Declaring Union Memberhsip

[pragmatic]

I am having some problems with the company I work with right now. I contacted my union rep who advised me to delcare my union membership because he feels it there is a 99.9% chance that they will not fire me.

I have the following questions:

Is what he says accurate about me keeping my job?


What consequences does declaring your membership have?


Thank you very much

[pragmatic]

Let me rephrase: He feels that by declaring my membership there is a 99.9% chance they wont fire me.

However, I am skeptical.

[Wage Slave]

I was talking to someone the other night about this. He strongly maintained that Japanese companies never want to fire an employee. If they do:

1. They have to pay some severance
2. The employee is in a stronger position when meeting new companies
3. The company loses face
4. The employee can claim unemployment benefit straight away instead of waiting months

They want you to resign and can play long and hard to try and get you to do it. The person I spoke to said the meeting to discuss his case went on over 3 hours and he only finally got them to fire him by losing his rag and kicking a few tables and chairs around the room. Only then did they finally relent and agree to dismiss him. This after a sustained campaign of isolation, bullying and humiliation had failed to elicit the desired resignation.

So I think the union rep is right. Them knowing you are a union member will not make a dismissal any more likely. It will remain unlikely. It might however, cause them to be a bit more careful about being accused of constructive dismissal.

Thing is - Has the relationship broken down? Do you really want to stay? Is there any point? If not, then actually you want them to fire you for the reasons above.

[GomiGirl]

What sort of job and what union?

Remember that the unions have their own agenda that is not necessarily always to help you out.

[pragmatic]

The relationship has not broken down at all. In fact it is quite amicable. They are still acting like my boss, but we are talking, I listen to them and they appear to listen to me. Delcaring my union membership will be a shock to them I think. However, they are a big company and I do not think it is the first time they had unionnized employees before.

I am concerned they may "ask me to resign" , like you said or transfer me off to the end of the Earth some where though.

[pragmatic]

I was talking to someone the other night about this. He strongly maintained that Japanese companies never want to fire an employee. If they do:

1. They have to pay some severance
2. The employee is in a stronger position when meeting new companies
3. The company loses face
4. The employee can claim unemployment benefit straight away instead of waiting months

They want you to resign and can play long and hard to try and get you to do it. The person I spoke to said the meeting to discuss his case went on over 3 hours and he only finally got them to fire him by losing his rag and kicking a few tables and chairs around the room. Only then did they finally relent and agree to dismiss him. This after a sustained campaign of isolation, bullying and humiliation had failed to elicit the desired resignation.

So I think the union rep is right. Them knowing you are a union member will not make a dismissal any more likely. It will remain unlikely. It might however, cause them to be a bit more careful about being accused of constructive dismissal.

Thing is - Has the relationship broken down? Do you really want to stay? Is there any point? If not, then actually you want them to fire you for the reasons above.

If you say that my termination will remain "unlikley" then what is the advantage of declaring you union membership then?

[Wage Slave]

If you say that my termination will remain "unlikley" then what is the advantage of declaring you union membership then?

The fact you have representation and legal advice might restrain the constructive dismissal tactics if you decide you want to stay. If you decide there really isn't any point in staying on and battling then with advice and representation you have more chance of getting a termination, which in fact is the best outcome for you and the worst for them. All a bit contrary to how we think about it but that's what I hear.

[Wage Slave]

Remember that the unions have their own agenda that is not necessarily always to help you out.

Could you explain a bit more?

[GomiGirl]

Remember that the unions have their own agenda that is not necessarily always to help you out.

Could you explain a bit more?

It has always been my experience that Unions are more interested in getting people to align with them and not with their employer and creating an adversarial environment in the work place thus creating a need for them as a third party in the relationship. Their agenda is self preservation of the Union.

As an employer myself, I have more respect for somebody who comes to me to discuss their needs rather than using a third party threat to supply "what is owed to them".

[Wage Slave]

Remember that the unions have their own agenda that is not necessarily always to help you out.

Could you explain a bit more?

