Labor Studies Journal Case Study Essay Assignment

Labor Studies Journal Case Study Essay Assignment

Order ID:89JHGSJE83839

Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago

Pages:5-10

Instructions:

Labor Studies Journal Case Study Essay Assignment

250 Labor Studies Journal 43(4)

The plants has not changed significantly in the last twenty years. Several women who worked at the plants in the 1990s sued the Company for pervasive sexual harassment, and in 1999, won a multimillion dollar settlement. As the women who were members of the United Auto Workers (UAW) told the Times,

bosses and fellow laborers treated them as property or prey. Men crudely commented on their breasts and buttocks; graffiti of penises was carved into tables, spray-painted onto floors and scribbled onto walls. They groped women, pressed against them, simulated sex acts and punished those who refused (Chira and Einhorn 2017).

When one of the women asked her union representative for help in dealing with a coworker who propositioned her for oral sex, he urged her not to follow-through on her complaints because the coworker would lose his job, his benefits, and his pension. False rumors about a sexual relationship with the harasser spread in the plant, which made the woman’s work life increasing stressful. She gave up attempting to press charges when the union official told her, “Suzette, you’re a pretty woman—take it as a compliment.” Other female union members shared similar experiences (Chira and Einhorn 2017).

Fast forward twenty years, and conditions have not improved significantly for the UAW women at Ford. In August 2017, the U.S. EEOC reached a $10 million settlement with Ford over racial and sexual harassment allegations at the very same Chicago plants (Chira and Einhorn 2017).

Thirty women autoworkers brought a separate law- suit, which accuses union representatives of harassment and obstructing women’s complaints.6 In that lawsuit, which is still making its way through the courts, several women accuse the UAW bargaining committee chairman, Allen “Coby” Millender, of repeated assaults that include touching, grabbing, and attempts at unwanted kissing (EbossWatch 2014).

When one woman sought his help after being fired, he told her she would have to get on her knees and “act like another woman who moments before their conversation, had been pressed close to him, standing between his legs” (Chira and Einhorn 2017). Millender also threatened to move a worker to an overnight shift if she did not lunch with him in his office and have sex with him (EbossWatch 2014).

Save for the failed efforts of one steward, the union took no steps to protect the women, yet went out of its way to protect the accused harasser. When Millender received a two-week suspension following a Company investigation, the union grieved the case to arbitration. When plant rumors spread that Millender had been fired, UAW Vice President Jimmy Settles quickly took to Facebook to clarify that Millender had not been fired, only suspended and noted that “the UAW has filed a grievance chal- lenging Mr. Millender’s suspension” (Settles 2015). By contrast, the union made no statement concerning the brutal conditions that its female members were forced to endure at the hands of supervisors and union agents.

A troubling pattern emerges from these cases: a victim complains to the union, the union representative ignores her, or points her toward the employer, encouraging her to file a complaint under the employer’s sexual harassment policy. The victim then files a complaint with the employer, who, to avoid liability under Title VII, conducts

Avendaño 251

an investigation. When the employer disciplines a harasser, the union grieves the dis- cipline, forcing the victim and the employer to align in opposition to the union and the harasser. Indeed, sexual harassment grievances in labor arbitration overwhelmingly involve men challenging discipline for sexually harassing conduct (Alleyne, 1999).

Part of the problem is that most unions do not bargain clauses specific to sexual harassment but rely on general antidiscrimination clauses to cover sexual harassment. That language gives unions little guidance on how to handle harassment claims, and, given the complexity of the issue, the emotionally charged nature of harassment claims, and the internal politics that often accompany such claims, it becomes much easier for a grievance handler to simply push complaints to the employer. Canadian unions, by contrast, have taken a different approach, negotiating clauses that deal spe- cifically with harassment, and supplementing the collective bargaining language with toolkits and training to make the protections accessible (Barnacle et al. 1994).

Lurking in the background is the union’s duty of fair representation, a legal obliga- tion to treat all members of a bargaining unit fairly and not act in a manner that is “arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith.”7 That duty requires that the union conduct an evaluation of the merits of a claim, and make a decision on how to proceed based on a fair and impartial consideration of the interests of members, free from political favoritism or ill will (O’melveny 2000).

