Employee Survey Form

Sunny

Corporate has just sent out a new Employee Survey that they want every employee to complete because of the recent change to a new outsourced payroll system (the payroll conversion from hell). Among the many questions on this thing is: "Are you a member with any union?" Aside from the execrable English, I don't think this is a legal or intelligent question to ask. Only a few of our plants are union, and we should know which of our employees at these plants belong to the union - after all, we payroll deduct union dues. In any case, if doesn't feel right to ask this kind of question. Is is any of our business if folks belong to a union at another job? And should we be making lists of union employees at our plants. I think there is potential trouble lurking here. I could really use some input here from the forum so I can stop this, if appropriate.
Thanks.

deniseE

If the goal is to determine if any employees have had difficulty with deductions taken directly from the paycheck...then the question should be just that.

However, it does seem to be worded in a manner that singles out union members.

If the survey has not been sent to all employees, it might be worth it to revamp this question...otherwise...just be prepared for the fallout!!

Steve McElfresh

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 09-18-03 AT 03:22PM (CST)[/font][p]Sunny,

The question is not especially intelligent (for more reasons than their ham-handed English). While there are reasons doubt whether this can lead to meaningful results, your liability issues may be somewhat limited. Note: what follows is most certainly not legal advice.

Of course, NLRA prohibits discriminate against union members. But you already know who your union members are, so the questionnaire doesn't change this liability for the most part. Special Case One: If it is contended that you found out that someone is a member of a different union -- not through their employment with you -- and you did something untoward to them, it could be argued that you found out through the questionnaire and discriminated accordingly. Seems a little far-fetched, but I've seen stranger. Special Case Two: It might be argued that you acted against union members who expressed certain attitudes (and not non-union members who expressed the same attitudes). Hence, you were discriminating against them based on their union membership+attitude.

Both of the SPs assume the possibility or appearance that the respondents will be individually identifiable. You remove these legal issues if responses are truly and demonstrably anonymous. But it may not be so easy to remove the fear and uncertainy that your question raises, and the unreliable answers and/or low response rate that results.

The question could be asked in a way that specifies interest in your unions only, and does so in a context that makes clear the relevance of your interest to their needs. Won't take away some of the reactions, particularly if people are already paranoid, but it will help.

And you could use a third-party vendor to run the survey, to help with the appearance and certainty of anonymity. Further, there are ways to survey your entire population and to separate out the results for union respondents -- without asking directly about membership, and while preserving anonymity. But that is will beyond the scope of this thread. Let me know off-line if that is of interest.

Regards,

Steve Mac

Steve McElfresh, PhD
Principal
HR Futures
408.605.1870

Don D

As I've posted before, two years ago I went through a 70 hour wringer called an NLRB Hearing. One question the Federal employee attorney asked me was, "As Director of the Human Resources Department, can you honestly tell the court that from time to time you do not use the fact that an employee is a union member in your decisions as to how you might treat that employee or what discipline you might decide he will get?" My answer stunned him. It was, "As HR Director, I have absolutely no knowledge whatsoever of who is and who is not a member of the union. That information meets no Human Resources needs and is used over in the accounting division only for purposes of dues deductions.

In this and other 'Right To Work" states, anyone eligible for union membership has the same protections as those who actually join up, but HR doesn't track them for any reason that I know of, nor should we.

The question still remains; what in the world would a third party payroll vendor need with the answer to the question they asked? No useful or legal conclusions can be drawn from tabulating that. Is there a chance your state law allows the mandatory deduction of union dues for all employees in the collective bargaining unit whether or not they are members? That might be their angle. If I couldn't get satisfied with the reason, I would prohibit the question. If not their English, you are possibly liable for their stupidity while they are acting as your agent.

Steve McElfresh

Don,

Right you are. By the by, the stupidity for which Sunny is liable is apparently coming from "Corporate", not their payroll vendor. Which makes it worse, of course.

Steve Mac

Steve McElfresh, PhD
Principal
HR Futures

408.605.1870

Sunny

Both of you are right. The purpose of this questionnaire is to obtain information from employees to check against the information in the system-from-hell (much of which is unaccountably wrong). I am one of the few union plants and I have a real problem with asking this question. As Don says, I can truly say now that, for the most part, I have no idea who is in the union and who isn't. I appreciate your support in this - I have already raised it with Corporate and been told that the risk was small. Of course it is, for them. They won't be around when the NLRB comes to call. Oh well, I feel better knowing the hr professionals agree with me. Thanks.

Don D

Sunny: It should always be comforting to know that there are supporters out here who will actually pass you food through the bars.

Sunny

Thanks - I'm truly touched.