Trade union officials in the firm

Trade union officials in enterprise are commended by both employees and personnel managers; the latter particularly appreciate their ability to harmonise the interests of management and staff. The assessment of the qualities of trade union officials also drew attention to the lack of younger people holding official trade union posts. 

Trade union officials are rated positively by both employees and human resources managers, who appreciate their ability to harmonise the interests of the company’s management and employees. An assessment of trade unions also drew attention to the lack of younger trade union officials.

Trade union officials and human resources managers see the function of the chairman of the basic trade union organisation as crucial for the future viability of the organisation. They also value having a qualified, suitable chairman with basic legal and economic knowledge complemented by social intelligence, as an equal partner for management. However, it would be misleading to say that employees are keen and willing to set up trade unions, let alone to put themselves at their head.

A project called 'Methods for the effectiveness of mediating interests between individuals, social groups and the state' sought to map the role of the trade union official at an enterprise. Carried out under the 'Modern society and its transformations' programme, this project received financial support from the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs of the Czech Republic (Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí ČR, MPSV) and was coordinated by the Research Institute for Labour and Social Affairs (Výzkumný ústav práce a sociálních věcí, VÚPSV). The project involved two questionnaires. The first, called Employees 2003 ('Zaměstnanci 2003'), questioned 1,009 respondents/employees; the second, called 50 50, questioned 54 trade union officials and 52 human resources managers in selected firms whose structure matches that of the national economy.

Willingness to take responsibility

The first questionnaire showed that employees are unwilling to set up and run trade union organisations at the enterprise and that this is the most frequent reason for no unions at a number of firms. A third of employees agree with the sentence that trade unions are not necessary. 12% of employees stated that the employer tries to prevent the setting up of a trade union. The following table shows the results.

Source: Sociological Institute (Sociologický ústav Akademie věd ČR, SOÚ), project MS 5 'Methods for and Effectiveness of Mediating Interests…', Employees 2003, N=1009

If we overlook a whole series of other adverse factors rooted in the very nature of trade union work, such as a conflict of roles when the trade union official tries to find consensus with the company management, which might anger other employees, the official is often pressured by the trade union or its members to follow a course of action he might not agree with. In addition, officials are at risk of possible discrimination by the employer. More than 63% of employees agreed with the statement that working in a trade union can complicate your professional career. These adverse circumstances cannot be offset by sufficient financial compensation, as few trade union organisations can afford to pay a 'released chairman'. For example, the biggest trade union in the Czech Republic, Czech Metalworkers´ Federation (Odborový svaz KOVO, OS KOVO), states that just 10% of basic organisations have a released chairman. If the chairman is released and his trade union work is made easier, his future is still not assured. The post of trade union chairman does not tend to lead to promotion within the trade union’s apparatus, regardless of the fact that by performing this office he loses the qualifications necessary for his original employment.

In-depth and group interviews held with enterprise-level trade union officials as part of the project show that people often become a trade union official because they do not want to have to share the problems associated with ineffective or non-existent management of a trade union organisation or out of personal conviction and enthusiasm. What is not clear is the extent to which, and how successfully people guided by these motives are able to carry out the trade union function.

Assessment of trade union officials

What do employees and human resources managers think of trade union officials? Their responses indicate that officials are successfully coping with their dual role, as trade union members are largely satisfied with their officials. 60% of trade union members expressed satisfaction with their chairman, 30% of trade unionists adopt a neutral stance and only one in 10 is dissatisfied with their chairman. Every second human resources manager rates the trade union official at the enterprise positively in terms of their ability to carry out their trade union function. 42% of personnel managers consider their abilities average. The remaining 8% consider their abilities poor.

Despite employees’ considerable satisfaction with trade union officials, they are not regarded as the source of trade union authority in firms. Only every eleventh employee working in a company where there are unions stated that the unions’ authority is founded on the official. This view on authority was shared evenly by trade union members and non-members. Trade unions’ legal standing at the enterprise, their tradition and the size of their membership are seen as a greater source of trade union authority (43%, 29% and 11%, respectively of employees working where there are trade unions).

The respondents have a very consistent attitude towards trade union officials. There is little statistical difference between individual socio-professional categories, refuting the assumption that people with a higher standard of education would be more critical of officials as passive, lacking the necessary qualification to bargain, or insufficiently experienced. The supposition that older employees would disagree more strongly with the statement that officials are part of the outgoing generation and have trouble coping with new ideas was not verified. The only statistically significant correlation was found between the assessment of officials and membership of a trade union organisation. Trade unionists were understandably more likely to attribute positive qualities and characteristics to their officials than non-members. Although non-members do not rate officials as highly as members, almost every second non-member is convinced that the trade union official is the right person for the job, that he has courage and knows how to stand up for people. Employees are most appreciative of trade union officials’ ability to harmonise the interests of the firm’s management and workers. Their realistic approach to collective bargaining is also rated positively. Conversely, 22% to 29% of employees surveyed rated officials negatively.

Source: SOÚ, project MS 5 'Methods for and Effectiveness of Mediating Interests…', Employees 2003, N=1009, and data from 50 50, N=106

The opinions of human resources managers also show trade union officials at the enterprise in a favourable light. All five positive characteristics proposed are also their most frequent answers, with each of them gaining 70% to almost 85% positive preferences. Most of the surveyed personnel managers regard trade union officials at their enterprise as 'the right person for the job', courageous and capable of standing up for employees. This appraisal of officials’ positive characteristics was often mentioned in group discussions with personnel managers. Other positive characteristics mentioned by personnel managers include their dependability, sticking to agreements, their willingness to dedicate their free time to trade union work, their loyalty to the employer, their ability to conduct social dialogue, especially in social matters, and communication with employees. Negatives mentioned were disunity, fragmentation of opinions, partiality, lack of objectivity, defending the interests of employees breaching work rules and discipline, lack of qualifications and education, incompetence and lack of flexibility. Personnel managers believe that trade union officials have sufficient authority with the trade unions and management and, if it is necessary, are able to act as a link between the collective of employees and the company management. During bargaining they are able to identify the firm’s needs and possibilities and to table well-balanced demands.

None of the negative characteristics shown in the table (passivity, lack of experience, lack of qualifications for bargaining with management, inability to win confidence) are frequent alternatives. The only exception is the statement that officials are part of the outgoing generation that has trouble coping with new ideas. This confirms the increasingly more evident generational problem in the trade union movement, particularly among its officials. This was also mentioned in group discussions, where the participants stated that trade union organisations are encountering a serious problem with recruiting younger officials. The existing state of affairs will not improve, in the opinion of the participating trade union officials, until young, educated people are guaranteed secure, long-term career prospects in trade unions and are sufficiently well paid for the work.

Comments

Considering the gradual decline in trade union membership, there is an increased need for debate on the role of trade union officials, whose opinions influence the existing and potential membership, in terms of both the number of members and their involvement and spectrum of activities. The advanced average age of trade union members and officials indicates that the necessary generational replacement is still not taking place. Younger trade union members and consequently officials who would bring new benefits and ideas for the work and running of trade union organisations would certainly help at least stabilise trade union membership. (R. Vašková, J. Hála, A. Kroupa)