekman, op. cit., p. 83*

23 which might have harmful results if projected into future policy.

In practice the steward should emulate the lawyer's

approach to a legal case. Up to this point the characteristics which have been described concerning what the shop steward's duties are have represented the formal relationship between the stew­ ard and one of his functions— that of policing the contract or collective bargaining agreement.

These formal duties

involve primarily the mechanical operations of comparing the conditions set forth In the contract with the conditions that actually exist in the place of work with regard to men, equipment, etc.

When problems appear, there is a formal

procedure whereby they can be resolved in relationship to the contract's provisions.

From the technical or mechanical

standpoint, the wholly legal approach which this represents concerns itself in any particular situation only with what the rights of the parties are.

The various rights and the

method for arriving at them are defined in some detail in the collective bargaining agreement. In this approach, (formal or legal) however, there is no necessary correlation between what rights are accord­ ing to the contract and what a satisfactory relationship is, particularly from the standpoint of promoting the most effective working situation for both labor and

24 management.-^

The contract, of course, is initiated with

the express purpose of promoting this more effective work­ ing situation but because of the complexity of that situa­ tion there are many parts which cannot possibly be defined specifically in the contract.

This introduces the informal

role of the shop steward--the role which is most directly connected with human relationships as they are involved in the application of collective bargaining agreement to the work-level.

An approach which works only within the frame­

work of legally defined rights is rigid and static.

For

every formal solution to a problem, however, there is an informal one.

In the legal profession, the best lawyer is

the one who keeps his client out of court by reaching settlements through informal negotiation.

The best steward,

in like manner, is the one who effects the settlement of grievances without resorting to formal grievance procedure. The shop steward is constantly faced with problems which can best be handled by a skillful blending of the formal with the informal.

The degree to which he accomp­

lishes an effective mixture of them reflects itself in the

An effective work situation, although infinitely varied in its implications, would be one, generally, which balanced the wants of the worker and management (since they are so often opposed). This would result in the workers producing efficiently and at something nearing capacity with management as nearly as possible satisfying the worker in terms of wages, working conditions, etc. The legal aspects of this as defined in the contract function only within the framework of human interrelationships.

25 human relationships which are interwoven throughout the area in which he operates.

The informal can be categorized

(in contrast to the formal, or legal approach) as a clinico-cooperative approach.

Distinguished from the legal

attitude which relates all problems to defined rights the clinico-cooperative approach involves treating each problem as a unique circumstance.

The solution is found by examining

the human as well as fixed factors in the problem with cooperation rather than coercion employed in the disposi­ tion of them.

Through its (clinico-cooperative) use the

elements of rigidity and legal force, present all too often in strict legalism, are modified considerably.

The hypo­

thesis is that a clinico-cooperative approach which embodies both formal and informal factors will usually prove more satisfactory in achieving the varied objectives in industri­ al relations than will an approach which adheres only to a legal contract. Clinico-cooperative approach.

As in the formal

approach, the steward is required to have a thorough knowl­ edge of the contract.

In this case, he views the contract

from the additional side of evaluating to what extent it is designed to meet actual difficulties which arise in dayto-day activity on the job-level.

The provisions which have

not been put into the contract are fully as important here

26 as those elements which have.

The steward should re­

cognize those worker's needs which seem to be adequately met by the contract together with those needs which actual­ ly exist on the job but which are not covered under any part of the contract.

In this process he is able among

other things to anticipate to some degree the areas with­ in which problems will probably be generated.

Not only

must the steward know the workers in his department accord­ ing to their jobs, skills, etc., but the clinico-coopera­ tive approach suggests that he be acquainted with their personality-characteristics. Most of the administrators of a union agreement, it must be remembered, are already in contact with the people whose grievances they must handle and with the shop within which grievances find expression.

The acceptance of the

clinical approach sensitizes them to the aspects of rela­ tionships that will bear watching.

They come to know the

individuals and their personality trends, including the men who usually "gripe."

They hear of worries outside the shop

that may affect an employee's mental attitude toward his job.

They spot bench groups and their leaders.

They are

ready for fearful reactions when changes in the methods or organization of work must be introduced.1^

^

Selekman, op. c i t ., p. 99*

One union

27 pamphlet tells the steward,

nYour job is to find out the

personal characteristics of each worker . . . the quiet work­ er may have as big a grievance as the ones who

h o l l e r . M l 8

By familiarizing himself with the personal traits of his fellow-workers the steward has a tool which helps him to deal with the problems brought to him.

He soon discerns

those points at which troubles will probably crop up in the human relationships and at the same time he can assume those points where the relations will probably remain har­ monious . A thorough knowledge of the department is again necessary in this informal framework.

The steward evaluates

the department in terms of whether or not it meets the scale established by the contract.

In addition he must evaluate

whether the contract falls short of meeting broader human needs.

He must learn what kinds of changes can be effect­

ed informally and what kinds require formal arrangements through prescribed channels.

Because he evaluates many

of these factors in terms of the human relations connect­ ed with them (rather than only according to the terms of a set of fixed rules found in the contract) the steward in using the clinico-cooperative approach, must be able to effectively deal with people face-to-face.

1O

How To Win For the Union, op. cit., p. 37*

28 A steward well-versed In the art of establishing ef­ fective human relations can do much in promoting dynamic interaction on this shop-level.

Selekman states, nIf

grievances are to be handled effectively, they must be approached primarily through the dynamic flow of shop relations rather than through the static clauses of the agreement.

When they are thus approached, they become in

turn a gauge of the state of health in relationships. Many grievances can be settled on the spot befqre they becane serious, simply (sometimes not so simply) by recognizing the potential friction which lies dormant in certain kinds of situations.

A shop steward should learn to anticipate

trouble spots and attempt through informal cooperation to correct them at their source before they reach dangerous proportions. By its very nature, the above means that the stew­ ard must be willing to face up to problem situations.

He

should attempt to resolve them even though it is easier for him personally to let a grievance develop and then handle it in a formal capacity through the approved grievance procedure. This latter mode divorces the personal relations from the grievance to a great extent for the steward then merely

^9 Selekman, op. cit., p. 107.

29 applies a set of rules to the situation and fills out specified forms concerning the dispute.

The steward in

applying the rules of the contract in this formal manner acts primarily in the non-dynamic capacity of a clericaltechnician. In order to act as a clinician the steward must,' in­ sofar as this is possible, approach the problems which arise with an attitude of impartiality and consistency.

If he

becomes involved in promoting only the interests of him­ self or those of his personal friends he will, in time, lose his effectiveness with the group as a whole.

If he

establishes a reputation for fair play he will be able to take grievances to his foreman informally.

The foreman

will give genuine consideration to the problem since he recognizes* that the steward is always careful in screening out disputes which are invalid. Whenever a steward can convince the company repre­ sentative (or conversely the company representative con­ vince the steward) that the final disposition of a poten­ tial grievance will inevitably come out a certain way an agreement can usually be worked out informally.

Unless the

case is a test one in which a precedent is being sought grievance cases will usually go beyond the work-level only when there are factors involved which have definitely vari­ able interpretations either of which might be valid.

30 The overwhelming majority of disputes are settled informally on the lower work-level.

It is nearly always

to the distinct advantage of both the union and manage­ ment to resolve disputes as close to their sources as possible.

An example of this thought is expressed by

Selekman and others in citing that, "Charles Raymond, re­ gional director of the Textile Workers, held periodic meetings with foremen, particularly during the early stages of collective dealings in any plant . . . Mr. Raymond sought to utilize meetings to build sound union-management rela­ tionships, and above all, to promote cooperative dealings between foremen and stewards, so that most grievances would be settled at the first s t a g e . " ^

Because so much of the

relationship between union and management is on the joblevel and falls into this informal category, the impor­ tance of the steward to the labor union becomes increasing­ ly apparent.

It also becomes increasingly apparent that

the relative success or failure of the union in a shop (apart from the factors of the company’s over-all attitude toward the union) depends upon the ability of the shop steward to handle problem situations in which, usually, the

on

Benjamin M. Selekman, Sylvia K. Selekman, and Stephen H. Fuller, Problems in Labor Relations (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1950), p. 30.

31 most Important element is the human relations factor involved. Steward-foreman relations.

Nearly all unions

recognize keenly the importance of the informal role play­ ed by the steward in policing the contract and implement­ ing union policy on the worker-level.

His attitude toward

and relationship with the foreman is especially important in his informal approach to policing the contract.

The

steward can usually force action on a legitimate problem by submitting it through the legal routine of the grievance procedure.

Many times, however, an alert steward can

achieve the same result with considerably less friction by informally contacting the foreman, discussing the prob­ lem with him, and reaching a settlement through coopera­ tion. Success with method depends partly upon the atti­ tude of the foreman or other company representatives. Shop steward manuals printed by the unions stress many of these informal elements.

The following are sample ex­

cerpts taken from manuals in their discussions of one of the steward's most important relationships--the relation­ ship with his foreman. . very work with

They are addressed to the steward:

. . Desk-banging and threats w o n ’t work for long, but bowing down to 'tough' foreman wqn't at all. You take a calm, patient attitude such a man--and stand your ground. You remind

32 him, gently but firmly, that the question of whether or not the workers want a union is closed, that the union is here to stay. And you keep coming back to the specific grievances at hand, reminding him constantly that his. work will be a lot easier if grievances are set­ tled in a fair and satisfactory way. Remember that he's (the foreman) a human being, too. You won't lose any grievances by being on friendly terms with your foreman, so long as you don't forget you're working for the union. May­ be you're both interested in baseball. A little talk about batting averages may smooth the bar­ gaining path.21

Use a postive friendly approach. Only people who are not sure of themselves feel the need of putting up a front and being over aggressive, dom­ ineering, and belligerent. You have nothing to fear; you are fully protected by your contract in what you are doing. So, keep your head, your temper, and your sense of humor. Be positive and friendly in your approach, not disagreeable and on the defensive. Be a good listener and disagree amiably. Being a good listener and not just making a speech in order to impress the foreman is a pretty good rule to remember anyway. Then, quietly present your side of the case, well supported by all the facts you've gathered and checked. If possible, have in mind beforehand a definite plan of settlement. When you must disagree with what the foreman main­ tains, do it with dignity. Remember, the grievance machinery is based on the principle of helping solve peacefully and fairly the problems that come up, in order to produce a smooth running shop with the best possible working conditions.

Don't gloat.

21

If you do win your case, don't gloat

How To Win For the Union, op. cit., pp. 41-42.

33 and brag about your victories over management. Be gracious and allow the foreman to !save face’ as much as possible. Y o u ’ll need the same considera­ tion from him at some later date. Shop steward diplomacy means that you will try to point out to management that actually it is to their advantage to have satisfied, alert workers. Y o u ’re asking for justice and not favors, and y o u ’re expected to be as fair as you expect management to be.22 Higher management officials will rarely overrule a foreman in most grievance matters.

To most workers the

foreman is> the management just as the steward is> the union. If grievances can be settled with the foreman the over-all grievance machinery does not become clogged up on the high­ er levels, leaving those levels with more time open to settle the major issues which, affect the whole plant. Various significant elements can be seen in the state­ ments which are cited above.

Primary among them is the em­

phasis on the steward’s promotion of harmonious human rela­ tions with the foreman.

Many of the techniques described

are designed solely to keep the atmosphere surrounding their relationship an amicable one.

The focus is definitely away

from the coercive aspect of the problem.

In the days of

highly militant unionism (and this is true of only a decade or so ago) the shop steward where he existed at all, usually had to force his demands by using the contract as an instru­ ment of coercion.

Foremen, and management in general,

Shop Steward’s Manual, op. cit., pp. 41-45.

34 resisted with all their power the intrusion by the labor unions into what they felt was their "sacred” sphere.

Un­

fortunately this attitude is still found in some shops. Manuals of the type described above have as one of their prime functions the description of methods for break­ ing down this traditional barrier between company supervi­ sion on the one side and supervisors for the union on the other.

While friendliness is stressed, there is equal

stress on the necessity for the steward to remain firm and stand his ground if he feels his side of the issue is a valid one.