Unions have substantial leeway in this area; they are not required to proceed with every grievance filed by an aggrieved member. If the union’s investigation concludes that the alleged harasser acted in a manner that violated the rules of the workplace, the union is not obligated to pursue a grievance on his behalf.

The Way Forward: Understanding the Past

To become an authentic leader in combating workplace sexual harassment, unions need to confront their past and present treatment of women. Bessie Hillman, the mili- tant labor activist proclaimed in 1961,

I have a great bone to pick with the organized labor movement. They are the greatest offender as far as discrimination against women is concerned. Today women in every walk of life have bigger positions than they have in organized labor. (Murolo and Chitty 2001)

The labor movement’s exclusion of women from leadership positions—indeed, from the movement itself—is rooted in long-standing sexism, a culture that values tradition and loyalty at the expense of other values.

Male chauvinism and a nearly exclusive focus on economic factors like wages and benefits have worked together throughout history to keep women in the labor move- ment as second-class citizens. Of the 13 founding unions of the American Federation of Labor (AFL), only two, the Typographical Union and Cigar Makers admitted women (Murolo and Chitty 2001). By the late 1890s, most AFL national affiliates amended their constitutions to allow for female membership, but found ways to keep

252 Labor Studies Journal 43(4)

women out. Even when women organized themselves, they were denied recognition. In the early 1900s, women printers in New York, candy workers in Philadelphia, hair- dressers in Seattle, and streetcar conductors in Cleveland organized and petitioned for a charter that would formally recognize them as an affiliate of the AFL. The AFL turned them down (Foner 1979; Murolo and Chitty 2001).

Nor did the AFL stand by women workers following World War I or World War II, when women entered the workforce in large numbers. Diane Balser’s (1987, 26) study of feminism in the labor movement exposes the antipathy that AFL leaders displayed against women:

Most if not all of the AFL leadership was convinced that ‘a woman’s place is in the home.’ The American Federationist, the AFL newspaper published many articles during these years condemning the presence of women in the wage workforce and demanding women’s exclusion from industry.

The UAW and United Electrical Workers (UE) pushed by Communists within their ranks adopted equal pay as the official policy of the union in bargaining; no others did (Foner 1979). Following World War II, organized labor participated in a cultural and legal consensus that married women belonged in the home, and that they should leave their jobs in the hands of returning veterans (Kessler-Harris 2001). Thus, women were displaced, with little support from government or labor. Both national centers, the AFL and the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO), were absent.

Worse, unions sanctioned discrimination against women through collective bar- gaining. Several unions bargained prohibitions against the employment of married women. Others agreed to the discharge of single women who married. Yet others bar- gained unequal hiring of, and wage rates for, men and women doing similar jobs where lower paying jobs were given to women (Foner 1979).

Well into the 1960s and 1970s, unions sided with employers on matters that benefit- ted men at the expense of women workers, and especially women of color. Those included protective measures like weight lifting restrictions, hours limitations, and separate jobs for men and women (Crain 2007; Deslippe 2000).

The International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) maintained a provision in its contract that allowed the “son of an active deceased longshoreman” the right to join the union by “taking his father’s union book”—a provision that remained until the 1970s, when a Southern California female dock worker sued the union (Alimahomed-Wilson 2016, 158).

Labor leaders also fought vehemently to lessen liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act for themselves, by trying to weaken the U.S. EEOC, and diverting claims away from the courts to U.S. EEOC, for both gender and race (Crain 2007; Crain and Matheny 2001). Some unions also strongly urged the U.S. EEOC to inter- pret bona fide occupational qualifications narrowly, which would allow employers and unions to continue to discriminate based on gender and race despite the antidiscrimi- nation laws (Crain 2007; Deslippe 2000).8

Unions’ responses to sexual harassment are also shaped by a distinctive form of feminism exercised by women inside the labor movement, which focuses on women’s

RUBRIC
Excellent Quality 95-100%	Introduction 45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.		Literature Support 91-84  points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.			Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score 50-85%	40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.		83-76  points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.			52-49  points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality 0-45%	37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.		75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.			48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow

 

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!