Labor Relations week 3 discussion
francisgon44
IPPT_Ch10_Budd6e.pptxChapter 10
The Evolving Nature of Work
© 2021 McGraw-Hill. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom.
No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill.
Because learning changes everything.®
1
Learning Objectives 1
Identify the importance of the changing structure of work for labor relations.
Explain the pressures for increased employee involvement, labor-management partnerships, and workplace flexibility in the contemporary employment relationship, and strategies for implementation.
Compare the conflicts between employee involvement, labor-management partnerships, and workplace flexibility on the one hand, and the traditional U.S. model of job control unionism on the other.
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Learning Objectives 2
Understand the debates over new forms of participatory work: whether these are methods for empowering workers and enhancing competitiveness, or for making employees work harder for less.
Understand the debates over nonunion employee representation: whether this is a vehicle of legitimate employee voice or an attempt to prevent unionism.
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Introduction 1
Key features of the traditional United States labor relations system are decades old
The major provisions of labor law were enacted in 1935 and 1947.
A pragmatic business unionism focus on improving wages and working conditions has been emphasized by United States unions in the late 1800s.
Multiyear contracts that are renegotiated with great formality only upon expiration began in the 1950s.
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Introduction 2
Does this still fit with today’s realities?
The push for flexibility, employee empowerment, and labor–management partnerships clashes with longstanding roles, practices, and expectations in United States labor relations.
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Work Organization Time Line: Foundations
Table divided into two columns summarizes the development of the major trends from the 18th century to today in work organizations.
| Year | Event |
| 18th century | Industrial Revolution, the rise of factories, mills, and mines |
| 19th century | Dominance of skilled crafts in production |
| 1911 | Frederick Winslow Taylor publishes The Principles of Scientific Management, scientific management (or Taylorism) comes to dominate 20th century thinking |
| 1913 | Henry Ford produces cars on an assembly line (Taylorism plus assembly line equals Fordism), skilled crafts replaced by unskilled mass productive workers |
| 1920s | The rise of welfare capitalism, including employee representation plans (company unions) |
| 1935 | Section 8 (a) (2) of the National Labor Relations Act, N L R A, bans company-dominated employee representation plans |
| 1946 | U A W strike at General Motors fails to win employee input into managerial decisions; management’s right to manage is cemented |
| 1950s | Institutionalization of job control unionism, emphasis on stability, predictability, and seniority; Two Americans, W. Edwards Deming and Joseph Juran, launch the quality movement in Japan |
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Postwar Work Organization and Unionism 1
20th-century mass production methods
The dominant paradigm for how to structure work in much of the 20th century was scientific management
Frederick Winslow Taylor and others developed scientific management in the early 20th century to maximize efficiency by carefully studying work tasks and scientifically determining the one best way of completing a task.
Time and motion studies were used to reduce jobs into their most basic components.
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Postwar Work Organization and Unionism 2
20th-century mass production methods
Specialization of work serves efficiency by allowing workers to become proficient through repetition.
Standardization further promotes efficiency through the use of carefully determined processes and the ease of training unskilled workers in rote tasks.
Critics saw scientific management as degrading work through extreme specialization of jobs, competition between workers, speeding up of the work pace, and hostility toward labor unions.
Managers, not union leaders, determined this vision of the ideal worker who labored with-out thought in narrow job classifications for much of the 20th century.
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Postwar Work Organization and Unionism 3
Unions had to design their representation strategies to fit with postwar methods of work organization
Unions had to contend with two deeply ingrained managerial practices that descended from the principles of scientific management
Insistence on preserving management rights by maintaining sole authority over traditional management functions.
For example, hiring, firing, assigning work, determining job content, and deciding what to produce and how and where to make it.
Narrow job classifications with minimal employee decision making.
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Postwar Work Organization and Unionism 4
Unions had to design their representation strategies to fit with postwar methods of work organization
Pursuit of equity and voice was therefore necessarily limited to negotiating wages, benefits, and fair employment policies.