His duty is first and foremost to the workers

he represents.

The union is the instrument in these cases

which makes such representation possible.

An attitude

toward the foreman is suggested in which long-range as well as the short-range objectives are considered in any pending grievances.

In all of these relationships a notable char­

acteristic is the blending of the formal with the informal which has been categorized as representing the optimum ap­ proach.

The steward should have his information in writing

while at the same time he should attack the problem through a personal approach with the foreman. One of the important elements connected with the steward-foreman relationship where the factor of the work­ ers' attitudes play a distinct role is that of refusing ■*

grievances when they are brought by the worker.

These are

35 the cases where the worker feels he has a grievance but an evaluation by the foreman or the steward shows he does not.

In past situations where no labor representative

existed the worker usually took his gripe directly to the company representative and with him attempted to effect a solution.

If the foreman rejected his complaint on the

grounds that it was not a legitimate grievance the worker often viewed the act with antagonism and suspicion.

Today,

where a shop-steward (this is also true where representa­ tion is through a business agent) system operates it is ordinarily the duty of the steward to evaluate whether the worker is mistaken in his facts, his attitude, or his in­ terpretation of what the contract provides.

If the worker

is mistaken, in the judgment of the steward, he should be shown by the steward where his error lies. The most important human relations factor which has been added to the picture by shifting this function from the foreman to the steward is that the workers will usually accept explanations from the steward where the same story might be difficult to take from the foreman because of the boss-employee relationship.23

23 John A. Despol, "The Duties of a Shop Steward," unpublished speech, delivered to Extension Class of the Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California at Los Angeles, February 4, 1948, p. 4.

36 It is easier for a worker to get a problem whether real or imagined off his chest to his steward than to his foreman.

Pfiffner points out that it is the right of the

rank-and-file member to bring up his own grievances to his own union steward of committeeman right on the job-he can complain and blow off steam to one of his own kind who is expected to be

on his side.2^

The steward acts as

a judge in these matters but not as an impartial one.

He

is a workerfs representative and by that fact is necessarily a partisan advocate.

For this reason the steward will near­

ly always in t h e o r y 2 ^

give the benefit of any doubt to

the worker.

Many cases of this kind are referred to high­

er union officials for a decision concerning their validity. Steward-union relationship.

Most unions exercise

a comparatively rigid control from the top of the hierarchy down when there is a serious question concerning what union policy should be in the treatment of specific grievances. The steward in these instances has the role primarily of facilitating communication down from the higher levels.

The

^ John M. Pfiffner, "Participation as a Tool of Management," Personnel, 26, No. 2, 76, September, 19^ 8 . xt was found in the results of the questionnaires sent to shop stewards that in this particular matter, (evaluating grievances) however, the stewards by almost nine-to-one felt a grievance should not be continued if the steward had evaluated it to be invalid.

37 avowed purpose of control by the union In these matters Is to eliminate the possibility that some action initiated by a steward on the shop-level might hurt or destroy care­ fully mapped long-range objectives through the establish­ ment of some precedent which would have counter-implica­ tions.

Timing is given a place of major importance; with

the feeling that a grievance will often be won for the union if it is presented at the proper time while it would be lost if pushed at an inopportune time. The whole area of grievance procedure is compared to a battle.

The higher union officials act as the generals

or over-all planners, while the stewards resemble the field officers whose duty it is to carry out the plans formulated from above.

The steward is encouraged to, and generally will,

rely quite heavily upon his union superiors for guidance in any situation where doubt exists with him concerning the proper course which should be

f o l l o w e d .

26

Because of the

^ This is an impression received from numerous dis­ cussions with union officials. The shop steward manuals and other related literature stress the self-reliant ele­ ment of the steward. Neither is necessarily inconsistent, however, because grievances of these questionable kinds probably represent only a small fraction of the total. One of the inherent problems involved here is the focus of pow­ er in the over-all structure of a particular union. Does the power to make decisions (of various kinds) come from the rank and file membership, from a delegation of authority, or from a self-perpetuating group? (A study of this was made in 167 national unions. The steward's function would vary as the center of authority varied in each union. (see Joseph

38 long-range implications which could follow from improper decisions on his part, the steward usually exercises personal discretion, then, only when it concerns imple­ mentation of some policy which is well-defined.

His role

is limited, therefore, to exclude most policy-making func­ tions . From the union standpoint close coordination (partly which this precariousness of policy-definition dictates) between the steward and higher union officials is one of the essentials for a good shop-steward system.

Because of

this coordination, communication is generally more rapid down the union hierarchy than down the management hierarchy. The steward as a result often finds himself in a position of advantage in the matter of information in comparison to his company counterpart, the foreman.

Possession of in­

formation is an important factor in controlling human re­ lationships in any situation.

The steward's position is

often enhanced and his relationship with his fellow-workers is made more effective.

He has access to and gives out in­

formation in which the workers are often vitally interested. The role which the shop steward plays in projecting a variety of information is inseparably connected with his role as the chief builder of the union in his shop. p/T

(continued) Shister, "Trade Union and Government: Formal Analysis," Quar­ terly Journal of Economics, 60:78-112, November, 19^3»)

CHAPTER III

BUILDING THE UNION "Building a strong union" in his shop is conceived to he the other general shop steward function equal in im­ portance to the category of "putting life into the con­ tract."^

Putting life into the contract and building the

union are viewed as the two primary functions of the stew­ ard.

All activities he carries out as a shop steward fall

somewhere within one or the other of these divisions.

His

activities in making the contract work have been described in the previous chapter. Building a strong union involves many factors, some of which are brought into play directly, some indirectly. In almost every instance, however, building a strong union means dealing with problems involving human relations and dealing with them on a day-to-day, face-to-face basis. As builder of the union the steward must attempt to secure 100 per cent union membership 'in his shop; he must approach new employees and sell them on the union; he must give lead­ ership to the workers; he must educate them; he must meet off-the-job needs; and in many shops he must help to organize the workers for political action.

^

To be effective, he must

How To Win For the Union, op. cit., p. 14.

40 work in these areas with the human relationships involved in all of these activities. Recruiting new members.

All unions stress the im­

portance of having 100 per cent union membership in their shops.

Various union-management situations with respect

to union membership range from the open shop where there is no union officially to act as the bargaining agent for the workers; to the closed shop (in most eases outlawed by the Taft-Hartley Law) where not only is 100 per cent union membership required but the union has control of the hiring of workers for an employer.

(An employer can re­

ject an applicant but his power of selection of his own employees is confined to picking from among the candidates the union sends to him.)^®

As the union representative on

the working level, the steward Is the union to a majority of workers.

For this reason, the steward will affect to

a marked degree the inclination of his fellow-workers to­ ward the union as an organization.

If the workers like and

are satisfied with the shop steward who functions over them, the probability is strong that they will project their personal attitude onto the union itself.

28 Russell L. Greenman and Elizabeth B. Greenman, Getting Along With Unions (New York: 23.

TWfTTp.

Harper and Brothers,

41 In various walks of life where problems of organ­ izing men into groups have arisen, the shop steward, as a union organizer, should use those techniques which have proven most effective.

These new workers may be "young­

sters fresh out of high school or trade school. country people fresh off the farm.

Many are

Most of them have

never come in contact with a union before.

As you (the

steward) know, they are often against the union, suspicious of its aims and

m e t h o d s . " ^

The steward is constantly reminded by the union leaders above him that his job Is to persuade men to join the union, not to coerce them to sign up.

The persuasion

is based primarily upon showing his fellow-workers what the union does for the worker and the reasons why strong active membership in the union is necessary to keep it strong enough to continue to carry out these functions. The stronger the union the more able it is to promote ef­ fectively the interest of the workers it represents.

(it

Is a fact that many companies would rather deal with a fair and well-organized union than with a weak union; and in preference to dealing with a weak union they would rather

The Union -Is Y o u . 1, pamphlet (Publicity and Ed­ ucation Department, United Steelworkers of America) p. 23.

42 oO have none at all.)

The steward should contact a new

employee the day he arrives in the shop making him feel as at home as possible, telling him who he the steward is, what the union does for the members of the plant, and the desirability for the new employee to join the union.

■51

The new worker is made to feel that the union is more than just a dues-collecting agency . ^ An enthusiastic, dynamic steward can make a shop one hundred per cent union (in more ways than simply member­ ship) while an unenthusiastic, non-dynamic steward will have difficulty keeping the union in that shop alive at all.

The factor, that to the workers, the steward usual­

ly _is the union cannot be stressed too often.

If the stew­

ard through his personal drive and initiative can affect a better set of working conditions in a shop, the union re­ ceives as much credit as the steward personally because the steward JLs the union.

The union’s primary justification

^ Herman W. Steinkraus, "industry's Viewpoint on L abor's Demands," Annals of the American Academy of Po­ litical and Social Science, 248:14, November, 194"5T The new man's membership in the union is often automatically provided for by a maintenance-of-membership clause in the contract or similar membership-requirement situation. In theory, the steward's job, even in this case, is to contact the new employee immediately and "sell" the idea of the union to him. He should promote a workerloyal ty which would have the workers voluntary union mem­ bers whether there are contract stipulations or not. The Union Is You!

op. cit., p. 26.

43 for existence is service to the workers it represents.

For

this reason, non-serving shop stewards threaten the very life of the union. The strike situation.

Shop stewards often have an

important role in effecting and shaping the worker-union relationships when a strike is called.

The following sec­

tion is addressed to the steward regarding his function when a strike occurs: Do what we may to avoid them, there are times when every progressive union is faced with a strike situation. When the occasion arises, the steward plays an important role. On him falls the respon­ sibility of success or failure. We realize the futility of trying to set down rules to govern each individual case but we believe the following simple rules will be helpful in most situations. 1. The steward, during the pre-strike period must make every effort to see that every member of the union as well as the non-members affected, are fully informed of all of the issues which re­ sult in the deadlock. This is important. Strikes are wars on the economic front. The people you re­ present are your armies. If they don't want to fight you can't win. The outcome of the strike de­ pends upon how well you inform them. 2. In instances where your members decide to act unwisely by walking off the job over some action of the employer, you must do everything to prevent them. This is important where you are working under an agreement. Never give your approval to unsanction­ ed strikes. 3 . After the strike is in progress, you will have to keep up your members' morale. Keep them pepped up and interested. 4. Keep members fully advised, through meetings and other methods, as to th'e actual facts. It is

44 necessary to do this both before the actual strike begins, and during the strike. Keep down rumors, for they can be disastrous to the members’ morale during the critical period of a strike. 5. Once the strike is settled, your job is to try to renew and maintain friendly relationship with management.33 Clearly, the union looks upon its shop stewards as the key personnel in shaping and controlling the human relationship factors in strike situations.

Dynamic leader­

ship on the part of shop stewards can make or break a strike. Dues collection. union."

Dues are the "life-blood of the

In many shops the shop steward’s role includes

the collection of dues.

This function is usually present­

ed as one of the unpleasant tasks connected with his service to the workers, but there are also positive aspects to it. Some union officials expressed the idea that dues collected by the steward was a healthy thing for the union (instead of through the check-off or other dues-collection systems which are "automatic" and impersonal in nature) because in this way the steward must personally contact each worker at least once in a given period of time.

To be sure, this

throws a heavy load on the steward’s shoulders but the

33 Shop Steward’s Manual, o p . cit., pp. 49-50.

45 union is kept ever alert.

The steward must be able, in the

process of collecting the union's dues, to show why the union is important to the worker, where it is functioning for him, and again, why it is vitally important to the worker that he support and promote a strong union. Dues-collection by the steward is often used as a device by the union itself to serve as an internal check on the effectiveness of its own services to the worker.

It

is a device to make certain that all of the workers are personally contacted periodically.

Because the steward

must contact each worker and be prepared to defend and promote the union to him, it requires that the steward again "sell” the union to his fellow-workers.

This atti­

tude toward dues-collection must be regarded as the excep­ tion rather than the rule for most unions attempt to es­ tablish automatic dues-collection systems through the "check-off” (pay-roll deduction plan).

Primarily, the

reason for this method is that greater revenue stability is provided inasmuch as there are no delinquencies under it.

