During my travels, I once talked with a gentleman who managed a group of unionized bus drivers. He was participating in a series of training meetings sponsored by his employer with several of his peers. They were not brainstorming, retreating, or developing company visions, but rather receiving a list of directives from the corporate Human Resources office. To my surprise, these managers were instructed to NEVER, under any circumstances, meet alone with union employees.
I wondered if the Human Resources officers realized just how much undeserved power the union gained by instituting such a shallow rule. This unfortunate manager’s ability to lead became drastically limited. As leaders in unionized environments, we have all been there. You know you need to meet with a team member, but you have Human Resources on your right hand, cautioning or even prohibiting you from meeting alone with a union employee, and your own fear on the left intimidating you with questions like, “What if I say something wrong?” “Will the union file another grievance, or perhaps an Unfair Labor Practice this time?”
There is no doubt leading in a unionized environment can feel technically treacherous and emotionally worrisome. While these apprehensions are understandable, far too many managers pull back and become ineffective for fear of violating a contract, or causing an indefensible grievance. Such apprehensions need not exist.
Leaders must lead, maintaining a meaningful relationship between employee and manager. How then, do we navigate these difficulties, steering our vessel carefully over the shallow waters of union rules, regulations, and contracts without running aground, or worse, becoming swamped by a barrage of union tactics and grievances? The good news is that it CAN be done, one just need understand the rules.
Leaders really can act decisively, deliberately, and with confidence when it comes to communicating with union employees needing direction or even correction. Managers can captain their ships and lead their departments to excellence. Here are some key concepts that will help you successfully and confidently meet with union employees, even alone, to have those desperately needed crucial conversations.
We must first explore two legitimate conditions under which managers should NOT meet alone with union represented employees. A law called, “Weingarten Rights”, dictates one of these conditions. On the surface, these rights may feel limiting to the manager, but once understood, following the rules associated with Weingarten Rights can ultimately protect the manager as well as the union employee when proceeding through the investigatory process.
Weingarten Rights permit a union employee to have a union representative present when questioned by managers, provided the employee is the subject of an investigation. Once the employee recognizes the potential for discipline associated with his responses, he may request representation for the remainder of the meeting. Technically, the employee under scrutiny must request the representation once sensing a disciplinary potential. However, experienced employers often adopt a practice of informing the employee of these rights beforehand. Such notice permits the employee to seek desired representation prior to the meeting. Informing the employee of representation rights often shores the employer up against accusations by the union that such representation was denied the employee under investigation. A third-party ruler such as an arbitrator may later review the case. Having advised the employee to seek their rightful representation is a solid demonstration of a good-faith effort by the manager to uncover the real facts of the case, a required aspect of the pre-disciplinary process.
Sometimes employees refuse to exercise their rights to have union representation during investigative meetings. These employees may not feel connected to the union, or perhaps they hope their act of standing alone, without union support, may cause the organization to soften its position. What to do in these cases requires sound judgment. For example, if the manager perceives ahead of time that the outcome will not be too serious, such as a verbal counseling or a simple coaching session, it may be fine to proceed without the union representative. However, if the potential exists for more serious discipline, such as suspension or termination, it may be best to encourage the representation or perhaps even provide a representative for the accused employee. An employee’s hope that a manager may lessen the consequences of their actions by denying himself or herself union representation may transform to bitter gall when the manager decides to hold them fully accountable regardless. A heated grievance resulting from the employee’s newfound love for the union will surely cause the manager to regret having proceeded without union representation.
A problematic, but all-too common manager error associated with Weingarten meetings is that of bringing disciplinary documents to the meeting. A manager should NEVER do this! The meeting is designed to ask the accused employee their side of the story. A decision about discipline is premature at this point. Holding a disciplinary action notice in one’s hand during such a meeting is strong evidence demonstrating the meeting was not conducted in good-faith to discover the facts. Moreover, the union may argue that “management” simply held the meeting as a formality to check off the requirement to do so. You must sincerely seek the testimony of the subject employee in order to demonstrate a fair approach to the issue.
When a Weingarten meeting occurs with union representation for the employee, the manager should also have another supervisor or a member of Human Resources present. The manager needs a witness for these meetings, as complicated grievances often result in distortions of the facts, whether intentional or not. Notes should be taken, and are often requested by attorneys during arbitration preparations. Union officials often seek any way possible during the grievance process to protect union employees. Avoid allowing a legitimate discharge to be reversed due to the failure of granting Weingarten Rights.
As a best practice, many experienced labor relations experts have learned that Weingarten Rights, while originally developed for the employee, can actually help the manager. On the surface, these rules may feel repressive, however, a deeper study may reveal that a transparent approach to applying progressive discipline after conducting a good-faith investigation actually benefits the manager in the end, improving the chances of winning a grievance or avoiding one altogether.
The second condition for which managers should NEVER meet alone with union members relates to an upcoming NLRB election This latter condition is far less common and occurs infrequently, but when elections are at hand, knowing the rules is essential. When the National Labor Relations Board holds a representation election, there are some points to remember about meeting alone with any union member, whether or not the employee supports the union. The National Labor Relations Board is responsible for holding confidential elections for employees considering union-representation. The employees participate in a secret-ballot election with the NLRB present to assure they have a fair chance to vote either for or against unionization. Prior to these elections, the NLRB grants the employer and the union several weeks to campaign among the voting employees. During this campaign period, managers should NOT meet one-on-one with employees. It is simply against the rules. Group meetings are permitted of course, but private meetings are forbidden by the NLRB. This rule benefits the employer should the election be won because the union cannot later accuse managers of coercing or making promises to employees during private meetings. Such coercion could result in a re-election.
When Should a Manager Meet Alone with Union Employees? Too many Human Resources officers are putting up barriers instead of training managers on the union rules. Leaders must lead. An integral part of leadership is one-on-one communication. Open-door policies, employee rounding, and sincere expressions of gratitude for employee contributions all go a long way with employees, union or not. In fact, the absence of a personal supervisor’s touch feeds into the power of the union. Learning the rules and following them while maintaining a leadership role is a far superior way to maneuver through the complexities of supervising unionized employees. Retreating to superficial rules such as NEVER meeting alone with union employees diminishes manager influence and authority. Oftentimes problems can be resolved with informal, personal conversations.
