Even in these times of national division there remain facts that are impossible to deny. One of these is that American workers represented by a labor union fare significantly better in terms of salary and benefits compared with those not organized. This is particularly true with regards to young workers, women and members of minority groups. Union membership also places employees far ahead of most workers in terms of employment security. Most employees in our country can be, without notice, terminated for almost any reason or no reason at all. There are some exceptions to this, (such as age or gender discrimination) however, it is up to the terminated employee to prove they were dismissed in a way that violated narrow and specific labor laws. If legal representation is part of the picture it falls on the terminated worker to bear the financial cost. These factors alone are often enough to accept being fired no matter how outrageous, illegal or unfair it may be.
In dramatic contrast, union membership protects workers from a range of unfair treatment including unjust termination. Contrary to the popular myth that “union workers are impossible to fire” the truth is members are much harder to be let go unfairly. Once employees complete a probationary period any type of disciplinary action by management (including termination) is subject to close review by the union. Management are required to complete a thorough and transparent investigation around any allegation of employee misconduct, Disciplinary actions taken by the employer towards the member can be challenged. This includes meetings with management where the employee is represented by a union steward. Though the union representatives themselves are often employees of the same business as the members they are representing, while acting within the role of steward, labor law stipulates that they have equal standing with management and are not subordinates. Provided they do not interfere with management’s inquiries the union can conduct its own investigation including requests for a wide range of information from management. Once both sides have gathered facts, direct discussions tend to be more productive. There almost always is a better understanding of not only the incident but also the context. By having a mutually agreed process to address situations (for example employee performance issues) an honest mistake or temporary lapse in otherwise excellent judgement can be distinguished from deficits that are far more serious. The necessary time involved provides the manager and employee the benefit from having time to “cool off” and think more clearly. Often both parties learn to improve at their jobs
Having served as a union steward for many years and having defended co-workers that found themselves in tight spots there was always one infraction that was fatal to continued employment. If the problem itself is lying, or in the course of investigation for another infraction the member demonstrates dishonesty there is no defense. Employers are not expected to tolerate lying. This is because the law recognizes that no organization or business can withstand the corrosive effects of dishonesty.
In 2020 the majority of American voters decided to fire the most obviously dishonest official in our country’s history. Then, four years later, in a decision that will astonish generations to come, millions of voters decided that what America needed was to rehire an individual that doesn’t meet the threshold requirement to continue in any job; not to lie. The Founders of our great country never anticipated an electorate so comfortable with constant, blatant lying as MAGA supporters have proven themselves to be every day. President Donald Trump’s criminal immunity does not protect him from impeachment and removal. The sooner he is gone the better.
Edward Dowd lives in Greenfield.