One union "sells" the steward on this plan by point­

ing out that it frees his time for the real job of improv­ ing working conditions, organizing and educating new mem­ bers.

This particular union further states that the stew­

ard should, "see that the men understand this so they do

46 not mistakenly resent the check-off."3^

The union’s

financial position is not so closely related in this case to the variable quality of "democratically" elect­ ed stewards. Political action.

The steward should call depart­

mental meetings at regular intervals at which time he dis­ cusses with the workers the immediate and long-range plans and policies of their union.

Some stewards run lunch-hour

classes for heart-to-heart talks with the w o r k e r s . 35

in­

creasingly, the steward's role includes that of providing political information and promoting political action on the part of the workers.

Here, the steward usually works

in close cooperation with official union political activity groups.

He informs the workers concerning such things as

pending legislation and voting records of congressmen. Examples of two manual's definition of the steward's role in organizing for political action are: Today, with wages and hours and the very existence of Jobs for all depending to a great extent on what happens in .Washington and in state and local govern­ ments, we need to keep up a steady fire of political action to preserve and strengthen the framework of

3^ For UPWA-CIO Stewards, pamphlet (205 West Wacker Drive, Chicago 61 Illinois: United Packinghouse Workers of America, CIO), p. 34. The Steward1s Job in the URCLPWA-C I O , o p . cit., p . 16 .

47 democracy within which our union exists. To do the job right, your local union PAC must be busy all year, organizing support for good bills and defeating reactionary ones. And that's where you come in. As an active steward, you keep in touch with your local PAC and keep the people in your de­ partment up to date on action to be taken. You help involve them in political work in the wards and in letter-writing campaigns and delegations to public officials. If no active PAC now exists in your local, do something to revive i t . At least you can stir up some activity in your own department. Time 1s awastin.*3h You, the steward, form a link in the political chain. You can rally your shop behind election is­ sues. You can encourage men to attend meetings, read printed material and canvass their friends and neigh­ bors. You can help get out the vote.37 The steward is the ideally situated man in the union organization to carry out the Political Action function. One of the principal elements here is his intimate connec­ tion with the workers. one like themselves.

He is viewed by most workers as He is a person who usually has popul­

arity and prestige with his fellow-workers.

And of major

importance is the fact that he is rarely held suspect by his fellows.

Because the steward represents the worker

and is himself a worker, his attitude toward political

^

How To Win for The Union, op. cit., pp. 70-72.

37 For UPWA-CIO Stewards, op. cit., p. 44.

48 matters may be different than other workers, but will only rarely be greeted with a suspicion that some ul­ terior motive lies behind his avowed opinions.

Since he

is the leader in the shop, his ideas will be treated sympathetically.

In contrast, a foreman will probably be

ineffective in this kind of role largely because of stereo­ typed attitudes which workers have toward management and its representatives.

The worker-steward identification

greatly facilitates the effectiveness of the steward in carrying out this as well as his other functions.38 Educational functions.

The steward is reminded in

union literature that he should "talk” union whenever the occasion presents itself, and that he should facilitate the education of his fellow-workers in union matters.

A stew­

a r d ’s manual describes some of these activities this way: As the official closest to the men who make the union, you are responsible for keeping them informed of union activities and policies. You are the link between the workers and the union office . . . . Many never see any union representative except your­ self. So they must rely on you to tell them what goes on between meetings. You are the union to them . . . . A program cannot get full support unless the work­ ers in the shop understand what i t ’s all about. As the department's best informed union member, you must

3® These, of course, are over-simplifications and the actual steward-foreman-worker relationship will vary around these norms. It can be said, however, that these

49 pass along that understanding. Informing the work­ ers of an important decision is not enough. You should explain policy where necessary. The workers want to know the reasons for the union action. See that the workers get the union paper and other publications of the local and national offices. Keep your department bulletin board fully posted and up to date.' Advertise union and recreational activities From the above description it can be seen that the union expects an extensive effort from the shop steward.

Another

manual expresses it this way: Your day-to-day work in grievance settlement is a kind of education for the workers in your depart­ ment. But to educate them fully in unionism and an understanding of CIO and UAW policies, you will need to run discussion groups, call special meetings, talk to individual workers, write a column for the shop paper, in short use every possible means of reaching them to explain and explain and explain. Stewards and education committee should work hand in glove to build a more active and united membership. As a steward you will see to it that the workers in your department take fullest advantage of all special educational events, forums, classes, etc., put on by the local education committee. On the other hand, the committee depends on you.and your fellow stewards to let them know what is needed in an educational program. Real union education is a continuous process and Is everyone's responsibility.40

38 (continued) patterns usually exist in a shop which has an effective steward system although most unions foster and promote other than this kind of development. The prevalent current (and in many res­ pects not current, being as old as the trade union movement itself) focus upon communist infiltration into unions seriously limits the scope of confidence placed by many workers on the political activities of their unions. This varies very much with different unions and communities. 39 gor UPWA-CIO Stewards, o p . cit., pp. 35-36. How To Win For the Union, op. cit., p. 68.

50 It is evident from the stress placed on the educa­ tional function that unions feel this function to be among the more important duties of a shop steward.

In discussions

with union leaders, this element was emphasized again and again.

Their common point of view was that the future

of the union movement in large part depends upon workers understanding what unionism is and hopes to be on both the local and national level.

The steward again (as with near­

ly every other union function) is the key man in the success or failure of such an educational program for the worker. Committees♦

The steward in addition to the functions

already discussed often serves on committees which are set up to facilitate over-all union activities.

(Management

sometimes establishes similar committees.)

The personnel

of these committees is variable with workers, foremen, stew­ ards, higher supervisors, and union officials all involved in various proportions.

The steward is usually a desirable

individual to have on many of these committees because of his intimate acquaintance with many of the facets of unionworker-management relations.

The following list of com­

mittees were named in answer to the question, of committees do you serve on?” Department Grievance Committee By-Laws Committee

’’What kinds

51 Fair Employment Practices Committee Welfare Committee Insurance Committee Strike Committee Plant Grievance Committee Class Committee Job Wage-Level Committee Policy Committee Political Action Committee Executive Board for the Union Steering Cormnittee Industrial Relations Committee Discount Committee Auditing Committee Organizing Committee Education Committee The shop steward should assume responsibilities on as many of these as possible for his experience as a steward ex­ pands the scope of contributions he can give to them.

CHAPTER IV

PRACTICAL ASPECTS The primary focus of the study to this point has been upon what labor unions feel their shop stewards should do and should be. stewards.

It has been related to "ideal" shop

What they are and do in reality is a somewhat

different picture. The steward should be the key man in making the union function according to its conception of its role in any work­ ing situation where a shop-steward system is used.

The most

dynamic and enthusiastic labor union organizer cannot be ef­ fective unless he has dynamic and enthusiastic stewards working under him.

This primarily involves human relations

which in turn require day-to-day attention if any effort to shape or control them is successful.

The steward must meet

needs, real or imagined, which workers feel they have and about which their attitudes toward the union are centered. Some of the factors attached to success or failure of the union have already been suggested.

In practice, the

success or failure of a shop steward (hence, the Union) in a particular situation at a particular time will depend on the steward's over-all attitude toward, and skill in, deal­ ing with human relations.

This is interwoven with the

53 entire socio-cultural complex which characterizes his work situation (factors such as worker-management inter­ action, traditions; stereotyped attitudes, educational level of workers, group unity, etc.)*

in general, the

steward's success depends on the ability to act as a supervisor for the union in all of its ramifications. The steward as a supervisor.

The variations be­

tween what shop stewards actually are in their role of supervisor and the norms set up for them are infinite.

On

the whole, stewards exhibit capacities common to supervisors everywhere.

The particular qualities needed in a lower-

level supervisor are fairly universal and involve such categories as leadership, technical knowledge, ability to deal with people, etc.

Every supervisor reflects, above

all, his own personality.

No two are exactly alike or will

approach similar problems in the same manner.

There are

important factors shaping the supervisory relations of a steward which vary (often subtly) from those of his manage­ ment counterpart--the foreman.

One of the most signifi­

cant items in this respect is found in the variations in the method of selection and was cited earlier in this study.

Stewards are usually democratically elected by

54 their fellow-workers.

Inasmuch as he is elected from

and not appointed jbo the workers whom he represents, re­ lationship with them has a kindred spirit which is not present in the workex*-foreman relationship.

In contrast,

however, the supervisory position of the steward lacks that social-distance factor which enables the foreman to exercise a degree of aloofness in his authority not pos­ sible for the steward.

These are extremes.

The "best1'

supervisor whether steward or foreman will combine the formal authority with the informal identification.

This

achieves a blending which promotes the interests of both labor and management. In actuality, the steward is rarely looked upon as a "supervisor” by his fellow-workers in the same sense that they look upon their foreman or company supervisor. This reflects somewhat the workers 1 over-all attitudes toward labor and management as such.

There are some work­

ers, of course, who resist and resent what they feel is "encroachment" into their freedoms; but as a general rule

4l por reason, however, the union frequently has a problem in the caliber of its shop stewards. Fre­ quently the type most needed will not undertake the re­ sponsibility and the place goes by default to hotheads unsuited to the give and take of day-to-day collective bargaining. (See Williamson, op. cit., p. 123*)

55 it can be said merely that working people view their relationship with unions as less fundamentally-necessary to,themselves than the relationship they have with their employer. Although the steward _is the union to most workers, they do not feel compelled to follow his direction in the same way they feel compelled to obey a foreman.

Lack of

obedience to a foreman often means the threat of losing his job while failure to obey a steward reflects itself in the more abstract sphere of ’’labor's goals and objectives.” Discipline in the physical sense is a more difficult thing for a steward to exercise than it is for a foreman.

The

foreman has more tangible force at his command--he need not rely so heavily on ideological weapons.

The variation %

here is tremendous; ranging from shops where the union has almost complete control to those where the foreman has an autocratic position with almost unlimited power over the workers including hiring, firing, etc.

This is not to

imply that the discipline of workers is necessarily less in their relationship to their unions than to management but merely that a steward's (therefore, the union’s) dis­ cipline is more dependent upon human relations than is a foreman's who has the more tangible coercive factors at his disposal.

The foreman can manipulate the physical

factors which surround the worker's job; the steward must

56 manipulate human relations to exercise his control. The current trend of labor and management is to modify their attitudes somewhat by shifting toward the other’s approach.

Management is increasingly recognizing

that the human relations factor should play a more im­ portant role in company-worker interaction.

In turn, the

unions, as they have become more firmly entrenched in the collective bargaining process, have tended to increase their use of physical controls similar to management's. Influenced by the ever-growing attitude for mutual coopera­ tion, the two have, in practice, become more like each other in their approaches to workers' relationships at the grass-roots level. Internal discipline.

The CIO has more of a prob­

lem with internal discipline than the AFL.

This is true

primarily because the CIO is a relatively new organiza­ tion and has as yet no firmly entrenched institutional patterns.

Many are just now coming of a g e .

Aaron Leven-

stein in an article in the Annals of the American Academy for the Political and Social Sciences, makes the following comment on this: The CIO suffers from the instability of its membership. The conservatism of the AFL is an ad­ vantage in that its members, skilled craftsmen, are more mature, more steeped in union tradition, and loyalty, cemented together by long years of con­ tributing to union welfare and benefit funds.

57 The CIO has not yet had time to build such vested interests for the individual rank-and-filer. Con­ servative institutionalism is not altogether a handicap 3 2 The shop-steward system provides the kind of workerlevel contact necessary to provide stability in a group which has not yet developed strong internal attitudes that are uniform.

This, in part, suggests why the CIO's

almost exclusive use of the steward-system while the AFL does so only in limited circumstances.

(Another primary

factof is the structure of the unions themselves--the AFL being organized on a craft basis and the CIO on an industry-wide basis.) The steward-system, as such, is still relatively new, institutionally.

The efficiency of its functioning,

in reality, is directly related to a considerable degree to the length of time a steward-system has been operating in a plant.

