Workers' Participation In Management
Unions face a number of questions when they try to develop a response to an employer's demand for an Employee Involvement (EI) program. Is this an attempt to circumvent or even to bust the union? Should the union agree to participate, or should the union resist the effort to implement EI? Where can the union turn to find information and advice in dealing with EI? Even fundamental questions like "what is EI?" or "Why is the company trying to implement EI?" are difficult to answer.
To begin to understand and develop strategies about EI, a union must not only ask the obvious questions, such as should we participate, but must also examine EI as more than an isolated event occurring in a vacuum. EI programs, operating under a number of names, has been going on in a variety of forms and under a variety of names since the 1970s and are present in virtually all industries. The experimentation period is coming to a close as there is developing some consistency in the implementation of the Japanese-style management system or as Mike Parker has accurately described it, the Management-by-Stress (MBS) system. Although MBS has built into it a system for increasing workers' involvement in decisions relating to their jobs, the purpose of MBS is not to combat worker alienation through de-Taylorizing work. Rather, MBS is designed to eliminate costs in the production process, to increase the quality of whatever is being produced, and to increase flexibility in the production process. What appears to be occurring is not only some attempt to involve workers more in decision making at work, but an attempt to reshape the labor relations process, management structure and, to a certain extent, the production process.
Please login to view the full essay...