That fit into the Taylorist systems of work with minimal on-the-job thinking and narrow job classifications.
The result:
Job control unionism: Seeks to protect workers against managerial abuse by controlling the rewards and allocation of jobs through objective standards.
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
10
Job Control Unionism 1
Replaces managerial subjectivity and favoritism with the objective measure of seniority as the primary method for determining layoffs, promotions, and transfers
Removes subjectivity from wage outcomes by linking wage rate to job classification (not perceptions of individual performance)
Detailed work rules further control how work is performed and allocated
Reaction to reserved rights doctrine.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Job Control Unionism 2
Traditional union contract is therefore long and detailed
Rights disputes resolved through formal grievance procedures.
Over time, arbitration awards and past practices establish precedents and create a common law of the workplace
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Example of a Traditional Seniority Ladder
Access the text alternative for slide images1.
Access the text alternative for slide images2.
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Job Control Unionism 3
This system of job control unionism became widespread in the postwar United States industrial relations system because it served both management and union needs
Supports mass manufacturing requirements for stable and predictable production.
Union leaders can counter managerial authority without having to resort to wildcat strikes that could undermine their own leadership positions.
Efficiency and equity are served through the peaceful, quasilegal application of workplace rules and contracts that fulfill industrial justice.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Job Control Unionism 4
Voice is provided through collective bargaining and grievance procedure.
But justice is bureaucratic
Based on contracts not worker involvement.
And also a certain amount of adversarialism built into this system
Unions seek to check unilateral managerial decision making.
Managers push back as they try to maintain their control over the production process.
Clashes are inevitable in the grievance meetings.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Job Control Unionism under Fire 1
Table divided into two columns summarizes job control unionism. Column 1 notes the job control unionism and column 2 notes the management concerns.
| Job Control Unionism | Management Concerns |
| Wages are tied to jobs, not individuals. | Runs counter to paying for performance, cannot reward individual merit, productivity, skills, or organizational performance. |
| Jobs are very narrowly defined. | Difficult to deploy workers to different tasks. Problems with employee boredom and alienation. Workers are not responsible for monitoring their own quality. Teamwork is absent. |
| Seniority is a major determinant of promotions, layoffs, and transfers through seniority ladders. | Hard to promote the best performers or layoff the worst performers. Extensive bumping results in disruptive adjustment to changes in labor demand. |
| Extensive work rules. | Flexibility to move workers around, change job definitions, and adjust production methods is restricted. Layoffs or subcontracting or both might also be restricted. |
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Job Control Unionism under Fire 2
Table divided into two columns summarizes job control unionism. Column 1 notes the job control unionism and column 2 notes the management concerns.
| Job Control Unionism | Management Concerns |
| Union contracts are very detailed and legalistic. Grievance procedures provide a quasi-legal forum for resolving disputes. | Difficult to break with past practices. Change is slow. Innovation is stifled. |
| No employee involvement in business and production decision-making; these are management rights. | Opportunities for harnessing workers’ ideas for productivity improvements are limited. Innovation is stifled. |
| Employee voice is limited to the grievance procedure and periodic collective bargaining. | Change is slow. Issues are only solved through formalized procedures. Problems accumulate until the next round of bargaining. |
| Labor–management relationships are frequently adversarial. | Adversarialism breeds conflict. Cooperation and partnership are needed to be competitive. |
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Pressures for Employee Involvement 1
The breakdown of the mass production business model
Simple, repetitive job tasks can cause boredom, alienation, and mental and physical fatigue (the “blue collar blues”).
A focus on monetary motivation ignores intrinsic motivators such as satisfaction from achievement, interest in a task, and responsibility.
These factors can cause absenteeism, turnover, shirking, and low-quality output.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
18
Pressures for Employee Involvement 2
The growing issue of worker dissatisfaction led to experimentation with quality of working life (Q W L) programs
These programs focused on improving the work environment and the nature of employee-supervisor relations.