As the pattern of interaction which it re­

quires between worker, foreman, and steward, becomes more and more established, the range of services rendered and the functions engaged in by the steward will increase. Activities which originally require a great amount of

tt

Aaron Levenstein, Interfederation Warfare and its Prospects,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2^8:50, November, 19^6•

58 personal attention and supervision by the steward becomes automatic for the w o r k e r s . ^3

This is particularly true

of the mechanics of grievance procedure. Relating to the area of steward-foreman inter­ action and the factors of discipline and stability, the following observation is made by N. W. Chamberlain in Advanced Management: The charge is frequently voiced by company officials that stewards in the shops have usurped the foreman’s executive role, countermanding his instructions or issuing orders of their own. They cite instances when workers under the foreman’s direction have challenged his executive capacity. Chamberlain goes on to say that this situation can be cor­ rected by shifts in the mutual attitude management and the union have toward each other. sented on the working level.)

(in this case, as pre­

He feels that the solution

is not to be found in changing the institutional patterns represented in a shop with a steward-system.

^3 An example of this would be found in a shop in which the steward-system had just been put into operation. In the beginning, a steward would have to devote much of his time teaching the workers how to use the contract, and the services the steward had to offer in the handling of grievances. As the steward's relation in the grievance process become more familiar to the workers and an establish­ ed pattern for them, the steward would begin to function in areas where he was before limited because he had no time for them. In this respect, it should be kept in mind that the steward's union activities on company time are usually de­ fined in the contract. ii4

N. W. Chamberlain,

„Functional

Roles of Union and

59 Although, in practice, stewards often find them­ selves in positions where they can usurp their authority, stress was placed by all unions covered in this study upon the necessity for the steward to clearly limit his activities to those which come under his particular juris­ diction.

The unions instruct the steward to make a point

not to encroach upon the foremanTs duties.

Difficulty

comes from the fact that the conceived duties of each overlap at many points.

If a cooperative friendly atti­

tude toward each other exists, the situations mentioned above will usually be avoided.

If the shop steward has

been trained to carry out his responsibilities intelli­ gently with similar training for the foreman, most of the friction between them can be eliminated. Problem of training.

The problem of properly train­

ing the steward in order that he may be able to effectively carry out the responsibilities given him is, in practice, one of the major problems faced by the unions (as is foreman training for companies).

There is ever-widening

acceptance of the fact that these first-line supervisors are the key men in any organization which requires in that organization a division of function between the staff and

UH /

\ ^ (continued) Management,” Advanced Management, 12:147* December, 1947*

6o the line--they are the link between the two.

An evalua­

tion of what is expected of the steward in relation to what he is trained for, and capable of doing is presented In the following statement by C . P. Mugridge: Shop stewards . . . should be well informed; but unfortunately the opposite is usually true. Except in rare instances, unions are not in a position to pass along pertinent information about the intricacies of a business. This has to be done by management. How can stewards properly and justly represent their constituents or resolve grievances factually if they are ignorant of timestudy techniques, job-evaluation systems, bonus plans, reasons for technological changes, safety rules, disciplinary rules, and countless other things affecting labor relations? . . . Union stewards, ignorant of business facts and treated by management as unnecessary meddlers, are at the mercy of the radical group present in every plant.^5 The circumstances expressed above are all too-true in many union-management situations.

The union is usually

in no position to evaluate accurately all of the neces­ sary factors relating to a particular plant or business because of this lack of information.

When the union acts

as an agent of the worker, however, the resolving of problems which arise through a lack of pertinent informa­ tion necessitate the presentation of such information.

^ G. P. Mugridge, “Better Management and Better Union Leadership,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 248:76, November, 19"ZT6-

6l Increasingly, there is an attitude by both labor and management that the workers in a plant have the right to know many of the facts concerning the operation of that plant.

Such matters become acute problems in proportion

to the attitude of cooperation or non-cooperation exist­ ing between the two groups. The steward’s approach (or at least what it should be) to some of the problems above is described in a shop steward manual as it discusses the need for the steward to know the workers and their work and to train himself in order to be able to carry out his functions: Just as you study the contract provisions and the grievance procedure to take advantage of every opportunity for improving your members’ working conditions, so you study the relations of each in­ dividual man or woman to his or her job, to see how it can be improved. In any department this has to be done systematically. You make out a record sheet, if your memory won't hold all the facts, for each workers and each operation in your area. Some of the information you need is: . . . current job, and past experience . . . operation . . . hourly rate or piece rate . . . output per man and per hour . . . key to job classification if y o u ’re under a classi­ fication system. This information can be gathered during lunch periods and other spare time. Much of it will come to you during the regular grievance work. Some can be collected at local and departmental meetings. You also need to know about sanitary and safety conditions, eating facilities, equipment needed and used by the workers, and similar general facts about the department as a whole. You may say, "What am I, a steward or a production engineer? Why do I need all that dope?"

62 No, you're not supposed to be an engineer, nor is this an attempt to take over "management's preroga­ tives." You need the information in a systematic form, to have all the background facts about any grievance that may be brought up, and to keep watch for abuses which should be corrected .^6 In this whole area, the attitude which most unions suggest as being the optimum one, is one in theory, which requires a very nearly "ideal" shop steward to implement it in prac­ tice.

^ With respect to. the training of union personnel in

1945^7 the following statement discusses it and is from Williamson and Harris', Trends in Collective Bargaining: . . . The needle trades' unions pioneered in training shop committeemen in tested methods of adjusting differences and of "policing the contract." Similar educational programs have been launched by unions in auto, steel, flat glass, rubber, and some other mass production industries. A few universities" have maintained summer schools for workers and at Wisconsin, public funds have long been used for this - purpose.

46

How To Win For the Union, op. cit., pp. 34-

36. ^7 it is important to note that the development of training techniques and an increasing awareness of the problems of training has been very rapid in many labor unions. In the groups studied personally in this study, those which had "training-awareness" were in the process of expanding this function as rapidly as circumstances would allow. The primary limiting factor in nearly all cases seemed to be one of financing. The quality of train­ ing media is developing constantly as can be seen in compar­ ing pamphlets and training manuals which were printed in 19^5 with those of 1950. The material is essentially the same but the method for getting it across has been refined considerably.

63 ’A serious obstacle to the development of better union leaders ,1 says one United Steelworkers of America official, ’is the lack of proper training by management of its own rank and file .1 Two other steelworkers officials have this to say of guides to grievance handling and other matters of unionmanagement relations put out by their organization: ’We are not too happy over the fact that these publications are read more carefully and extensively by management personnel than by our own staff, local union leaders and members.’ Nevertheless, handbooks like the Steelworkers guides illuminate the spirit and philosophy of collective bargaining and are useful educational material for both foremen and shop committeemen .^8 The feeling toward this particular problem by labor union officials contacted personally in this study was that the functions which their unions engaged in were all important­ ly related to the role unions should play in working situa­ tions everywhere.

These men (and women); all felt that as

the shop-steward system becomes a more familiar entrenched institutional way of operating in labor-management rela­ tions, more adequate training methods will be devised and put into effect to meet the needs which these situations bring into focus. The UAW-CIO, as an example of this kind of training, prints a 16-page pamphlet called ABC of Time Study for use by shop stewards in understanding some of the problems related to time study.

^

It has an opening sentence stating:

Williamson, op. cit., pp. 123-124.

64 "The Steward’s Opinion is as Good as the Time Study M a n 1s."^9

Then* it discusses the particular problems

which steward's may face with regard to time study; gives a brief history of the development of it as a technique; a simple explanation of today's concept of time study; and the method of doing a time study; the steps involved, etc.

This information is presented in a question-answer

style with drawings to facilitate the reader's understand­ ing.

Near the end of the pamphlet, after time study tech­

nique has been described, the following question is raised. It.suggests the role unions feel their stewards should take in meeting problems which arise from time study evalua­ tions: Question: Just on the basis of what I have learned here I know I am no time study expert, but suppose I do come up against the company time expert, can I argue with him on even terms? Answer: Sure. The steward in a department, or the chief steward, or the man on a job knows enough about the job itself to make up for the fact he is not a time study expert. On a job in your department you are just as expert as anyone in the time study department. Don't let the phony figures confuse you.50

^

ABC of Time Study, pamphlet (28 West Warren, Detroit 1, Michigan: UAW-CIO Education Department), p. 2. 50 Ibid., pp. 12-13.

65 The pamphlet ends by describing the equipment needed for time study, and how the steward can provide himself with it.

He is told that the Time Study and Engineering De­

partment of the UAW-CIO will send out a man to help him with these problems whenever he needs such help and that a man will be provided to teach a group if workers want to organize an evening class.

A suggestion for the stew­

ard to investigate the field further and a list of recom­ mended books which would provide further information con­ cludes the pamphlet. Democratic leadership.

There is a continued em­

phasis by the unions that the steward educate himself on union matters.

In theory, one of the reasons he should

do this is that he will then be better able to give demo­ cratic leadership to the workers whom he represents.

Union

SI literature"^ stresses the idea that one of the reasons for the development of the shop-steward system was that the unions which fostered it:

It should be mentioned that almost all union lit­ erature as it relates to this study is either CIO or independent in its origin. The AFL unions contacted did not have extensive material in this field. (see Appendix I). The factors involved in the reasons for this are varied, and most of them have been discussed elsewhere in this study.

66 . . . were essentially much more democratic than the old line craft unions. They were organ­ ized by workers in the shop, and these workers were determined that the control of their unions should remain in their own hands. So they set up controls in the union from top to bottom to make sure the policies followed by the union were those which had been decided on by rank and file members themselves. And shop stewards were elected in the shops instead of being appointed from above .52 The modification in methods of selection from the norm of democratically selecting the steward has been dis­ cussed earlier in this study.

Democratic participation by

members of a local in the activities of the union and the degree to which this is encouraged or discouraged varies considerably.

Democratic participation can be hindered

or fostered by the shop steward; and at the same time, no amount of rank-and-file participation, as such, can effec­ tively guarantee democratic practices unless fixed tech­ niques for participation and control are present.

The shop-

steward system, wherever it is set up, does provide the kind of framework in which democratic participation in union activities can exist.

The primary factor will always be

the desire (or lack of it) by the workers to engage active­ ly in the affairs of their union. This is one shop steward manual's attitude toward

How To Win For the Union, op. cit., p.

76.

67 democratic leadership by the steward: The job of a democratic leader is not easy. While you must advocate and explain major union policies as they apply to your shop so the workers will understand and agree with them, at the same time you must accept and work with decisions made“by the majority of your members even though you may not agree with them. Democratic leadership is neither a matter of giving workers a blueprint of what you think should be done, nor a matter of refusing to take a position till you are sure it will be a popular o n e . A real leader works out a positive solution to a problem with the workers themselves and then organizes the activity of the entire group to carry out the solution in the way agreed to by the majority. Real leadership can only be developed over a period of time.53 As has been suggested in another part of this study, the degree of democracy actually present varies with every union and situation.

In those matters where higher union policy

countermands a local decision (this actually occurs only rarely) the process theoretically is still democratic (from the union point of view) for the higher policy-making groups are the delegated representatives of the workers. Almost all of the shop steward manuals point out the democratic structure of their unions.

One example:

On purely local matters, the local union through its officers and membership, determines its course of action. Likewise the state and district councils on their respective affairs. The executive board made up of representatives of different international unions in the CIO hold their offices by virtue of be­ ing elected at national conventions.

53 ibid., p . 64.

68 National policy is set at the annual CIO con­ ventions through motions and resolutions voted on by the entire delegation. The Executive Board makes recommendations to the membership which are accepted or rejected through vote. The Executive Board then carries out the mandate of the conven­ tion for the following year within the limits of the policy set in the Convention.5^ The above example seems to carry out the contention of Williamson:

No bargain of any kind can be successful unless the parties to it adequately represent those for whom they act. In collective bargaining, where the bargaining agents speak for thousands and sometimes hundreds of thousands, authentic representation is absolutely crucial. Back of labor's agents in collective bargaining there must be as genuinely a free and democratic union structure as workability permits.55 The shop steward, in practice, is playing an everexpanding role in forcing communication both ways and putting democracy into practice on the worker-level in union matters.

