|
Publications | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Avenues for Worker ParticipationThere are a variety of different mechanisms for worker participation in the redesign of public services. Today, Total Quality Management and High Performance Workplace methods are often encountered as part of redesigning schemes. Participation on redesign commissions could be a way for labor's voice to be heard. Labor-management committees have long been a part of labor relations in the public sector. Other programs that have existed (although not widely) in the public sector workplace include Quality Circles, Quality of Work Life programs, and Self-Directed Teams.Under the right circumstances, any of these avenues for redesigning government can establish at least minimal dialogue between labor and management to foster organizational change. Some of these mechanisms, however, offer greater potential for genuine voice than others. Workers and the union should keep in mind the limits and risks of the various programs when deciding whether to participate.
"Reinventing Government" CommissionsWhile there has been much talk about scaling back government operations and trimming the public sector workforce, there is at least one high-growth industry in the public sector: the "Reinventing Government" commissions. During recent years, a multitude of task forces, commissions, blue-ribbon panels, and other groups of appointed "experts" have been formed at all levels of government. These commissions invariably include an abundance of businesspeople, academicians, consultants, community leaders, and government staff. They may even include a private sector unionist or two. But all too often, the only voice not represented on such panels is that of the front-line public worker. The recommendations of reinventing government commissions typically include reorganizing agencies, competitive bidding, privatization, performance measurement, merit-based pay, and downsizing. At the same time, the commission might recommend "labor-management cooperation." Such recommendations often receive wide coverage in the press and put the union in the position of reacting to harmful proposals, which is not conducive to working for positive change. The shortcomings of most of these commission reports reflects the lack of credible public worker input. When such commissions are in the formative stages and the union might be able to "make a difference", it is often useful to fight for inclusion so that the worker's voice can be heard. There are tricky political issues involved with participating on "reinventing government" commissions. In all likelihood, the union representative will be a minority member on a commission that could make recommendations at odds, in the short term at least, with the best interests of front-line workers and the public they serve. On the other hand, participating on a commission offers opportunities for the exchange of information and ideas that the union can ill afford to pass up. It can also provide the union with a forum to advocate more meaningful front-line worker input. The union will need to balance the political risk involved in participation with the risks of the reinventing government debate taking place without front-line worker or union input. In order to minimize these risks, the union should take steps to ensure that it is well-prepared for participation on a commission, including:
Labor-Management CommitteesLabor-Management Committees (LMCs) are the most widespread form of worker participation in the public sector. The committees are often established in contract negotiations and can feature strong union representation. They may be ad hoc or permanent, and the rules under which they operate (the number of members, frequen cy of meetings, groups represented, and so on) vary. The issues that LMCs most often address are those that:
As a forum for the exchange of ideas between labor and management, LMCs can be useful. The danger of referring issues to an LMC is that they will languish due to inaction. AFSCME's minimum safeguards for LMCs were set forth at the 1986 Convention, and include:
Quality CirclesQuality Circles (QCs) are small groups of employees that meet voluntarily to identify and analyze problems and recommend solutions to management. Meetings may or may not take place on the clock, so participants may or may not be paid for their extra efforts. QC participants might be involved in implementing their suggestions, but this does not mean they have any real decision-making authority. QCs were trendy in the private sector in the 1970s and 1980s, and have been tried on a limited scale in the public sector. However, the "fad" has abated and QCs are no longer widely used, especially in unionized settings. Unionists have long been suspicious of QCs because they typically ignore the union structure. They are often dominated by management representatives and can be, in effect, nothing more than a suggestion box by committee. Nevertheless, some advocates argue that QCs can act as a steppingstone to more empowering types of programs.
Quality of Work LifeQuality of Work Life (QWL) is a term that has been used liberally over the years, to describe everything from flextime to self-directed work teams. QWL usually refers to joint union-management programs to improve organizational effectiveness and productivity as well as working conditions. A network of labor-management committees, led by a steering committee, usually guide these efforts. QWL programs are wider in scope than QCs and LMCs, and often involve redesigning or "broadbanding" jobs and/or changing the work process. QWL was never very widespread in the public sector, and in recent years has receded in the private sector as emphasis has shifted to other types of programs.
Self-Directed TeamsSelf-Directed Teams (SDTs) can be implemented as "free-standing" programs or as part of wider quality efforts. SDTs are known by many names - autonomous work groups, self-managed teams, worker self-management, and socio-technical systems. Employees in a SDT are responsible for all tasks associated with the work they perform, including functions normally carried out by supervisors like the assignment of work, training, scheduling, and quality control. SDTs originated in heavy manufacturing industries during the 1960s and 1970s when the drudgery of assembly-line production methods resulted in the "blue-collar blues" and led to a drop in output and quality. SDTs require every team member to be familiar with (and responsible for) all facets of the work process, so there is a heavy emphasis on ongoing training and the development of "multi-skilled" workers. Also, SDTs may lead to changes in pay structure such as compensation for additional skills and duties taken on by team members. Although there is still a role for management in a team-based workplace, front-line supervisors can perceive SDTs as a threat to their authority. In their new role, managers must shift their emphasis away from directly overseeing work to being a coordinator and resource person.
Total Quality ManagementSome redesign initiatives are based on the principles of Total Quality Management (TQM), first developed by W. Edwards Deming. Deming is widely considered the "father" of the TQM movement. An American statistician, his views were first adopted by Japanese industrialists in the 1950s and 1960s and helped establish Japan as a leading economic power. While TQM is sometimes viewed negatively by unionists because it is often implemented in a top-down fashion, it actually shares much common ground with traditional trade union values. TQM focuses on the work process rather than the individual worker. TQM is designed to replace management control of workers with employee and management commitment to quality. Workers study work systems to suggest overall improvements rather than being rewarded or punished for individual efforts. In fact, according to Deming, individual performance appraisal systems are not compatible with TQM. Management-dominated improvement initiatives, called TQM but really just old ideas dressed in new age jargon, have undermined the appeal of TQM to many workers and unions. True TQM requires a fundamental change in how an organization is managed. Joint union-management TQM processes feature the following:
High Performance WorkplaceBuilding on TQM and other employee involvement theories, a new type of work organization, known as the High Performance Workplace (HPW), has evolved. HPW is intended to replace the rigid "command-and-control" style of management prevalent today. "Command-and-control" management eliminates the link between thinking and doing: management thinks - workers do. Under this system, employees and unions are kept at arm's length from decision making because their interests are assumed to be limited to achieving higher pay and benefits. Unions and employees are thought to have no commitment to organizational success other than job retention. Employees are viewed as cost items on the balance sheets. The High Performance Workplace, in contrast, is based on the idea that employees are assets that should be fully developed. HPW theory holds that an organization gains an advantage by providing each employee with an opportunity to achieve full potential. It holds that employees have not only the skills and experience to contribute to high performance, but the commitment as well.
Towards genuine empowermentJoint quality initiatives can involve direct worker participation or indirect representation through designated representatives on committees or commissions. The scope of control can be confined to a single issue, or can encompass the work process, vendor relationships, and customer satisfaction. Input can vary from a "suggestion box" arrangement, where worker ideas are submitted to management for approval, to true joint decision making. Coverage can range from a single workplace to an entire state or local government. And, finally, the effort can take place under various names, such as "Employee Input Committees," "Total Quality Services," or "Partners for Excellence." Regardless of what an initiative is called or how broad its scope, the union's principles can be met if:
The New WorkplaceHow Does the New Workplace Differ From a Traditional Workplace?
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||