The Transition from Formal Nonunion Representation to Unionization: A Contemporary Case

Abstract

The authors examine three phases in the unionization process among Imperial Oil Limited employees in Canada who, in 1993, decided to withdraw from a long-standing nonunion employee representation plan: the conditions leading to the propensity to unionize; the transformation into a bargaining unit; and post-certification behaviors and practices. The unionization process in this case study differed from that suggested by literature based on unionization among workers without a previous history of collective representation.In the pre-campaign phase, workers experienced a significant loss of perceived power due to changes in company practices and managerial style. Elected worker delegates to the nonunion representation plan spearheaded the union campaign. The union organizing phase allowed the company multiple opportunities for redress without unionization. Subsequent union attachment was diminished by continuing loyalty to aspects of the old system. M ost research by industrial relationsscholars focuses on unionized worksites and assumes that unionization introduces workers to collective action for the first time. Many of the workers whom for helpful comments. industrial relations scholars treat as "unrepresented," however, participate in various employee representation plans. Such plans are common in Canada, which has few legal restrictions on nonunion worksite governance schemes.In the United States, by contrast, legal impediments to nonunion plans are substantial, and are one subject of a fierce debate over the continuing relevance of the Wagner Act model.We examine a Canadian formal nonunion employee representation plan at Imperial Oil, the Joint Industrial Council (JIC), with particular emphasis on the factors affecting the ability of workers to exercise their choice to withdraw from the nonunion plan in favor ofjoining a union. In 1993, employees at Imperial Oil's billiondollar Norman Wells gas plant and refinery chose to end over 20 years of participation ). They are often treated as historic relics of a bygone era by contemporary scholars (for example, Nelson 1993), despite growing evidence that a number of companies are defying the law and operating nonunion plans (Kaufman et al. 1997).In Canada, by contrast, nonunion plans continue to be lawful.3 Many Canadian plans result in the drawing up of workermanagement agreements that strongly resemble collective agreements in the unionized sector.4 These nonunion agreements technically are individual contracts of employment that are applied collectively. Canada's nonunion plans exist outside the purview of collective bargaining laws.5

What Kind of Voice Do Loyal Employees Use?

“…Representative voice tends to be more structured and issue-oriented, addressing problems more likely to arise after a dispute has been defined, and leading to more of a distributive process in which an important objective of the third party is to win on behalf of his or her client. The dividing line between direct and representative voice may not always be clear, as when an employee threatens to blow the whistle to outside authorities following the unsuccessful resolution of a problem; when employees try informally to resolve disputes before turning to the formality of union representation (Taras and Copping 1997); or when a union tries to use a less confrontational, problem-solving approach during the formality of the bargaining process. As a general rule, however, direct voice is a more preventative approach to dispute resolution, with greater potential to facilitate solutions that satisfy each of the parties' underlying interests in dispute, whereas representative voice is a more reactive approach, with less potential in this regard.…”

Non-union employee representation in North America: diversity, controversy and uncertain future1

“…Both historical and contemporary evidence suggests that NER can be a way station (or 'launching pad') to unionism. The literature for Canada is reviewed in Taras and Copping (1998), and Timur (2004) presents three detailed case studies showing how unions successfully used NER plans to gain collective bargaining rights. In the USA, NER plans in the steel, energy and telecommunications sectors were 'captured' by union militants in the 1930s and used to usher in collective bargaining (Bernstein, 1960;Brody, 1960;Hogler and Grenier, 1992;Ozanne, 1967;Schacht, 1975).…”

Re-conceptualizing voice in the non-union workplace

“…workplace 1189 interdependence (Hyman, 2005). It is possible, therefore, that such arrangements are more than substitution and/or the suppression of union triggers, but actually act as a 'complement' to management decision-making (Gall and McKay, 2001;Gollan, 2000;Kaufman, 2000;Taras and Copping, 1998;Terry, 1999;Watling and Snook, 2003). This additional possibility of complementarity contrasted against substitution is summarized in Table 1.…”

“…The by-product of such voice arrangements is that many of the conditions that lead employees to seek outside representation are not present. However, Taras and Copping's (1998) research into nonunion voice arrangements at Imperial Oil in Canada offers a cautionary note. An important finding of their investigation was that the company allowed perceptions of 'worker power and influence to develop', and representatives 'over-estimated their capacity to halt corporate-level initiatives'.…”