The structure exists in a shop-steward

system for democratic participation and two-way communica­ tion. S t e w a r d 's changing r o l e .

A basic problem related

to the leadership role of the shop steward stems from the manner in which this role changes as the union steward

The Steward rs Job in the URGLPWA-C IO, op. cit., p . 7Williamson, op. cit., p. 2^0.

69 becomes an established institution in a plant or industry. As a rule top management adjusts itself more quickly to the new conditions which unionization brings than does its subordinates.

Often when unions find themselves with a

newly-negotiated contract, they also find little disciplined leadership capable of carrying out the terms of the agree­ ment.

It may take months and even years in newly organized

industries for subordinate leadership and shop committeemen handling complaints to adopt the spirit of collective bar­ gaining shown by the higher union and corporation officials. The best shop steward is not necessarily the man who signed up the most union members or was otherwise active during an organizing campaign.

Nor is the old-fashioned

foreman who has a ”what-I-say-goes!f philosophy the best adjuster of grievances of the day-to-day variety.

The union

and management often find that when these men get together to try to conciliate a dispute, collective bargaining in the cooperative sense does not have a chance.

The experience

of many of the unions has shown that peaceful collective bargaining must be performed by negotiators, not by mili­ tants.

Acting as a lower-level supervisor of union activi­

ty, then, means the 11ideal” shop steward may vary with the stage of collective bargaining interaction at a particular plant at a particular time.

The stages involved have been

described in the following manner:

70 If a recognition of the human side of collective bargaining is crucial in the case of the rank and file of workers, it is even more so in the case of leaders--both of management and men. The success or failure of collective bargaining in the long run will be largely the resultant of this personal equation. In the case of union leaders, especially, the three distinct stages in the development of collec­ tive bargaining call for three different traits of personality: (l) The fighting stage, when the union is battling for recognition; (2 ) the stage of negotiations, when both sides meet across the bargaining table; and (3 ) the administrative stage, when both are called upon to make the collective bargaining agreement work in the daily welter of practical shop detail. In the first stage even the language of collective bargaining is saturated with the metaphors of war­ fare . . . . What this terminology reveals is an un­ derlying concept of conflict, sometimes covert, some­ times open, and often violent and bloody . . . . The second stage of collective bargaining, that of nego­ tiations around the conference table, may be colored by a residue of mutual alienation and suspicion . . . (and) when the contract is finally signed, its ad­ ministration, the third stage of collective bargain­ ing, may be plagued by the carry-over of the same discords which existed during the organizing and negotiation stages .56 The shop steward is an active union participant in each of the above mentioned stages.

As such, he must ex­

hibit a range of attitudes and qualities rarely found in a single individual.

For this reason, the best man for a

steward in one situation may not be the best one in another.

Ibid., pp. 197-200.

71 Judgment on the adequacy of a specific steward must be made only in relation to the norms for the particular collective bargaining stage found in his situation.

The

ultimate norm in all cases is to eventually have the situation which calls for, and the steward to fill, the role of a cooperative conciliator. The steward is (as is any supervisor) a tool which is used by the union to implement and supervise union policy on the work-level.

Shop stewards (as do foremen)

reflect the attitude of the officials under whom they work and from whom they receive their direction.

William­

son points outs . . . the subordinates of management and union leaders take their cues from the men on top. If the supervisor has reason to believe that the front of­ fice would like to "put a crimp1’ in the union, he doesn't need explicit instructions. "Just because those guys on the belt have got a union, do they think they don't ever have to shake the lead out of their pants, or that the conveyor is located in the men's room?” Similarly, if the shop steward is convinced that the union leaders would like to keep needling the management, he doesn't need to be told what to do. ’’The tool crib is too far away, isn't it? The food is so lousy at the company cafeteria that everybody's getting heartburn. The foreman's just a wolf, he doesn't keep his mind on his work at all, why yester­ day he was making passes at that pretty Polish girl, and she 's going to quit if he doesn't stop, a good worker, too.57

57 Ibid., pp. 207-208.

72 The steward's over-all role in any situation, then, can best be determined by evaluating the mutual attitude of management and the union toward each other, and the total sphere of activities the union feels it should participate in.

The steward has a function in relation to all of

these activities. The future role of the steward in union-worker-management relations depends upon many variable factors.

His

role will be an expanding one to the degree that the union movement itself expands.

At the present time, the two

fields which offer the greatest number of non-unionized workers are the white-collar workers and governmental em­ ployees— national, state, and local.

There are few basic

reasons why union organizing should not be successful in. the white-collar groups.

The principal deterrent seems to

be the intangible factor of worker identification.

White

collar workers traditionally simply have not identified themselves with the ’‘laboring’' class.

The social status-

symbol of white-collar work has generally been higher than that of so-called blue-collar work.

In those areas where

they are organized, the practice of using stewards or paid full-time business representatives varies considerably. The steward system, however, is well-adapted to serve most of these groups. Governmental employees present a more difficult

73 picture for the unions.

In this area, collective bar­

gaining (in its orthodox conception) has a primary ob­ stacle in that the fixing of wage rates, working conditions, job classifications, etc., are set by legislation or* ad­ ministrative regulation rather than by negotiation between employer and employee.

Shorn of its principal function

(that of getting a larger share of the profits of production for the worker) the problem arises as to just what functions labor unions have in the field of public employment.

In

discussing the limitations on its activities faced by the union, in this respect, A. M. Cooper makes the following observations: Obviously, when.a union cannot legally strike ■ against government, cannot picket or term "unfair 11 any government owned project, and cannot by any other means compel government to bargain collec­ tively, the leaders -of such a union are definitely handicapped in their efforts to serve the workers who continue as members of such an organization. It is further true that, since full publicity in the press to the failure of various strikes against government, it is reasonable to assume that the average civil service employee soon comes to ap­ preciate that his civil service commission is far more powerful than any labor union in determining his conditions of employment. At the same time, this publicity given to the inability of organized labor to bargain successfully, with government, reaches all American Workers.5o

A. M. Cooper, "Labor C a n ’t Do Business with Government," Public Utilities Fortnightly, 42:88, July 15> 1948.

74 The key to further development here depends on whether a need for collective bargaining with government arises. One writer on the subject thinks that it does: . . . if personnel policy is to be democratically determined rather than autocratically dictated by a management with a free and powerful hand, some system akin to collective bargaining must be evolved. The fact is, it has been in a large number of federal and municipal services.59 Whether these relationships can be modified to an extent which will increase the range of valid union functions is a question which only time can answer.

One of the primary

elements will probably be the degree to which government keeps the differential between working conditions for governmental and industrial employees minimized.

At present,

governmental jurisdictions (with such exceptions as the T.V.A.) rarely have the formalized grievance techniques found in industry and even less-frequently, any individual on the worker-level who corresponds to the shop steward in industry.

59 Sterling D. Spero, "Collective Bargaining in the Public Service," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 24b:153j November, 1946"

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Summary.

To summarize the more important points

covered in this study, a brief review of each chapter will be m a d e . In the introductory chapter, the point is made that labor unions have become a strong, permanent, social, econ­ omic and political force in the United States.

Labor unions

advocate for themselves two primary functions; collective bargaining and promoting the growth and development of a strong labor organization.

At the worker level, the shop

steward is called upon to promote and carry out these func­ tions.

In the craft unions, the shop steward (in the

industry-wide unions 1 sense) duties are carried out by a full time, union-paid, union-appointed business agent. The "Steward and the Contract" chapter establishes the fact that in the minds of the worker, the foreman is management and the steward _is the union.

In "policing

the contract," the steward’s duty is primarily the mechan­ ical operation of comparing the contract provisions with the actual conditions found in the shop.

When there are

discrepencies, a formal procedure exists whereby they can be resolved in relationship with the contract.

Because of

76 the human relation problems involved in the day-to-day work situation, however, informal situations. tive approach.

contract provisions cannot cover

This necessitates a clinico-coopera-

Using this method, the steward is required

to know the workers in his department according to their jobs, skills, etc.

In addition, he must be acquainted with

their personality characteristics.

The clinico-coopera-

tive approach calls upon the steward to "face-up" to prob­ lem situations.

Instead of allowing a grievance to develop

requiring treatment through the formal grievance procedure, the steward attempts to correct troubled workers before the friction develops into dangerous proportions.

The union

instructs its steward to be cooperative with his foreman in grievance matters.

If grievances can be settled at the

first level, major issues which affect the whole plant can be given more consideration by the higher echelons--both union and m a na ge me nt . The third chapter deals with the steward In his rela­ tionship with "building the union."

In this category, the

steward must attempt to secure 100 per cent union member­ ship in his shop; approach new employees and sell them on the union; give leadership to the workers;

educate the

workers; meet off-the-job needs of the workers; and in many shops, he must help to organize the workers for political action.

To be effective, he must work in these

77 areas with the human relationships involved in all of these activities. The chapter on "practical aspects," distinguishes between what, the steward should do and should be with what he actually does and actually is.

As a supervisor, on the

whole, stewards exhibit capacities common to supervisors everywhere.

The steward is rarely looked upon as a "super­

visor" by his fellow-workers in the same sense that they look upon their foreman.

Obedience to a steward reflects

itself in the more abstract sphere of "labor’s goals and objectives."

The steward is required to manipulate human

•relations in order to exercise his control over the work­ ers.

Although the union instructs its stewards to make a

point not to encroach upon the foreman’s duties, difficulty is encountered because the conceived duties of each overlap at many points.

The problem of training the steward is

one of the major issues faced by unions.

In theory, train­

ing will give the steward the necessary tools for better democratic leadership of the rank-and-file members.

The

steward’s over-all role in any situation can be determined by evaluating the mutual attitude of management and the union toward each other. Conclusions.

As previously stated, the purpose of

this study is to show that the union shop steward has an important role in the administration of labor-management.

78 relations; that this role is a variable one both in scope and emphasis; and that human relations are at the center of the steward’s over-all activities.

In the process of

unfolding the material gathered in thi3 study, the premises appear to be valid. For their inception, labor unions formed in the mass production industries in the United States established the shop-steward system as the basis for their whole organ­ ization.

The CIO unions from their very beginning laid

every stress on the need for a steward system and had it incorporated into their written contracts.

Industrial

unions, because they encompass all the workers in a given industry, needed a structure which enabled the workers in every department to take up their grievances through a representative of their own choosing, without prolonged delay or extensive negotiations. The industrial unions are essentially much more democratic than the old line craft unions.

This observa­

tion was made very clear during the field work for this study.

The typical craft union setup provides only for a

top committee or business agent (in most instances, ap­ pointed by the union) to handle grievances and can be ap­ plied only in small shops or where the members of a given craft are a numerical minority in a plant.

In the Building

Trade’s Union (AFL), for example, the first man on the job

79 automatically becomes the shop steward.

He i s n ’t demo­

cratically elected to the position nor is he entrusted' with the typical duties of the CIO's steward.

The A F L 's

steward, generally speaking, handles only routine matters' such as dues collection and in addition, watches out for the union's interest on the particular job.

Any complaints

from his fellow-workers are passed on to the business agent. In the CIO, per contra, the workers have set up controls in their unions from top to bottom in order to guarantee that policies followed by the union are those which have been decided on by the rank and file members themselves.

In contrast, the AFL appears to have a -"top-

heavy ’1 organization wherein the dues-paying member has little-discretion in policy-making matters.

The AFL in

terms of its constitution is an "association of such trade and labor unions as shall conform to its rules and regulations."

Thus, its constituent parts are not individ­

ual workers but unions or associations of workers federated together.

As one author states:

. . . The hardening of the governmental structure of the private association (in this category the author includes the AFL) into a well knit machine may be accompanied by the development of an inadapt­ ability in which the leadership is not truly repre­ sentative of the interests of the mass of the member­ ship of the society concerned. . . . The professional leaders and bureaucrats of the private society, as the specialists in verbal­ ization for the group, are apt to become so thoroughly

80 and completely attached to a set of doctrines or Ideologies that they lose their intellectual nimbleness. In such an instance, unreflecting attachment to a rigid ideology by the leadership . . . may endanger survival. . . . Over a long period the policies of the AFL regarding the role of government were astonish­ ingly similar to those of business .60 During the field work for this study, it should be noted, little cooperation was received from the AFL.