The underlying principle was that if working conditions were made more humane, job satisfaction and product quality would increase.
But did not change how work was organized.
Today, pressures are for more significant changes
Including changing how work is organized.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Work Organization Time Line: Pressures
Table divided into two columns summarizes the pressures on work organization. Column 1 notes the year and column 2 notes the events.
| Year | Event |
| 1972 | General Motors Lordstown strike reflects the blue collar blues and worker alienation, first generation quality of working life (Q W L) programs start |
| 1980s | Total quality management (T Q M) returns to the United States with increased efforts at using quality circles and other initiatives; also, lean production |
| 1981 | Desktop computing era begins with the launch of the I B M Personal Computer |
| 1990 | Production starts at Saturn based on extensive employee involvement in production and business decisions (high performance work systems) |
| 1992 | The Electromation ruling finds some forms of labor-management committees to be illegally-dominated employee representation plans under section 8 (a) (2) |
| 1993 | The first hypertext browser is released paving the way for the World Wide Web and the internet age |
| 2009 | Uber is formed, exemplifying the gig and sharing economies |
| 2011 | Honda’s ASIMO robot includes autonomous behavior control ability |
| Today | Emphasis on flexibility, pay-for-performance, employee involvement, and technology |
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Pressures for Employee Involvement 3
The 21st-century organization of work
Strategies for reforming corporate structures, processes, and strategies have tremendous implications for human resources practices.
Narrowly defined jobs are being replaced by job rotation, cross training, and job enrichment.
Wage rates has become less tied to job classifications and more tied to individual and organizational performance.
Intrinsic as well as extrinsic motivators are recognized as important determinants of employee behavior and performance.
This sharply clashes with the ingrained system of job control unionism
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Employee Empowerment 1
In the 1940s two staff members of the United Steelworkers union, Clinton Golden and Harold Ruttenberg, developed principles for getting employees more involved in their work
Workers perform their job tasks and have good ideas for improving productivity, increasing quality, and lowering costs.
Employees’ discretion in their work might increase job satisfaction and make them better employees.
Golden (correctly) predicted that management’s insistence on retaining the right to manage and the accompanying scientific management distinction between management’s thinking and labor’s action “might well restrict the flexibility so necessary to efficient operation”.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Employee Empowerment 2
Various options for employee involvement
Gainsharing programs.
Joint labor-management committees.
Quality circles: Provide a forum for workers to make suggestions about how to improve productivity and quality through regular group meetings with supervisors.
Frequent component of continuous improvement programs such as total quality management.
Other types of joint labor-management committees might be formed to address ad hoc issues or establishment-wide issues.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Employee Empowerment 3
Various options for employee involvement
High-performance work systems.
The most extensive efforts to restructure the workplace involve increasing employee involvement in decision making and changing how work is organized.
These efforts try to create high-performance work systems of mutually supporting human resources systems.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
High-Performance Work Systems 1
Lean production: Emphasizes just-in-time inventories, the smooth flow of materials, teamwork, and off-line quality circles to deliver continuous process improvement
Regarded as the Japanese approach to mass manufacturing.
Referred to as “Toyotism” or the “Toyota production system” (compare mass production “Fordism”).
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
25
High-Performance Work Systems 2
Self-directed work teams: Autonomous groups of employees who are responsible for a set of job tasks as well as routine maintenance tasks
Self-directed work teams in a sociotechnical system are empowered to manage their internal affairs without a supervisor.
The teams can make their own decisions regarding job pacing, task assignment, and quality control.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
High-Performance Work Systems 3
Labor relations debates over lean production
Lean production has been popularized in the United States through the spread of total quality management (T Q M).
Lean production is associated with T Q M because workers participate in quality circles to make suggestions for continuous improvement (kaizen).
But constant pressure to remove inefficiencies (like idle time) can be stressful.
And the American version of lean production, can be very centralized with management still tightly in control of decision making.
Critics label it “management by stress”.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
High-Performance Work Systems 4
Labor relations debates over self-directed work teams
Greater employee and managerial discretion increases potential for subjectivity, favoritism, and discrimination.