It has always been my experience that Unions are more interested in getting people to align with them and not with their employer and creating an adversarial environment in the work place thus creating a need for them as a third party in the relationship. Their agenda is self preservation of the Union.

As an employer myself, I have more respect for somebody who comes to me to discuss their needs rather than using a third party threat to supply "what is owed to them".

I see. Well, you are clearly a good employer and so there is no need for a union to ever be involved. Whether all employers are like that is perhaps questionable. Having worked in situations where there was no union involved and in situations where there was, my experience is that things were better, more proper and more legal when there was a union involved.

I have only ever actually been in dispute with an employer once. They were truly terrible and there was no union involved. I got nothing out of it except I found a much better job within a week or two.

I think unions work best when they are just there as part of the infrastructure and worst when the leadership take on a sort of wider reforming/crusading role.

[wagyl]

I was talking to someone the other night about this. He strongly maintained that Japanese companies never want to fire an employee. If they do:...
2. The employee is in a stronger position when meeting new companies...

I don't entirely (= at all ) understand this.

As far as downsides of mentioning union membership go, I feel that if the relationship between you and your employer is still amicable it may convert it into an adversarial, antagonistic relationship. It might be a useful tool for you to have, but I would think carefully about when you choose to use it, maybe when you are getting close to making last ditch efforts.

Reading between the lines in the OP's other posts, I am assuming we are talking about an industry-wide union, rather than the common Japanese single-enterprise union, which acts as go-between between management and labour in the one company only. I wonder if the OP is on permanent staff, or on a contract renewed each year. The most usual thing I would think if management is not happy, is to wait until the contract is up for renewal and make the decision not to do so. To go shifting a contract employee around midcontract to encourage them to resign seems like either overkill or deep, deep, sudden dissatisfaction on their part.

[Wage Slave]

I was talking to someone the other night about this. He strongly maintained that Japanese companies never want to fire an employee. If they do:...
2. The employee is in a stronger position when meeting new companies...

I don't entirely (= at all ) understand this

He seemed to be saying that the worst thing possible was to be seen as flaky, a quitter, no guts etc. If you cave in and resign then that indicates a lack of character. If, however you fight and force them to dismiss you, then they appear the losers not you.

Interested to hear other's perspective on this. I have noticed that in every case I have heard of, the company's MO has been to try to secure a resignation by hook or by crook. You are in trouble, you must sign this paper before you can leave this office etc etc. The advice is invariably don't sign anything. Force them to sack you if they want rid of you.

[wagyl]

Hmmmmn that seems to be assuming that the potential new employer has access to all the inside gossip.

From what I have seen in my experience within a Japanese workplace, I would agree that terminations of permanent staff, even when the company would be better off without the deadwood hanging around, are extraordinarily rare. The capacity of that same deadwood to linger longer in a toxic environment is also extraordinary. I don't think it does good things to either side. I have seen downsizings where there is a blanket offer of a redundancy payout, but they usually only lead to the employees with get-up-and-go, getting up and going, and the deadwood still lingering, but that is not a uniquely Japanese phenomenon.

My personal view is that if a job environment is toxic, it is best to plan your own exit strategy, not engage in a bloody-minded war of attrition, trying to force the other side to make a move. There is certainly a better job environment out there. You spend too much of your life at the workplace to spend it in misery. I am not sure that the OP is at this stage: in fact, I am unclear just what his issue is.

[Wage Slave]

My personal view is that if a job environment is toxic, it is best to plan your own exit strategy, not engage in a bloody-minded war of attrition, trying to force the other side to make a move. There is certainly a better job environment out there. You spend too much of your life at the workplace to spend it in misery.

Agreed. Life is too short so bring it to a head one way or another.

I am not sure that the OP is at this stage: in fact, I am unclear just what his issue is.

Double agreed. On the one hand there are problems, on the other the relationship is normal and in fact amicable.

If there are real problems and the company isn't showing signs of good faith then I would probably make it clear I had union support. Just levelling the playing field a little and making it clear that legality must be observed.

If there aren't any intractable problems and the company is showing good faith then I would just keep quiet about it for now as it isn't really the sort of thing a union can necessarily help with, as explained by GG.

