We examine the evolution of labor arbitration decisions between 1988 and 2018 in which a union-represented employee was alleged to have committed sexual harassment. We find that management punished sexual harassment more stringently over time and that arbitrators became more sensitive to whether or not good procedure was followed by management over time. Distributive justice was also a major concern for arbitrators. The results suggest that it is essential for management to exercise procedural justice in disciplining employees, but that it is just as important for management to consider distributive justice when it comes to imposing discipline for inappropriate behavior.

To help instructors teach students the meaning of negotiations, and to help students understand the different types of negotiations, we developed the "Negotiate to Survive" activity. In this activity, students work in teams to participate in both distributive and integrative negotiations, in an effort to help them understand the difference between the two. Statistical results show both that the activity helped students understand the difference between the two negotiation types and that they enjoyed participating in it. Student comments support the statistical results.

Purpose This paper aims to examine the impact of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA). It is expected that returns would have increased in response to the law’s passage, as it imposed a number of restrictions on unions vis-à-vis management and instituted many rules regulating unions’ internal affairs. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses event study methodology, which examines the impact of the law’s passage on the shareholder returns to the firms likely to have been affected by the law. Three different samples are used. Shareholder returns are examined on critical dates associated with the passage of the law to assess whether it benefited the firms in the samples. Findings Shareholder returns to firms expected to have been affected by the LMRDA fell in comparison to their competitors’ returns, indicating that the law was viewed by investors as being beneficial for firms. Presumably, the restrictions the law placed on unions were judged to be more important by investors than the improvement in unions’ image that might have resulted from the law, indicating that the law benefitted firms. Originality/value This is the first paper that has examined the impact of the LMRDA empirically to assess its impact on firms.

PurposeThe purposes of this paper are to discuss why firms are resistant to unionization of their employees and to discuss the potential benefits firms derive if their employees are unionized. There are benefits to firms if their employees are unionized, however, and firms whose workforces are unionized should take advantage of these benefits.Design/methodology/approachAnalysis and discussion of the drawbacks and benefits of unionization to firms.FindingsFirms benefit in two ways if their workforces are unionized. First, unionization reduces employee turnover. Second, employee involvement programs are generally more effective in unionized firms, while they are often held to be illegal in nonunion firms. Therefore, managers in unionized firms should work with the unions representing their employees to further reduce turnover and make Employee Involvement programs even more effective.Originality/valueAs employees sometimes opt to unionize despite firms’ wishes to the contrary, this paper discusses the benefits of unionized workforces and advocates that management in unionized firms develop positive relations with unions to derive these benefits.

Purpose Unionized employees have the legal right to bring a union representative with them into an investigatory interview if they request it (“Weingarten rights”). This study aims to demonstrate that employers should allow nonunion employees the right to have a co-employee accompany them in a similar type of interview, if the employees make that request. Design/methodology/approach Not applicable. Findings There will be two benefits to allowing nonunion employees the right to bring a co-employee into an investigatory interview with them. First, this will be a form of organizational justice, and researchers demonstrated the benefits of employees perceiving that they receive organizational justice. Secondly, this will be a form of union substitution which should reduce employees’ desire for unionization. Originality/value Whereas most employers seek to avoid the application of Weingarten rights in nonunion workplaces, this article argues that organizations should grant employees this right voluntarily.

In 2010, the National Mediation Board (NMB) decided to base Railway Labor Act representation election outcomes on a simple majority of those voting, rather than on the majority of all eligible voters, as had been required earlier. This was widely expected to make it easier for unions to win rights to recognition in the railway and airline industries. We demonstrate that investors expected that this change would favor unions, just as they earlier had expected rule changes that made voting easier (in 2002 and 2007) to be favorable to unions, affecting stock prices of railway and airline corporations. After the 2010 change in election procedure, between 77% and 91% of all eligible employees returned ballots in NMB elections, demonstrating that a significant portion of nonvoters were not opposed to union representation, but simply were unwilling or were unable to vote. We conclude that the current voting process is fairer than the old one. However, it has not resulted in a tide of union success in these representation elections. Apparently scholars, the parties themselves, and investors all over-estimated the practical consequences of changing NMB representation election procedures.

We present evidence regarding how a card check recognition process affects the labor relations climate during the period preceding recognition and that which immediately follows. Interviews with managers, interviews with union representatives, and surveys of workers indicate that card check typically results in a less prolonged, costly, and stressful recognition and negotiations process. Although the resulting contracts are often similar to those in other parts of a heavily unionized corporation, sometimes they reflect a different business context - and hence are somewhat more favorable to employers without being substantially less favorable to employees. This reality is reflected in the positive reaction of the U.S. stock markets to union recognition by an employer through a card check process. Employers make card check agreements primarily for business reasons, and investors respect their judgment as to the impact of such agreements on the bottom line.

