Should Employers Try To Inform Employees About Unions If Most Vote To Unionize Anyway?
If unions are winning a vast majority of elections, employers are still trying to provide information to their employees about unions. Here's why...
Quick Facts:
Unions are winning the vast majority of certification elections.
A majority of respondents believe employers should still provide information to their employees about unions, however.
The timing of sharing information affects outcomes
Unions’ astounding win rate. During the week ending February 2nd, unions won 20 out of 21 certification elections (RC and RM) conducted by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). That is an astounding 95.2 percent.
The week before that, the week ending January 27th, unions won nearly 80 percent of the certification elections held. This is higher than the 76 percent win rate for the 1316 certification elections the NLRB conducted in fiscal year 2023.
As unions continue the trend of record high win rates, along with the new Cemex Doctrine, as well as so-called “quickie” or “ambush” elections, a question that employers may begin contemplate:
With unions winning a majority of certification elections, and employers risking bargaining orders even if a union loses, should employers even bother to inform their employees about unions?
The answer is ‘yes,’ according to a majority of those asked.
In an informal poll on LaborUnionNews.com’s LinkedIn group, which consists of over 5,000 human resources, labor and employee relations professionals, and some union officers, 93 percent of those who responded believe that, despite unions winning a majority of elections, employers should still inform employees about unions.
What people are saying…
In related discussions, several people familiar with unions and union organizing tactics explained why they believe express employees should be fully informed about unions.
“Absolutely, the employer should provide this education to their staff,” noted one retired CHRO. “The decision being made by the individual employee impacts them personally and professionally.”
“Without some level of employer information prior to an NLRB election,” another retired HR professional who requested anonymity stated, “that election may be subjected to one-sided viewpoints and, possibly, less than accurate information that could have adverse impacts to the workforce."
“I absolutely agree with educating employees on unions.,” responded Patricia Garland, author of ‘33 Ways Not to Screw Up HR.’ “It is a serious decision to sign an authorization card or cast a vote in a union certification election, with long-term implications for the workplace and the people who make their careers there.”
“Employees faced with this decision are entitled to have all the facts,” Garland continued. “If the employer takes the ‘neutral’ position, only the union's view will be heard.”
Michael Alcorn, an employee of Trader Joe’s, whose store was unionized in 2022 states, “I think employers should educate their employees about unions because the unions paint a false or incomplete picture during a campaign of what it means to elect a union to represent you at the bargaining table.”
“The union is an administrative system with rules and restrictions that seek to thrive by sewing animosity between the employees and the employer,” Alcorn said. “In my experience, employees with a strong ability to advocate for themselves with their employers are the enemy of the union.”
Yes, but…
With the NLRB’s new Cemex standard, as well as so-called “ambush elections,” should employers wait until after a union is on the scene? Probably not.
Unions often spend weeks or months planting the seeds of unionization within a workforce. Unions today deploy underground union organizers known as “salts’ or “moles” to cultivate unionization within unsuspecting employers.
If an employer waits until a union appears before providing information to employees, it will likely be too late.
Proactive vs. reactive information
The question of when to provide information about unions to employees is a delicate issue.
As the NLRB election data shows, employers who wait until after a union demands recognition or files a petition for an election are more likely to lose.
The reason is they are reacting to a union campaign that may have been going for weeks or months wherein a union has likely gotten a majority of the employees to support it well before an employer even knows its employees are interested in a union.
However, many employers who educate their employees on unions and union organizing tactics as part of their overall employee relations approach before employees are targeted stand a greater chance of not having a union campaign.
“During my time as an organizer knocking on doors, I could tell almost immediately if an employer had done proactive preventive education,” Rian Wathen, a former Director of Organizing for a major union who now educates employers and employees on unionization. “The employees were skeptical and asked a lot more questions. You could not sign them easily.”
Managing expectations. Even in cases where a majority of employees have demonstrated support for unionization and a likelihood to vote to unionize, some employers may choose to provide at least some modicum of information before an election to employees in order to manage expectations if the union were to win.
Often, employees believe that merely voting to unionize will somehow lead to immediate changes in their workplace when, according to a Bloomberg Law analysis, it takes an average of 465 days to bargaining a first contract—if one can even be reached.
In addition, before elections, most unions do not provide information about their own rules—which include such things as what members can be put on trial for, or how contract ratification and strike votes work.
Even if employees choose to unionize, at least having a basic understanding of how the law works and what the unions’ rules are helps reduce blaming the employer if things do not work out the way the union organizers promise.
Not everyone agrees.
Obviously, if providing a full picture turns may sway some people away from a union, unions and their allies have a vested interest in not having employees knowing both sides of the union equation.
The NLRB’s General Counsel, Jennifer Abruzzo—as well as several states—have called for a ban on employers’ right to hold mandatory meetings to educate employees about unions.
"Workers are typically subject to a significant number of captive audiences," Abruzzo told Insider back in 2022.
Even if employers don't make illegal statements during the meetings, Abruzzo stated, "it does have a coercive impact."
“The majority of union-busting employers and their ‘persuaders’ do not operate in good faith, as illustrated by the rampant noncompliance with federal labor law,” stated Bob Funk, founder of the pro-union LaborLab, a website that advocates for unions by tracking employers and their consultants. “If these folks can’t follow a few simple rules, maybe they shouldn’t be allowed on the field.”
Will union win rates shift employers’ approach?
With unions winning the vast majority of union certification elections, even if the NLRB bans so-called captive audience meetings, employers will still have the right to provide information in voluntary meetings and discussions as part of their overall employee relations approach.
As NLRB data shows, an employer who waits until a union files a NLRB petition for a certification election or demands recognition of an employer, there is a much greater likelihood that the employer will become unionized.
However, as the union win rates continue to increase, and the NLRB moves to stifle employer speech, many employers may shift their approach to inform their employees about unions and unionization well before a union ever shows up.