Employee Committee
mlbarker
19 Posts
I seem to recall that it was not a good idea to have employee committee meetings where a manager was (in a non-union environment).
Does anyone know where I can get specific information?
Does anyone know where I can get specific information?
Comments
We simply asked for volunteers, they elect their own officers each year, we give them a budget to work with and they take care of everything else. This has been working great for us for several years now.
The title alone would scare the daylights out of me. If anyone wants to take a run at establishing the committee as a bargaining group, you may have already done half the work for them. Now, "Warm and Fuzzy Picnic Planners", THAT has a ring to it!
Each committee member represents his crew and brings forth their respective questions, suggestions and/or gripes. The employees like being "heard" even though they may not like the responses.
What else could this be called, though... any creative types out there???
We also at one time had a Coordination Committee, which did more of the event planning and "social" or work life kind of stuff.
If Mary is on the HR Council, and it's a fairly well-known fact that she is on the Council and the Council's role is to advise the HR Director, then... If Sue is sexually harassed by Steve, and Sue reports it to Mary, and Mary does not report it to HR because she doesn't believe the allegation, or it's too awkward, or whatever... Then would a "reasonable person" (i.e., the Court) find that the Employer should have known about the harassment since it was reported to the HR Council?
I don't put "HR" on ANYTHING unless that person or group is a trained professional. If I have a payroll clerk, then the title is Payroll Clerk, not HR Assistant - for that specific reason.
1. A "Labor Management Committee" is standard practice (and GOOD practice) in a unionized environment ... the basic intent is for that group to work on communication and problem-solving before things get to the level of a grievance; also to clarify "intent" of CBA language, etc. If you are NOT a union environment, however, by ALL MEANS do not adopt this title.
2. I think the OP's question is in reference to the old "Electromation" and "DuPont" decisions by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that addressed limits on the authority of "Quality Circle" teams with respect to "conditions of work." I believe that the former involved a nonunion workplace and the latter involved a unionized one. The basic finding was that if an "employer dominated" QC Team made decisions about "conditions of work" (in the true legal sense), it could be construed as illegal bargaining, and a violation of the NLRA. There was, however a subsequent case, "Crown Cork and Seal," that eased up those constraints. Here is a reasonably good summary of these cases:
[url]http://www.hklaw.com/Publications/Newsletters.asp?IssueID=233&Article=1323[/url]
THere was another case, "EFCO," that pre-dated "Crown," which was pretty scary - here's a url for a good article on that case:
[url]http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Mar/1/127017.html[/url]
It's been a while since I looked at these in depth, so perhaps our moderator can shed light on the current thinking in this area.
3. I agree with ACU Frank about not using the term "HR" for anything other than HR ...
That's about it for now ... gotta get some sleep.
But, you've given me something to think about, and to check out the next timing I'm speaking with counsel .