On

the whole, the local union officials contacted had little knowledge of the A F L ’s policies.

In a number of instances

conversation merely consisted of repeated denials that the particular union local was ’'communistic.’1

Indeed, the

questionnaire devised for this study was of little value in A F L ’s unions inasmuch as most questions were aimed at a democratically-elected steward and not a paid business agent. The functional role of the shop steward is an everchanging one and presents an area in which further study is required.

An understanding of human relationships in­

volved in unionized working conditions is inevitably based upon an understanding of the shop steward’s role.

As

6° v. 0. Key Jr., Politics, Parties, and Pressure Groups (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 19^7) j P P . 5769.

81 organized labor’s concept of its role in the total pic­ ture of industrial society evolves, the related role of the shop steward will evolve. point of emphasis today.

Cooperation is the focal

In addition a synthesis of the

clinical and legal approaches is required.

Increasingly

effective union-worker-management relations should be achieved as this develops. At the worker level, the steward is the key man in the activities of the union.

As Mr. John Despol stated

in a lecture delivered to the Institute of Industrial Relations, at UCLA "the shop steward, over a period of time, acts as a combination economist, lawyer, psycholo­ gist, prophet, administrator, policeman, and political leader.Almost

without exception, labor officials

contacted in this study expressed the opinion that "the union stands or falls on its shop-steward system."

Cor-

relatively, the success of the steward depends on the efficacy with which he handles the human relationships involved inJ the day-to-day work situation.

Despol, op. c i t ., p. 1.

S E L E C T E D

B I B L I O G R A P H Y

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

A.

BOOKS

Gardiner, Glenn, When Foreman and Steward Bargain. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, I n c ., 1945. 194 pp. Greenman, Russell L., and Elizabeth B. Greenman, Getting Along With Unions. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1947. “ T 58 pp. Key, V. 0. Jr., Politics, Parties and Pressure Groups. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1947767 pp. Millis, Harry A., and Royal Montgomery, Organized Labor. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1945. 930 pp. Selekman, Benjamin M . , Labor Relations and Human Relations. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1947• 255 PP Selekman, Benjamin M., Sylvia K. Selekman, and Stephen H. Fuller, Problems in Labor Relations * New York: McGrawHill Book Company, Inc., 1950. 672 pp. Slichter, Sumner H . , The Challenge of Industrial Relations. Ithaca, New York: The Cornell University Press, 1947• 196 pp. Williamson, S. T., and Herbert Harris, Trends in Collective Bargaining. New York: The Twentieth CenturyFund, 1945 245 P P •

B . PERIODICAL ARTICLES Baldwin, R. N., "Union Administration and Civil Liberties," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 248:54-61, November, Chamberlain, N. W., "Functional Roles of Union and Manage­ ment," Advanced Management, 12:143-147, December, 1947*

83 Cohen/ L., ’’Unions and Job Evaluation/' Personnel Journal, 27:7-12, May, 1948. Cooper, A. M., "Labor C a n ’t Do Business With Government," Public Utilities Fortnightly, 42:86-92, July 15, 1948. Dale, E., "When Labor Cooperates with Management," Advanced Management, 14:101-106, September, 1949« Golden, C. S., "Understanding Union Attitudes," Harvard Business Review, 27:4l2-4l8, July, 19^9* Gomberg, William, "Union Participation in High Productivity," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 248:70-75* November, 19763 Levenstein, Aaron, "Interfederation Warfare and its Pros­ pects," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 248:'44-53* November, 1946. Mugridge, C. F., "Better Management and Better Union Leadership," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 248:76-81, November, 194*61 Parka, D. S., "Labor Leadership Training," Personnel Journal, 23:154-158, October, 1944. Pfiffner, John M., "Participation As A Tool of Management," Personnel, 25 , No. 2; 143-154, September, 1948. Rushmore, H., "White-Collar Unionization," Management Re­ view, 35:8-9, January, 1946. Selekman, B. M., 'When the Union Enters," Harvard Business Review, 23, No. 2; 129-143, January, 1945• Shister, Joseph, "Trade Union and Government: Formal Analysis," Quarterly Journal of Economics, 60:78-112, November, 1945 * Spero, Sterling D . , "Collective Bargaining in the Public Service," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 248:146-153, November, 1946. Steinkraus, Herman W., "Industry’s Viewpoint on Labor's Demands," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, ’24*8:11-19, November, 1946TI

84 Taft, Philip, "Judicial Procedure in Labor Unions," Quarter­ ly Journal of Economics, 59*370-385* May, 1945. , "Understanding Union Administration," The Harvard Business Review, 24, No. 2; 245-257* January, 1946. Tead, Ordway, "Public Mindedneos Through Cooperation," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2487X51 -167 , November, 1946. "Training Program for Shop Stewards," Personnel, 26, No. 2; 76 , September, 1949"Who is Joining White-Collar Unions and Why," Factory Manage­ ment and Maintenance, 105*97-100, May, 1947Wolf son, Theresa, "Union Finance and Election," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 248: 31-36 , November, 1946.

C.

PAMPHLETS

A ® H 2L Study, pamphlet. 28 West Warren, Detroit 1, Michigan: UAW-CIO Education Department. 15 PPFor UPWA-CIO Stewards, pamphlet. 205 West Wacher Drive, Chicago 6~, Illinois: United Packinghouse Workers of America, CIO. 49 PP- ' How To Win For the Union--A Handbook for UAW-CIO Stewards and Committeemen, pamphlet. 1324 Maccabees Building, Detroit 2, Michigan: UAW-CIO, Education Department, revised, June, 194580 pp. . • Settling Plant Grievances, Bulletin No. 60, United States Department of Labor, Division of Labor Standards, 1943^6 pp. Shop Steward*s Manual, pamphlet. Machinists Building, Wash­ ington, D. C.: Research Departments, International Association of Machinists. 58 pp. Sure We Believe in Safety I Do You? , pamphlet. wealth Building, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Steelworkers of America. 12 pp.

1500 Common­ 'United

85 The Steward1s Job in The URCLPWA-CIO, pamphlet. United Rubber Worker’s Building/ High at Mill Street, Akron 8 , Ohio: URCLPWA-CIO Department of Education. 57 PP* The Union Is Y o u !, pamphlet. Publicity and Education Department, United Steelworkers of American. 32 pp. Winning Grievances, pamphlet. 28 West Warren, Detroit 1, Michigan: UAW-CIO Education Department.’ 35 PP*

D.

UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS

Despol, John A., "The Duties of a Shop Steward,1’ unpublish­ ed speech, delivered to Extension Class, of the In­ stitute of Industrial Relations, University of California at Los Angeles, February A, 19^8 . 6 pp. "Shop Stewards and Committeemen," material of Labor Rela­ tions Associates, Inc., 19^5* 9 PP*

A P P E N D I X

APPENDIX I

Although in practice the American Federation of Labor uses the shop-steward system sparingly, their theoretical definition of his role is very similar to the other groups.

(A primary exception, here, is that of

political action.)

The following is the text of a defini­

tion of the role and function of the shop steward which can be considered typical, not only of the AFL but of all the groups studied in this project.

It was supplied by

the Central Labor Council for Los Angeles, AFL, and was compiled by Labor Relations Associates, Inc.

It has a

more formal style than the manuals printed by the CIO and IAM, but its content is much the same.

SHOP STEWARDS AND COMMITTEEMEN FOREWARD There is a definite tendency and trend on the part of management to accept collective bargaining as a permanent characteristic of their enterprise. In establishments where this has been sincerely undertaken, union stewards and committeemen have responded by making a sincere effort to build up a constructive and cooperative labor-management relationship. Labor and management are learning how to make collective bargaining work. That the attainment of good relations is a joint undertaking and mutually beneficial is ■ evident by results that have been achieved. A direct result is a reduction in the number and im­ portance of labor-management disputes. Harmonious relations

87 are reflected in terms of higher morale and greater pro­ ductive efficiency. The purpose of this section is to analyze the means whereby these objectives may be promoted, and if they are absent to search for the reason. The means of promoting amicable human relations can­ not be found in a "stuffed shirt" philosophy. In this outline, no Utopian concepts or impractical objective ideals have been proposed. All material is field-tested, and has proven to be sound and effective in its application. There is no intent to teach or preach. Self-evident truths are placed in the spotlight of analysis. The shop steward is provided with a new tool or technique whereby labor and management may settle their problems in an equitable man­ ner and with the satisfaction of having disposed of o n e ’s own affairs within the family circle. The steward who exercises wise leadership in the plant and takes a constructive attitude toward day-to-day problems of labor-management relations, makes a real con­ tribution to morale, production and the development of a sound union.

THE JOB, DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A SHOP STEWARD

THE INDIVIDUAL The shop steward is an important individual to both the union and management. First and foremost, he should ertdeavor as a gentleman to foster mutual respect and confidence. A steward who lives up to this specification will hurdle many of his difficulties and travel far along the road to success and accomplishment. Sometimes elected, sometimes appointed, the steward usually attains his position because he has the marked qual­ ities of leadership which the job demands. Such qualities push him to the fore in elections, or singles him out from his fellow workers to the attention of higher union officers.

88 Usually he has the reputation of being a square shooter, of better-than-average intelligence and having a pleasant personality. He knows how to get along with people. How well he can utilize these ’qualities of'.leader­ ship is affected by two major forces: 1. The cooperation, assistance and instruction he receives from union officers to whom he reports. It is from this source that union policy is invariably formed. 2. His own will to learn and put into practical use such training, information, and instruction in an intelligent and impartial manner. He must execute union policy. Policy which is of necessity originated by top levels authority needs to be imparted to the shop steward from the "head-end." The steward needs specific aid and assistance on not only what he is expected to do, but how best he can accomplish It with lasting effect, with the least friction, and with credit to himself and the union. THE SHOP STEWARD IS DESERTED WHO DOES NOT RECEIVE THIS AID AND ASSISTANCE. The steward’s job is not only important, but valuable in many ways. He gets a liberal education in leadership and in dispensing justice which will serve him well during his entire lifetime as could no other training.

THE JOB The shop steward is to the union what the foreman is to the company. The membership looks to the steward for counsel and guidance. He is the first contact with new workers and new members of the union. He is the accredited outlet for dissemination of union information to the member­ ship. He is the contact officer between the membership and the higher union officials. To the membership, the steward is the Union and thus he exerts a definite influence in their thinking. The need for proper guidance and education in all aspects of a union shop steward’s activities immediately becomes apparent. THE UNION IS AS BRIGHT OR AS DULL, AS

89 GOOD OR AS BAD, AS PROGRESSIVE OR AS REACTIONARY AS ITS SHOP STEWARDS. A steward who does not lead, soon loses the con­ fidence of his fellow workers. He may posses the qualities of leadership but fail because he has not been properly or adequately Informed, and as a result, confidence Is lost in the union itself. Very often, union failure is a result of shop stew­ ard failure, for the reasons outlined below: 1. The shop steward usually has gained valuable experience when the contract was negotiated or revised. At least he has gained considerable experience in applying the rules of the agreement. He has handled grievances and made use of precedents established by cases he has won or lost. He has become acquainted with company officials and knows their personality and attitudes. Above all, he knows the membership he represents. WHEN A SHOP STEWARD IS CHANGED THAT VALUABLE BACKGROUND IS LOST. 2. Company officials dislike frequent changes in the shop steward personnel. They manifest this interest in many ways. For example, management usually insists that a contract clause be written which provides that a shop stew­ ard must be an American citizen, and must have been in the employ of the company a specified length of time, sometimes 6 months and frequently one year. Although such matters are considered to be solely within the discretion of the union, one management spokesman argued that: !IWe are interested In having a high type of man in these important jobs. Any foreign-born worker who loves America and all it stands for, and has the true Interests of, the workers at heart, wants to be a citizen. When he acquires citizenship, it is a mark of intelligence, loyalty and good' spirit. Length of service requirements are im­ portant so that the stewards will know the company, its officers and the employees. He will understand the contract and how it is interpreted and applied.” Company officials claim that each time a new steward is elected or appointed, the experience is much the same as though a new contract was written. All that has gone before in precedent, practice and interpretation is lost with the outgoing steward.