[Doctor Stop]

As an employer myself, I have more respect for somebody who comes to me to discuss their needs rather than using a third party threat to supply "what is owed to them".

So if one was to come up to you and say, hey GG, back enroll me in the social insurance you haven't enrolled them in would you respect them for saying that and enroll them or come up with some excuse why not to?

If one would ask for a 3% raise to compensate them for the upcoming consumption tax hike, would you respect them and say yes?

[kurogane]

As far as downsides of mentioning union membership go, I feel that if the relationship between you and your employer is still amicable it may convert it into an adversarial, antagonistic relationship. It might be a useful tool for you to have, but I would think carefully about when you choose to use it, maybe when you are getting close to making last ditch efforts..

Yeah, agreed that it could easily be taken as a provocation; it seems to be a sort of a Face Thing. The prevalence of anti-union sentiment amongst the Jpn business class is pronounced enough I would agree that thinking about it as part of the total tool kit is a very good strategy, to be deployed only if necessary. OTOH, asking your union rep for advice on the QT is also a good idea.

I despise the redneck anti-union sentiments that seem so strong these days even amongst workers, but as GoGi said, if constructive dialogue is possible without mentioning or involving the union there is little need to do so.

Also, if this is the General Union we are talking about, they seem very much concerned with promoting their own agenda and little else but increasing membership, often to the detriment of individual members and the efficacy of union involvement in general. That is based on social interaction with chapter organisers in Kansai and what seems to be a very clubby insider bias in its operation.

But if there was ever an era where increased unionisation is important, it's now. I can't see it working for me as a freelance subcontractor, but many normal workers could benefit greatly. Look for that union label.

[GomiGirl]

As an employer myself, I have more respect for somebody who comes to me to discuss their needs rather than using a third party threat to supply "what is owed to them".

So if one was to come up to you and say, hey GG, back enroll me in the social insurance you haven't enrolled them in would you respect them for saying that and enroll them or come up with some excuse why not to?

If one would ask for a 3% raise to compensate them for the upcoming consumption tax hike, would you respect them and say yes?

This depends on their performance. If somebody is performing well, then they are more likely to get a raise or extended holidays when they want them. If they are just doing the absolute minimum and are only looking for what they can get then I am unlikely to just give a raise for a no reason - and the consumption tax affects all of us so this is not enough of a reason.

Insurance is something that needs to be done by law. If not then things need to be negotiated before the employee starts. I always give full disclosure about what I will and will not do BEFORE somebody comes to work for me. If they can live with this, then great. If not, then they are probably not advised to take on the job from the beginning. Employers are people too and they want to work in a happy, productive environment so will do what they can to ensure this and people who fit into this culture will be taken care of.

Simply showing up is not enough to earn your wage - you have to perform and contribute to the business and you will be compensated accordingly. Those who contribute more will earn more or are more likely to have their requests met. I give great holidays, am very flexible with personal time and pretty much let people behave like adults. I only hire adults though. There was one of my staff who needed to take some time off and work remotely from home. He came to me with a proposal that was fair and I accepted it.

I had another staff member who was unreliable, always late, slept at his desk, full of excuses and he never got a raise and minimal bonuses. He didn't ask either as I am sure he knew that he was a bad employee.

[pragmatic]

I was talking to someone the other night about this. He strongly maintained that Japanese companies never want to fire an employee. If they do:...
2. The employee is in a stronger position when meeting new companies...

I don't entirely (= at all ) understand this.

As far as downsides of mentioning union membership go, I feel that if the relationship between you and your employer is still amicable it may convert it into an adversarial, antagonistic relationship. It might be a useful tool for you to have, but I would think carefully about when you choose to use it, maybe when you are getting close to making last ditch efforts.

Reading between the lines in the OP's other posts, I am assuming we are talking about an industry-wide union, rather than the common Japanese single-enterprise union, which acts as go-between between management and labour in the one company only. I wonder if the OP is on permanent staff, or on a contract renewed each year. The most usual thing I would think if management is not happy, is to wait until the contract is up for renewal and make the decision not to do so. To go shifting a contract employee around midcontract to encourage them to resign seems like either overkill or deep, deep, sudden dissatisfaction on their part.