The decline of unions in the U.S. is a salient issue for workers, and a number of studies have demonstrated the relationships between worker attitudes and unionization. The vast majority of this research pertains to workers' attitudes toward the union as an organization, but little has examined workers attitudes to the union officials who are closest to them on a daily basis. As unions strive to maintain membership and support, research that addresses correlates of union members' satisfaction with their work-site union representatives is needed. This study investigates factors associated with teachers' assessment of the adequacy of the support they receive from their building union representatives. Study results show that teachers' satisfaction with leadership communication, board of education practices, staff support, school pride, parent involvement, and the lack of gossip among employees are all associated with teachers' rating of the support they receive from their building union representatives. Implications for the selection and preparation of work-site union representatives are discussed.

The authors used survey research to determine the congruence among the competencies that businesses identify as being indicative of successful managers, the competencies that business schools identify as being indicative of successful graduates, and the competencies that are emphasized in business school curricula. The results show that although businesses and business schools essentially agree on the competencies that identify successful managers and graduates, business schools do not emphasize these competencies in their curricula. Because one of the main goals of business schools is to prepare their graduates for managerial careers after graduation, these results suggest that business schools should do more to align their curricula with the desires of businesses.

“The Zinnia”: A Collective Bargaining Simulation. This simulation accompanies Labor Relations: Striking a Balance by John W. Budd. 2008. New York: McGraw Hill/Irwin. 608 pp.

This “play or pay” mandate would have required California employers to either provide medical insurance for their employees or pay into a state insurance fund. Although the law ultimately did not go into effect, movements in shareholder wealth provide evidence about the differential effects of such health‐care mandates on various types of employers. Large or unionized firms had no negative effects; expected profits declined most for firms with 50–199 employees.

Research has shown that a firm's reputation influences the amount investors are willing to pay for that firm's securities. Therefore, securities of firms with a good reputation should be valued higher than firms with a poor reputation, ceteris paribus. In this study, we use event study methodology to assess whether the public disclosure of the Reputation Quotient (RQ(SM)) list, an index of corporate reputation, induces a change in the security prices (shareholder returns) of the firms included on that list. The results show that disclosure of the RQ does not affect firm shareholder returns. We explore reasons for this finding, suggest possible explanations and offer implications.

This study examined the impact of union membership on employees’ intent to leave their jobs across a number of facets of satisfaction, as a further test of unions’ voice face. Among the findings were that there were significant relationships between job, compensation, benefits, working conditions, and immediate supervisor satisfaction and intent to leave one’s job for nonunion employees. In contrast, only the relationship between job satisfaction and intent to leave was significant for union employees. Finally, over the facets of satisfaction where one would expect unions to have the most influence, the relationship between intent to leave one’s job and satisfaction was greater for nonunion employees than for union employees. These results provide a great deal of support for the effect of unions’ voice face.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to compare the market reaction to layoff announcements of union and nonunion employees.Design/methodology/approachEvent study methodology was utilized to assess the effects of layoff announcements of union versus nonunion employees. The union status of the laid‐off employees was determined for 135 layoff announcements reported in the Wall Street Journal in 1993 and 1994 and shareholder returns between the two groups was compared.FindingsOver each event period tested, the market reaction was more negative when nonunion employees were downsized than when the announcement concerned unionized employees. Over the two days surrounding the announcement, the market reaction to the layoff announcement of unionized employees was actually positive, while the reaction was negative when nonunion employees were the subject of the announcement.Research limitations/implicationsThe sample included layoff announcements from 1993 and 1994 only. The market reaction to announcements in different years might be different.Originality/valueWhile many papers have examined the market reaction to layoff announcements, this is the first paper that compares the reaction to union versus nonunion employees.

The Supreme Court has gradually narrowed the number of persons who are protected by the National Labor Relations Act should they seek to form or join a union, in part by ruling that professionals who also serve as supervisors of less skilled employees are not covered by the Act. The market's reaction to the two latest rulings, Health Care & Retirement Corp. and Kentucky River is researched herein. Shareholder wealth rose for health care firms in response to each ruling. The market response was greater for the latter decision, signaling investor beliefs regarding the benefit to employers and the likely future direction of court decisions.