90 Duties of the shop steward. 1. The steward is the union organizer in his de­ partment or section. Whether there is a closed shop, union shop, preferential hiring or maintenance of member­ ship, his job is to maintain and build up membership. He is most influential in this respect because he is usual­ ly the first to contact new members or new employees, and by his acts, lasting impressions of the union are formed. 2. The steward polices the contract to make certain that each member secures all the rights and privileges to which he is entitled under the collective bargaining agree­ ment. He handles grievances resulting from improper applica­ tion of the contract rules, and all other disputes or griev­ ances which may arise in the course of day-to-day employ­ ment and human relations. 3. The steward serves the union on various committees. Sometimes he is a member of the contract negotiation commit­ tee, the general grievance committee, or others such as labor-management and plant sdfety committees. 4. He may be a member of the union executive com­ mittee or an officer of the local union. 5. In plants where employees are not on 1check-off* it usually is a duty of the steward to collect dues, and in the case of new members, to llect both initiation fees and dues. Depending upon the constitution and by-laws of the union, he may obligate candidates by administering oaths and inducting them into membership. In other in­ stances, he must advise the candidate for membership where and when to report for initiation.

6 . When a new employee refuses to join the union under a union shop contract, or members are delinquent in the payment of dues or assessments, the steward is obligated to immediately contact the employees involved. Delay in attending to matters of this nature may lead to disastrous effects on the status of the union. The company and union officials must be notified through the established procedure when the steward is unsuccessful in correcting the condition. Responsibilities. The shop steward is invested with responsibilities that are exacting and which demand all of the best in human

91 qualities. A few of these essential qualities are tact, intelligence, impartiality, absolute honesty, freedom from religious, political or racial prejudice, reliability and sincerity of purpose. In addition, he must thoroughly understand the scope of his duties and responsibilities. A few of these responsibilities are as follows: 1.

Organization:

One of the most important functions of the steward is the task of building up union membership. He should strive to secure and maintain a 100 per cent membership in his department. If the membership is permitted to fall off, some rival or independent union may seek to seize representation. The employer, sensing some lassitude or internal weakness, may attempt to jockey the union into a National Labor Relations Board election in a test of strength to determine the exact status of the union. Under a maintenance of membership contract, where there may be cliques composed of non-members, it is im­ portant to immediately contact each new employee before he may be influenced into not joining. If there is a voluntary check-off provision in effect, the steward should request new members to sign the check-off authority at the same time his application is taken. The responsibility rests upon the steward to create a good impression of the union. New employees should be told about the benefits in wages and working conditions which the union has secured for all employees, how the contract safeguards employees from discriminatory acts, how all share in the benefits of the collective bargaining agreement and how all should share in responsibility and costs. Even under a closed or union shop contract, it is important to contact new employees and sell the union. It is far better to make the new employee a friend by inviting him in rather than clubbing him In. If management is fair, give them a plug too, d o n ’t be afraid of being criticized for saying ’’this is a swell place to work.” Responsible stewards never knock manage­ ment as an organizing tactic. It backfires. A Union does not need to scare a new employee into joining. The labor movement is grounded on a much more firm foundation. If a new member later discovers that the employee-employer relationship has been misrepresented, he will feel that he

92 was tricked into joining and his confidence in the union will be weakened or lost. Secure his membership, instead, by pointing out how both he and the union will mutually benefit, what the union has already accomplished and its future goal. 2.

Policing the contract:

In policing the contract, a shop steward’s integrity is open to challenge. Unless he has the consent of higher authority, he should never waive any clause of the contract nor make any ’side agreements’ in conflict with the terms of the agreement. The steward is responsible for securing for the mem­ bers, every concession which the contract provides. Like­ wise, a company which operated under a progressive in­ dustrial relations policy instructs its foremen and super­ visory personnel to grant employees every privilege and benefit to which the collective bargaining agreement en­ titles them. Be consistent. Do not ask for special privileges which conflict with the contract and you will not be embarrassed by having to refuse a like concession requested by a foreman. 3-

Handling grievances:

The handling of grievances is a grave responsibility. The steward’s knowledge of his job and his ability to secure a prompt and just settlement has a direct bearing on the well-being, happiness, wealth and security of human being. 4.

Committee work:

A steward who also serves on the contract negotiating committee can contribute his experience in applying the contract and point out any frailities or ambiguities which may have appeared. Constructive ideas advanced for the modification or clarification of the contract should be supported by reference to actual cases and specific in­ stances. The responsibility of the steward is multiplied when he also serves on such committees because his sugges­ tions will apply plantwise rather than to the narrow con­ fines of his department. Whether or not he is a member of the negotiation committee, a good shop steward should be ready to offer the committee constructive suggestions

93 based on his experience. 5-

Dues collection:

The financial responsibilities of a steward, which may involve the collection of dues, assessments, fines and initiation fees, are second only to moral responsibilities. A signed receipt should be issued for any union monies paid into his keeping. The reasons are two-fold: (a) It will dispel any doubt in the mind of a member that he will be given proper credit for the sum entrusted to the steward's care. (b) Conducting a union on accepted principles of good business creates confidence in the union and gives it stature. Both the members and management notice these matters and have greater respect for a union operated on a sound business-like basis. Do not comingle union money with your own funds, and make your financial report and remittance at the earliest* time possible. Prompt reports lessen the work of the financial secretary and will avoid embarrassment when members make inquiry in regard to their union status. Under no circumstances should a steward violate the trust placed in him by his fellow workers by temporarily using union funds for other purposes. It is wrong in principle and may destroy an otherwise spotless record. A UNION STEWARD MUST LIVE BEYOND REPROACH. Nothing so thoroughly discredits a labor union than scandal over financial transactions, whether small or large. Authority. Shop stewards, like foremen, have a pre-determined area of authority. Definite limits of authority are essen­ tial if there is to be orderly procedure, efficient handling of grievances and uniform application of the collective bargaining contract. The steward should observe the following rules to avoid stepping out of his limits of authority. 1. He should thoroughly understand the contract, its interpretation and how it is applied, but when in doubt, he should consult the Business Representative or the Chief

94 Steward.

Never guess--be sure.

2. If a new problem arises which may establish an important principle or precedent, he should again consult higher union authority. An act which may appear wise on its face, may have far-reaching complications and upset well-laid plans causing irrevocable injury to the member­ ship at large.

3 . The shop steward level of authority is usually coterminous with, and equal to the foreman level. Run-ofthe-mill grievances can generally be disposed of at this level by either reaching a settlement or correcting the cause. Ninety per cent of ordinary ’beefs' should be settled at this point. A fair measure of the beginning and end of a steward's authority is usually found in how far the foreman is authorized to go. 4. In the same way that a shop steward’s area of operation is staked out and defined with limits beyond which it is unwise to go, so also should others in higher authority respect this area as exclusively the field of the steward unless assistance is requested. It is not in the interest of orderly procedure for one in higher authority to ignore the shop steward and trespass his delegated authority. Such acts cause resent­ ment on the part of the steward, the membership and the foreman with whom the steward deals. The first principle of good management is to es­ tablish and rigidly respect levels of authority and de­ finite responsibility. Define the steward's area and limita­ tions, demand standards of performance, give him clearly defined duties and responsibilities, then respect his domain. It is unfair to bypass a steward under any circum­ stances by handling complaints or grievances taken 'over his h e a d ’ by some disgruntled worker. Attitude. When a union wins a National Labor Relations Board election, certification by that federal tribunal rules the union to be the 'sole and exclusive bargaining agency.’ Even though the union is not certified, the contract usual­ ly provides that the union represents all employees covered by the collective bargaining agreement.

95 This means that the union shop steward is the ex­ clusive representative authorized to settle grievances. A non-union employee may also present a grievance, but the National Labor Relations Act (Wagner Act) has been interpreted to mean that such individual can go that far but no further. That is, he can present a grievance, but only the exclusive bargaining agent can settle t h e ' grievance. The reason for this is self-evident. If grievances could be presented and settled by any individual without the participation of the union representative, precedents soon would be built up under the contract which never were intended by the negotiators. Also, violations of the contract could not properly be controlled. For example, a non-union employee through individual bargaining with the employer might waive overtime provided by the contract. As a result, non-union employees could secure preferential treatment by soliciting overtime work without overtime pay. Under the National Labor Relations Act, it is an unfair labor practice for an employer to settle a grievance presented by an individual without participation of a shop steward or other authorized union representative. There is nothing in the Act that requires a steward to handle the grievance of a non-union employee. If a non­ union employee presents a grievance, however, the steward must be permitted to be present when the grievance is settled if he demands such right. Regardless of a shop steward’s personal likes or dislikes for individual members of the union, he should be absolutely impartial to all when disputes arise. Be fair and settle each controversy on Its individual merits. A decision based on the mertis of the individual case can always be justified and shall not return to haunt you. Where there are non-union employees under a mainten­ ance of membership contract, do not destroy your reputation and your contract precedent by yielding to the temptation to exercise discrimination. There are more effective means of dealing with the chronic anti-union employee who seeks all the benefits of the contract yet shuns the ex­ pense and responsibility of maintaining it. The standard maintenance of membership union security clause usually provides: The union, its officers and members shall not

96 intimidate or coerce employees into joining the union or continuing their membership therein. If a non-union employee fails to enroll by solicita­ tion and despite the benefits guaranteed by the contract, there is nothing that requires the steward to associate with him, or to have other than necessary working contacts.

APPENDIX II

THE QUESTIONNIARE In order to gather more-detailed information on the work-level, relating to the attitudes and actual practices of shop stewards, a questionnaire was distributed among shop stewards on the job.

Three hundred questionnaires

were given out to union representatives who distributed them to stewards and then collected and returned them. Ninety-three were returned. Although the results of answers to these questions have been tabulated in terms of percentages, it must be emphasized that this questionnaire was designed to provide general informational data only, and was not set up to try to determine norms,* or to formulate what a so-called ’’average” steward’s reactions and attitudes might be.

The

findings show ranges in attitudes which would validate primarily self-evident generalizations such as:

”stewards'

attitudes toward their functions vary considerably and

* One of its major purposes, however, was to show that stewards, in the day-to-day handling of their duties, actual­ ly exhibit attitudes which vary considerably from the norms set down in manuals--to show that stewards are, after-all, variable human beings, not robots. This, of course, is in itself, a norm.

98 significantly reflect the steward's personality character­ istics."

This kind, of generalization was expected and

readily-predictable.

There were extremes of viewpoint

in answering some of the questions which reflected an interesting breadth in the range of possible attitudes. Only a few of the minor questions answered were sufficient­ ly one-sided to make reasonably valid generalizations from them. The following is a copy of the questionnaire, to­ gether with the number (in the parentheses) of answers received in each.

Discussion of these results and the

answers which required statement-answers follows the ques­ tionnaire .

99 PLEASE DO NOT SIGN YOUR NAME TO THIS QUESTIONNAIRE.

. . .

The purpose of this group of questions is to gather general information concerning the job and duties of the shop stew­ ard or grievanceman. The information gathered will be in­ corporated into a study whose broad objective is to examine human relations as found in working situations. Type of business (aircraft* dairy* trucking* etc.)___________ . Approximate number of employees in p l a n t ______ . Is your shop a (check one) (17) union shop (23) open shop (15) closed shop* or (37) maintenance of membership. 1.

How were you chosen? (47) elected by fellow workers* (42) appointed by the union* (3) other (explain).

2.

Are any of your duties specifically set forth in the contract (69) yes* (24) no.

3*

Are you the primary union contact with a new employee when he comes into your shop? (89 ) yes. If not, who is? (3)

4.

Rate the following as to probable order of importance (1* 2* 4, etc.) in your function as a shop steward. (239 ) contact new employees. (221) assist in writing grievances. (341)serve on committees. (390) collect dues (unless check off system). (251) union organizer. ( 209) police contract.