What is the role of the union?
If it is not a strategic business partner, then is it marginalized?
If it is a strategic business partner, then how to balance dual functions of co-management and representation or advocacy?
When unions are concerned with business decisions, they might not be looking out for employee interests to the fullest extent possible.
Bottom line: how to achieve true employee empowerment?
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Labor–Management Partnerships 1
Labor–management partnership: Formal initiative in which workers and union leaders participate in organizational decision making beyond the daily work-related decisions of employee empowerment and beyond the usual bargaining subjects
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Labor–Management Partnerships 2
Challenges for unions
Requires new skills for union leaders.
The most fundamental challenge for labor unions is figuring out how to be effective business partners without excessively weakening their fundamental purpose of representing worker interests.
Instead of “cooperation”, labor is looking for…
Worker empowerment through involvement.
Union empowerment through true partnerships.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Nonunion Employee Representation 1
Many corporate strategies to improve competitiveness and quality explicitly include some form of employee voice
Debate 1: does the presence of a labor union increases the effectiveness of these voice mechanisms?
No well-accepted consensus.
Debate 2: do nonunion voice mechanisms truly benefit workers?
Employee representation through a nonunion committee might seem like a win-win situation for employers and employees.
But it can be used as a management weapon for suppressing unionization and true employee voice.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Nonunion Employee Representation 2
How can nonunion employee representation can be used as a management weapon for suppressing unionization?
To prevent workers from thinking they need a union, managers might occasionally give a committee a victory without truly granting the employees any power.
So workers believe they have a voice and won’t support a union.
But this voice is management-controlled.
Thus, the National Labor Relations Act prohibits employer domination of committees and representation plans that deal with employers over terms and conditions of employment (because this is could be a union substitute).
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
32
Illegal Company Unions 1
Electromation: A small manufacturing company, established several committees with a handful of employees and two managers to discuss working conditions and policies
These committees were formed to better understand the employees’ concerns and to improve the company’s policies where feasible.
There was no evidence that these committees were established because of a union organizing drive.
In 1992, N L R B ruled that these committees were illegally dominated labor organizations because they dealt with management over terms and conditions of employment, but management controlled their structure, the issues, and their continued existence.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Illegal Company Unions 2
Legal versus illegal committees and representation plans
One concern of labor law is the illusion of a true bilateral, give-and-take relationship between labor and management.
“One-way” plans (for example, info sharing) are legal.
Employee involvement plans in which employees speak for themselves as individuals, not as representatives of their coworkers, do not violate United States labor law.
The N L R A focuses on wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment.
Nonunion plans that are primarily concerned with business issues such as quality and productivity are outside the domain of the N L R A and are legal.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Illegal Company Unions 3
Section 8 (a) (2) bans management domination, not involvement.
Plans in which employees have some control over structure and function are acceptable.
Business concerns with the Electromation controversy are not as prominent as they were in the 1990s
Employers can deal with business issues in any way they see fit, and can engage employees as individuals rather than as a group.
The risk of facing an 8 (a) (2) unfair labor practice charge is low because not many complaints are lodged, especially in the absence of an organizing drive, and the only penalty for violating 8 (a) (2) is abandonment of the representation plan.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Nonunion Employee Representation
There are three major views of nonunion employee representation:
Good.
Better than nothing.
Bad.