I think these are all valid points. I have tried to talk to them. They are nice to me. However, everytime I ask them whether or not I will have a job for next year they all keep telling me "I dont know, its not my decision". I am wondering if everything is really what is seems. I believe if I declare my union membership and dont call the office and make demands all the time, I think it will remain amicable.

However, any constructive feed back is useful

[Yokohammer]

Just a couple of things off the top of my head. If I'm missing the target completely feel free to ignore me.

Firstly, if you'll all nervous and badgering them about whether you'll have a job next year, that in itself might be sufficient cause for them to decide that you're a pain in the arse and they don't want you around.

Secondly, if there's any doubt at all I'd be out networking and trying to set up the next gig, or at least find potential openings. If you're confident in your abilities and value to an organisation that should be no problem. Time spent working on the future will be much better spent than time spent fretting and fussing over a present that might soon turn out to be the past.

[wagyl]

As far as downsides of mentioning union membership go, I feel that if the relationship between you and your employer is still amicable it may convert it into an adversarial, antagonistic relationship. It might be a useful tool for you to have, but I would think carefully about when you choose to use it, maybe when you are getting close to making last ditch efforts.

Reading between the lines in the OP's other posts, I am assuming we are talking about an industry-wide union, rather than the common Japanese single-enterprise union, which acts as go-between between management and labour in the one company only. I wonder if the OP is on permanent staff, or on a contract renewed each year. The most usual thing I would think if management is not happy, is to wait until the contract is up for renewal and make the decision not to do so. To go shifting a contract employee around midcontract to encourage them to resign seems like either overkill or deep, deep, sudden dissatisfaction on their part.

I think these are all valid points. I have tried to talk to them. They are nice to me. However, everytime I ask them whether or not I will have a job for next year they all keep telling me "I dont know, its not my decision". I am wondering if everything is really what is seems. I believe if I declare my union membership and dont call the office and make demands all the time, I think it will remain amicable.

However, any constructive feed back is useful

I'm going to go out on a limb here. It is pretty radical, so hang on as we go for the ride....

What about if they are telling you the truth?

I know, a shocking concept, but somehow that might just explain everything, strange as that may seem.

You are, in effect, asking them to make a promise that your contract will be renewed. If it is true that that decision is made by others higher up, the decision is completely out of their hands and they are prudent not to make a promise they have no hope of knowing whether it will be kept or not.

You, on the other hand, keep asking anyway. They think "does this guy think we have suddenly got the power to make those decisions in the meantime?" but they don't say anything about that because they understand that it is a concern for you. But they can offer no other answer than that which they have already given.

No real harm done so far.

So let's imagine then that you come and say "I am a member of a labour union by the way."

This will not suddenly give them the power to make the decisions they have lacked all along.
Your situation is not improved.
As a best case scenario, they say "whoopy-doo." In my view, anyway.
As a worst case scenario they might start to wonder whether there is some hidden agenda behind your constant questions about your future with the company, whether you want to alter the terms and conditions of your employment, get a little assertive, start to be just that little bit too much trouble to be worth keeping on.

The advice you will get on this issue will change depending on the philosophy of the person answering. In other words, it will depend how "red" the person is, as to whether they recommend that you announce your membership or not. The ultimate decision will be yours, but bear in mind that this is not a black and white area.

[Wage Slave]

So, it turns out that "having some problems" means not getting re-assurance that a contract will be renewed. It also turns out "getting fired" means not having a contract renewed. I see.

Sorry, I completely misunderstood. In that case, I agree that you have no reason to mention the fact you have joined a union. It's irrelevant - you are not in dispute and nor do you even have a grievance.

Other than that, I agree with the advice earlier about doing everything possible to have a viable plan B in case your contract is not renewed. I would especially recommend this if the company you are working for is facing difficult and challenging trading conditions.

When does the contract came up for renewal?