5.

Is the worker who has a .complaint required by the union to (52 ) contact you first. (21) contact foreman first. 123 y makes no difference.

6.

Do you make a written report of ( 10 ) complaints (79) grievances ( 3) only special types of disputes.

7.

a.

Do you bring the member who has a grievance face to face with the foreman or other worker involved in order to settle their differences?

100 (yes - 84) b.

(no - 7)______________

As a method of settling disputes do you find this generally 23 very satisfactory. 62 satisfactory. 3 not satisfactory.

8'.

On the average, how many disputes do you handle per week? (range: 1-20)

9.

Does your foreman generally cooperate with you on grievance matters? 27 most of the time. 45 some of the time. 19 hardly ever.

10.

Approximately how much time do you spend on union business while on the job? _____ _ hours per week. (range: 0-20 h r s .) Do you get paid by the company for time spent on ______ grievances ________ negotiations,________ other union activities.

11. 12. 13-

What kinds of committees do you serve on? Suggest what is your main reason for your wanting to be a shop steward? _________ _______________ ______ _ (range: b m o s .-10 y r s .) How long do you hold office? ______ y r s . Can you be reelected? (91 ) Can you be removed by a majority vote of the members? (91) » Can you be removed by a higher labor union official? (yes - ’27) (no - 64)______

14.

Does the company have any authority concerning your election or removal? (no - 90 ) ■ - •

15.

As a shop steward how far beyond the foreman can you take a dispute or grievance? (range: Business Agent President of the Company)______

16. Do you find it better to process grievances 70 Im­ mediately, or 18 wait until parties involved have cooled off. 17*

If you feel a worker has no merit to his complaint do you feel you should pursue it to a conclusion? (yes - 20) (no - 66) _____________

101 18.

Dp you keep records of past grievances from yours and other departments so as to guide you in future "Beefs?" (yes - 78 ) (no - 10)__________ ■

19 -

In your opinion are precedent rulings by the employer, foreman or higher ups on grievances as important as contract provisions? (explain) (yes - 17) (no - 71)

20.

What in your opinion is more important of the follow­ ing if you must select but one alternate. (9)

pleasing most workers or (80 ) giving just treatment to an aggrieved worker.

(83 ) knowledge of the contract or

(81) win a grievance in 1st step or

21.

(7)

chance a win in higher procedure.

Do you believe that your job or chance of promotion is affected in any way because of your position of shop steward: ( 9) helps me greatly (43) makes no difference

22.

(6) ability to in­ fluence opinions of workers or foremans.

(14) helps me a little (24 ) hurts me.

Do you look for trouble or do you overlook trouble until a grievance is brought to you? (look for - 38 ) (overlook - 41)_______

DO NOT SIGN THIS QUESTIONNAIRE

102 3•

Sample answers to the second part (Are you the primary union contact with a new employee when he comes into your shop? If not, who is?) were: "any member" "Department Steward" "is condition of employment"

4.

(Rate the following as to probable order of importance (l, 2, 3> etc.) in your function as a shop steward.) The figures shown are the sums from 89 questionnaires which answered this one. The category with the lowest number is the one rated most important, etc.; there were complete ranges in variation from one qeustionnaire to another, even though the union in many cases was the same. (in this respect, theoretically, all the answers should have been the same in each union) The categories themselves are somewhat ambiguous, in that "union organ­ izer" and "contact new employees1’ are similar; and "Po­ lice contract" and 'kssist in writing grievances" are similar.

7*

Sample answers to this question member who has a grievance face man or other worker involved in differences?) were:

(Do you bring the to face with the fore­ order to settle their

"Yes, if he is available and the foreman will not willingly change his mind." "Yes, in a second meeting." "Yes, ordinarily--conditions govern." "When dispute is between specific parties and not over contract interpretation." "Depends upon circumstances." 12.

(Suggest what is your main reason for your wanting to be a shop steward?) This is a random sample of the answers to this question: "The betterment of my fellow man or woman." "I believe in unions." "My interest in the labor movement." "in order that I may assert my democratic rights on an economic level." "To see that the company lives up to the contract." "No one will assume the duty." "I like the work." "That satisfied feeling you get when you correct wrongs affecting your fellow workers. ' "I like to see things run right and smoothly."

103 "I was elected and chose to serve for them." "To serve the member and build the union.” ”To give the man in the plant a fair shake.” ”To help improve working conditions and to improve the standard of living for all the employees.” ’’Desire to improve working conditions.” ’’To assist others who do not have qualifications to help themselves.” ’’The vote of the members.” ”Educational--help keep the union alive and strong.” ’’Believe in fairness.” ’’Because ’I like to help other workers.” ”l like to see our contract enforced.”

17 *

(If you feel a worker has no merit to his complaint do you feel you should pursue it to a conclusion?) Sample answers, when given, were like these: "No, after explaining that there is nothing to gain and w h y .” ”0n policy matters, yes.” ”No, I try to talk him out of it.” "Division Committee decides.” ”No, unless ordered to by membership.” "Yes--a grievance without sustance deserves as much attention being dispelled as a real one being ad­ justed .” "Yes, to the workers satisfaction.” "No!”

19*

(In your opinion are precedent rulings by the employer, foreman or higher ups on grievances as important as contract provisions?) Sample answers: "Yes, they often mean more than contract provisions.” ”l go by the contract.” "Yes, if it is to help both parties, avoid misunder­ standing or trouble.” ”No--get hung by arbitration every time.” "No. Can change their rulings.” "No. The working agreement is the Bible we follow." ”ln some cases--not in unilateral action.” "They can be tied into interpretations of contract.” "No, the contract is the Law, irregardless of anyones rulings.” ”No. Only the contract is binding." ”No. Because employer and union must live up to contract.”

104 "They are not, Period." "No. Contract is a signed agreement by both parties." 'No. Employer will change their mind--a contract will not change until termination. 22.

These are sample answers to this question: (Do you look for trouble or do you overlook trouble until a grievance is brought to you?) "if a fellow worker is involved then I look for trouble. Personal feelings have no place in union affairs." "I like trouble." "Good chairman looks for and heads off trouble if possible before grievance." "it depends on the trouble but I usually overlook trouble until a grievance is brought to me." "All depends." "I never look for trouble but I do try to police the contract." "Take immediate action when contract is violated." "Wait for beef." "Prevent trouble first." "Prevent trouble If at all possible before grievance step." "Keep an open ear." "I help to 'police the contract.'" "I look for trouble." "Both." "I overlook it." "I try to see that the terms of the contract are carried out by the company at all times." "Yes, if it comes to me." "Don't look for trouble but don't shirk duty." "Wait until a grievance is brought to m e ." "If it's there I'll find it." "I'm pretty well notified of anything serious. But I keep my eyes open." "Handle grievances as they come up." "Never look for trouble, it will come to you."

APPENDIX III This is-a copy of the table of contents from the shop steward manual for the International Association of Machinists.

It is reproduced in its entirety.

Examina­

tion of these headings gives excellent indication of the scope covered by a typical manual and the vein in which it is presented: CONTENTS Foreword The Shop Steward’s Big Job Need for Shop Stewards Two Main Tasks Building a Strong Union Put Life Into the Contract How the Shop Steward Can Help Build His Union Getting New Members Use Honey Not Vinegar Talk Union Making Members nOne Hundred Per Centers*1 Dues - Life Blood of the Union Know the Men in Your Department Keep the Members Informed Meet Problems Before They Become Grievances Keep a United Union Front

106 Be A Good Listener Good Relations With- Your Supervisors Grievance Procedure - Tips on Relations with Management Abide by Contract Rules Is It A Just Grievance Get All the Pacts Write it Down Go to the Foreman Use A Positive Frie ndly Approach Be A Good Listener and Disagree Amiably No Empty Threats Try to Settle at First Stage Stick to the Facts and Stick to the Point Insist on Retroactive Agreements D o n ’t Gloat Get to the Roots from Which Grievances Grow Educate the Foreman The Contract is Your Constitution When Strikes Occur Labor Legislation a Steward Should Know About Federal, State, County and Municipal Government Employees Negotiating with Public Officials Give Them a Chance Suggestions for Further Reading

APPENDIX IV Provisions of the collective bargaining agreement vary in limitations on., and definition of, the duties and jurisdiction of the shop steward.

These are examples of

extremes in detailing the duties of the steward as part of the conditions of the contract: (Aircraft plant contract with APL Teamsters) ARTICLE III - UNION REPRESENTATION Section 1 : The Union shall be represented by one shop steward on each shift at each of the following places: Santa Monica plant, El Segundo plant, and Long Beach plant. Stewards shall be selected in such manner as the Union may determine. The Union may designate an alternate for each steward; the alternate may act in place of the steward only when the latter is absent or otherwise unable to act. Section 2 : Each shop steward shall be a regular employee in a job classification within the bargaining unit and shall have been in the onploy of the Company for a period- of at least three (3) months immediately preceding his selection as shop steward. The Union shall notify the Company of the names of shop stewards thus selected and shall notify the Company in writing of any changes in the personnel of the shop stewards. The Company shall notify the Union of its representatives authorized to handle and settle grievances for it. Section 3 » Each shop steward is employed to perform full­ time work for the Company and shall be responsible for such work on his part except as otherwise expressly provided herein. Each shop steward shall report to his regular place of work at the commencement of the shift and after any recess or lunch period. Each shop steward is subject to all of the location rules regarding the conduct of employees on the premises of the Company, except as otherwise express­ ly provided herein.

108 Section 4 : A shop steward will, upon application- to his supervisor, be permitted to leave his work during working hours for reasonable periods, which time will be paid for by the Company, to perform the following duties: (a)

To present to a supervisor, or his representa­ tive, grievances which he has been requested by an employee or group of employees to present to such supervisor for adjustment.

(b)

After such presentation, to make necessary investigations of any such grievance so that it can be properly presented to the supervisor or his representative.

(c)

To attend, when necessary, any meetings with representatives of management when such meetings are necessary to present and adjust any such grievance or dispute.

Section 5 • When the presence of a shop steward is desired by an employee for the presentation of a grievance, the employee may request his supervisor to send for his shop steward and the supervisor shall send for such shop stewward as soon as possible. Section 6 : Each shop steward shall report to his. supervisor or his designated representative the time of leaving his work to perform the duties set forth herein, and the time of his return to work upon the completion of those duties. Section 7 ' The Company agrees that shop stewards shall not be hindered, coerced, restrained, or interfered with in the performance of their duties of investigating, presenting, and adjusting grievances as provided in this Article. The Union understands and agrees that each shop steward has full-time, productive work to perform, and that he will not leave his work during working hours, except to perform such duties. It is further understood and agreed by the parties hereto that each will cooperate with the other in reducing to a minimum the actual time spent by shop stewards in investigating, presenting, and adjusting grievances. (Fruit Produce Company contract with AFL Teamsters:) ARTICLE IX - ADJUSTMENT OF GRIEVANCES 1.

A steward may be selected by the employees of

109 each department. It shall be his duty to attempt the settle­ ment with the departmental foremen of all grievances in that department to the satisfaction of the UNION and the COMPANY. 2. In the event the steward and the foremen are unable satisfactorily to settle any grievance, it shall be referred to a Union Business Representative and the Company Personnel Supervisor or his representative for further consideration. A typical superseniority clause pertaining to shop stewards taken from CIO Steelworker's contract: Seniority Status of Grievance Committeemen and Local Union Officers When Management decides that the work force in any seniority unit in any plant is to be reduced, the member of the plant grievance committee, if any, in that unit shall, if the reduction in force continues to the point at which he would otherwise be laid off, be retained at work and for such hours per week as may be scheduled in the department in which he is employed, provided he can perform the work of the job to which he must be demoted. The intent of this provision is to retain in active employ­ ment the plant grievance committeemen for the purpose of continuity in the administration of the labor contract in the interest of employees so long as a work force is at work; provided that no grievance committeeman shall be retained- in employment unless work which he can perform is available to him in the plant area which he represents on the grievance committee.

U niversity of S o u th ern California JLKtofary