Disputes over these views split the field of human resources and industrial relations in the 1930s and are again dividing the field in the 21st century
Depends on the school of thought someone favors.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
The Organizational Quest for Flexibility 1
Table divided into three columns summarizes the flexibility in the employment relationship. The column headers read: Employment flexibility goals; examples; and employee concerns.
| Employment Flexibility Goals | Examples | Employee Concerns |
| Change labor utilization through varying work hours or number of employees. | Part-time employment Temporary employment Seasonal employment Outsourcing | Lack of sufficient hours to earn enough income to take care of basic needs and raise a family; uncertainty; periods of unemployment; stress. |
Table divided into three columns summarizes the flexibility in the employment relationship. The column headers read: Pay flexibility goals; examples; and employee concerns.
| Pay Flexibility Goals | Examples | Employee Concerns |
| Make compensation responsive to changes in competitive pressures and organizational performance. | Pay-for-performance Profit sharing No wage indexation | Risky. Compensation is uncertain and may decrease; potential for managerial abuse; organizational performance beyond individual or work group control; stress |
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
The Organizational Quest for Flexibility 2
Table divided into three columns summarizes the flexibility in the employment relationship. The column headers read: Functional flexibility goals; examples; and employee concerns.
| Functional Flexibility Goals | Examples | Employee Concerns |
| Easily shift workers into different jobs in response to changing customer demands and production needs | Job enrichment Work teams Cross-training | Potential for replacing high-wage, skilled employees with low-wage, unskilled employees; disguised old-fashioned work speed-up; stress. |
Table divided into three columns summarizes the flexibility in the employment relationship. The column headers read: Procedural flexibility goals; examples; and employee concerns.
| Procedural Flexibility Goals | Examples | Employee Concerns |
| Change production methods, technology, and work organization | Unilateral management authority to restructure the workplace | Lack of a voice in the absence of unions or work councils; stress. |
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
38
(In)Flexibility in the Unionized Employment Relationship
Job control unionism restricts flexibility
Restrictive work rules limits functional flexibility and employment flexibility through limitations on the use of part-time or temporary workers, subcontracting, or layoffs.
Seniority based procedures make it difficult to transfer and promote workers on the basis of skills and merit.
Focus on seniority rather than skills hampers training and other developmental opportunities.
But remember employee concerns
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Unions in the Fissured Workplace
A fissured workplace has workers who are legally distinct, e.g., regular employees, staffing agency placements, subcontractors, and independent contractors
Sometimes this is done to avoid unionization.
Harder for unions to organize ultra-competitive subcontractors and win contract improvements.
High turnover and isolated bargaining units.
Classifying a worker as an independent contractor means that they are no longer an employee in the eyes of the law, so they are no longer entitled to the NLRA’s protections.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Unions in the Gig Economy
The gig economy presents labor unions with difficult challenges
Difficult to achieve solidarity.
Independent contractors are excluded from the NLRA.
Workers lack NLRA protections.
Firms can’t be compelled with bargaining.
Gig workers have instead focused on building solidarity, fighting misclassification through the courts, and using mass protests to win gains directly.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Automation and the Future of Work
Technological change is not new, but can cause major disruptions for employers, workers, and unions
Challenges for unions.
Job loss and re-training.
Reduced need for solidarity across skill types.
Rise in alt-labor movements (e.g., worker centers, Fight for $15) to advocate for marginalized, low-wage workers.
What to do if artificial intelligence, machine learning, and advanced robotics replace complex, non-routine jobs with technology?
Not just a problem for unions.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Fostering Improved Labor–Management Relationships 1
Strategies for managers in unionized business to respond to competitive pressures, increase flexibility, or redesign work
Escape: exiting from the company’s bargaining obligation by relocating operations to a nonunion site, subcontracting work, or decertifying the union (“union busting”).
Adversarial.
Force change: hard bargaining (maybe withstanding a strike) to pressure the union and employees to accept compensation and work rule concessions.
Adversarial.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Fostering Improved Labor–Management Relationships 2
Foster change: collaboratively developing labor-management partnerships that seek mutual gains.
Cooperative.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
Fostering Improved Labor–Management Relationships 3
Fostering change
Integrative bargaining in which wage and work rule concessions are granted in return for gains for workers.
But also needs to change the tenor of the entire labor-management relationship.
Attitudinal structuring to develop trust.
A key element of the fostering change strategy therefore focuses on developing relationships (partnerships) based on recognition of both labor and management goals and the opportunities for mutual gain.
