There is a long-standing labour-relations adage that “bosses get the union they deserve.”
If employers want to deal with a union that is trusting, problem-solving and prepared to listen, they need to behave the same way. On the other hand, if managers appear comfortable with confrontation and unilateralism, they should not be surprised when their employees and the union representing them respond in kind.
And let’s note that the adage works both ways, as no doubt there are examples where unions have been unreasonable in their demands and at times unnecessarily confrontational.
In the current dispute between the teachers and the provincial government, we seem to be witnessing a classic case of dysfunctional labour-management relations. And while media blackouts are in place, nevertheless the protracted talks, as well as the strike and lockout scenarios, show little sign of a constructive and healthy relationship between the parties.
This is all too bad, since there is a stream of academic research in labour-relations journals that illustrates the direct link between the state of the labour-relations climate and organizational effectiveness as measured in terms of workplace satisfaction and productivity.
More than two decades ago, Ali Dastmalchian, the former dean of the University of Victoria’s Gustavson School of Business and his colleagues began a series of studies in Canada, Australia and the U.K. defining the “labour or industrial relations climate” and its importance in contributing to performance and employee commitment.
The climate is described in terms of the degree of positivity and the quality of relationships between employees, their unions and management. It reflects “the workplace norms and attitudes perceived by management and employees and their representatives about the nature of union-management relationships in an organization.”
They found that the general dimensions that define the labour climate are fairness, union-management consultation, mutual regard, member support and union legitimacy.
There are several behaviours that illustrate these dimensions. But let’s focus on one — union-management consultation. It suggests that parties such as the B.C. Teachers’ Federation, its members, school trustees and government administrators would be better served if they worked to create an environment designed to solve common problems.
In such an environment, management would seek input from the union and its members before initiating changes, exchange information freely, illustrate concern for other parties and use joint management committees to help implement proposed changes to work conditions work. It would be a co-operative effort to make the organization a better place to work, and in so doing, deliver a first-rate public education to students in the K-12 system.
There are so many common problems, including the class size and composition issue, where the parties could work on solutions in an integrative problem-solving, non-partisan manner. Other problems we have heard about include discipline and lack of respect for teachers and fellow students, absenteeism and an environment that could be healthier, plus ways to encourage quality teaching and reverse declining enrolment.
To be sure, everything comes down in the end to funding. But this is a common problem that needs to be addressed with input from all concerned, especially the taxpaying public.
Practices for ensuring good relationships, such as those that encourage individuals to accept responsibility in developing a good union-management relationship, are also associated with improved loyalty and reduced absenteeism.
We suggest that offering a provocative $40-a-day per-student bribe to parents, if the dispute remains unresolved by Sept. 2, is exactly the wrong way to go and serves only to aggravate rather than to resolve the current dispute.
Instead, we urge the premier to show real leadership and insist that a sincere effort must be made to seek mechanisms designed to change the climate and the culture for all future talks. For example, she could establish a task force to identify specific ways to implement this suggestion and present a public report within three months.
In the meantime, she should make it clear to both parents and students that the new school year will go ahead as scheduled even if that requires the legislature to be recalled early.
These are difficult choices, but such decisions are a responsibility that comes with holding the highest office in our province. Let’s not forget that nothing less than the future education of our children and our grandchildren is at stake. It is time to act — now.
J. Barton Cunningham is a professor in the School of Public Administration at the University of Victoria, and John Fryer is an adjunct professor in the same school.