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
45
Overcoming Resistance to Change
Table divided into four columns summarizes the strategies of dealing with resistance to change. The column headers read: Strategy; used when resistance stems from; advantages; and disadvantages.
| Strategy | Used When Resistance Stems From… | Advantages | Disadvantages |
| Manipulation and Cooptation | …any source (but be careful!). | Quick and inexpensive. | Loss of cooperation if people feel manipulated. |
| Explicit and Implicit Coercion | …any source, and if the initiators have power (but be careful!). | Quick and effective (in the short run). | Sharpened resistance if people feel threatened or get angry or both. |
| Negotiation and Agreement | …being made worse off by the change. | Can buy out resistance; also see education and participation. | Potentially expensive, especially if it sets a precedent. |
| Education and Communication | …inaccurate or incomplete information about the change. | People will be more cooperative after being persuaded. | Can be slow and cumbersome. |
| Participation and Involvement | …power to resist (such as those resisting having needed information or skills for the change to be effective). | People will be more committed and can share their knowledge and skills. | Can be slow and cumbersome. Loss of control. |
| Facilitation and Support | …difficulties of adjusting to the change. | Effective for addressing adjustment problems. | Time-consuming and potentially expensive and ineffective. |
Insert Photo Credit Here
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
End of Main Content
© 2021 McGraw-Hill. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom.
No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill.
Because learning changes everything.®
www.mheducation.com
Accessibility Content: Text Alternatives for Images
© 2021 McGraw-Hill. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom.
No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill.
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Because learning changes everything.®
© McGraw-Hill
Example of a Traditional Seniority Ladder - Text Alternative 1
Return to parent-slide containing images.
The arrows in the flowchart denote the bumping sequence during layoffs. For example, if the number of employees in the “major body repair trucks” classification is reduced, those with the least seniority move down to the “dingman and metal finisher” classification, and so forth. The miscellaneous group, including assemblers, is at the bottom of the seniority ladder.
Table divided into two columns shows the traditional seniority ladder at a truck assembly plant. The column headers are marked as Department one and department two.
| Department One | Department Two |
| Major body repair trucks | Dingman and metal finisher |
| Dingman and metal finisher | Door hanger trucks |
| Door hanger trucks | Welder for gun body setup |
| Welder for gun body setup | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
| Elpo attendant | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
| Repair engine | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
| Welder for arc or acetylene | Welder for gun body setup |
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
49
Example of a Traditional Seniority Ladder - Text Alternative 2
Return to parent-slide containing images.
Table divided into two columns shows the traditional seniority ladder at a truck assembly plant. The column headers are marked as Department one and department two.
| Department One | Department Two |
| Repair for end of line | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
| Door adjuster trucks | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
| Repair computer command control | Mechanic |
| Electrical troubleshooter | Mechanic |
| Air conditioning equipment test and adjust | Mechanic |
| Mechanic | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
| Paint spray equipment attendant electrostatic | Color spray bodies |
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
50
Example of a Traditional Seniority Ladder - Text Alternative 3
Return to parent-slide containing images.
Table divided into two columns shows the traditional seniority ladder at a truck assembly plant. The column headers are marked as Department one and department two.
| Department One | Department Two |
| Striper | Paint repair |
| Paint repair | Color spray bodies |
| Color spray bodies | Sander for wet oil or dry |
| Sander for wet oil or dry | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
| Paint mixer | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
| Conveyor attendant scheduling | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
| General clerk | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
51
Example of a Traditional Seniority Ladder - Text Alternative 4
Return to parent-slide containing images.
Table divided into two columns shows the traditional seniority ladder at a truck assembly plant. The column headers are marked as Department one and department two.
| Department One | Department Two |
| Driver | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
| Apply sealers | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
| Deadener spray | Miscellaneous group: assembler, touch up brush or gun, car loader, masker, conveyor attendant |
If the number of employees in department one were reduced, then those with the least seniority would be transferred to their respective department two.
©McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
‹#›
© McGraw-Hill
52
