The question came to mind as I watched the Labor Relations Special Session at the NECA Convention in Seattle. I was hearing and seeing examples of local labor-management committees in action. The underlying message was one of cooperation. The presenters talked about how they worked to break down barriers of mistrust to develop programs to promote and advance the electrical industry in their areas.

I started to wonder why labor and management are so distrustful to begin with. And that lead me to the debate of good versus evil.

In many ways, I think how we view human nature colors the way we see the labor-management relationship.

Over the years, I’ve heard some electricians describe their employers as greedy, insensitive louts who take delight in mistreating their workers. There are also electricians who admire their employers and are grateful for the jobs and benefits they provide.

I know electrical contractors who view union electricians as self-centered, lazy bums who barely work and will steal anything that’s not tied down. Then, there are contractors who value the labor of their employees and are grateful for their time, dedication, and loyalty.

Most of us don’t have such clearly delineated views. But we have to admit that do have prejudices, whether borne out of experience or just our beliefs about human nature.

In times of economic stress like we are experiencing now, these underlying beliefs magnify our reaction to events. When employers bargain for wage reductions in order to be competitive, the distrustful union member will see it as just another example of a greedy employer taking it out on the backs of labor. Other union members may be hurt that the employer they so trusted and depended on is not taking care of them in their time of need.

Overcoming these deep-seated beliefs takes a lot of effort. The presenters at the NECA Convention talked about how long and hard they worked to build even a minimal level of trust. It wasn’t the result of one meeting, but many meetings, over many months or even years.

While none of this solves the debate over whether we are inherently good or evil, we do know that it’s possible to forge a productive working relationship between management and labor, employers and employees. The alternative is to accept that human nature is what it is, that nothing will change. And, of course, for those who hold that belief, it won’t.

Speaking of optimism, I was encouraged by how many NECA members are positive about the future. Most expect a tough year in 2010 but then look for a release of pent-up construction demand after that. 

Anyone who lived in the Seattle area told us how unusually nice the weather was. I’ve been to Seattle maybe a dozen times in my life. Only one time have I experienced rain there. Do you think they tell those tales of perpetual clouds and drizzle because they don’t want us to catch on what a great area it is to live in? A little selfish, if you ask me.

I heard a number of comments about how the Trade Show looked bigger and better. It was actually a bit smaller than last year, but it did feature a great variety of vendors — and NECA members kept them busy on all three days of the show.

Many of the workshops and seminars were packed. While there’s a big social aspect to a convention, this shows that the real reason to be there is education.

A truly random thought: Why are so many people interested in paying to ride to the top of the Space Needle? I assume when it was built in the 1960s it was the tallest structure in town. Now, there are a number of buildings from which you can get a great view. For example, the sights from the top of the Columbia Tower are spectacular. And you look down on the Space Needle!

BTW: No need to comment to me about the Opening Reception. I know. If you’ve been to other NECA Conventions, you know that isn’t our norm. We’ll fix it.

Immigration reform is one of the administration’s top issues, but it has been on the back burner while Congress deals with other major legislation — which at the moment is health care reform. Immigration is expected to be on the docket in 2010, so the meeting I attended was an effort both to get ready for the legislation and to start the selling process.

At present, NECA has three main concerns regarding immigration — (1) vicarious liability under any employment verification system, (2) border security, and (3) the need to streamline the H-2 visa system for construction needs. I spoke to Secretary Napolitano and White House and DHS officials on the third point.

I noted that the current H-2 visa system is too cumbersome, especially for employers with emergency manpower needs. As an example, I told about our line contractors’ need for linemen following Hurricane Katrina. Qualified, trained IBEW linemen were available in Canada, but the visa requirements made it nearly impossible for them to work in the United States — at least on a timely basis. I suggested that employers, or perhaps labor-management groups like NECA-IBEW, should be able to pre-qualify for worker entry visas. 

Most other aspects of immigration reform were discussed during our two-and-one-half-hour meeting. It was encouraging to see the administration listen to our concerns. Of course, we don’t know if they will accept any of our suggestions or not.

Near the end of the meeting, President Obama popped in to say hello and to thank us for participating. It was the first time I met the president in person. 

NECA’s presence in, and influence on, national political and legislative matters continues to grow. This week’s White House meeting is just one more example of that.

I was backstage at Hill Auditorium, the site of the opening ceremony, when Dingell hobbled in on crutches. I said to him that it looked like he needed to get national health care passed sooner rather than later. He replied that members of Congress have good health care and that he was trying to get the same deal for the rest of the country. I reminded him his health care came through private insurance and not a government-run plan. He bristled a bit and told me public insurance would only be an option, not a requirement under the proposed legislation. He then went on the attack against insurance companies, whom he claims are the true villains in our health care system.

I’m not a fan of the insurance companies, but I recognized that he was using the talking points that House members were given before they went on recess this week. Someone did some polling and found out that most Americans hate their insurance companies. So in selling a national plan, the Democrats are setting up insurance companies as all things evil. 

I asked Dingell if they were going to include a tax on high-end health plans. I noted our industry’s concern that our long-established and collectively bargained plans may fall into the tax trap. He said he isn’t a big advocate for taxing benefits but he feels that rich people and company owners are taking advantage of the tax deductions and he isn’t against hitting them up for more money. 

We went on to debate a few more points and didn’t agree on much. One thing we did concur on, however.

Congressman Dingell said he felt that Congress doesn’t work as hard as it used to. He said they used to put in a full five-day week in Washington. I noted that now they feel obligated to get back to their districts every weekend to meet with constituents. That can be a good thing, but in the old days when they spent the weekends in Washington, they tended to socialize with each other. And, by socializing together, they learned to like each other better and to work cooperatively on solving problems.  

I told the congressman that I’m probably one of the few people who would like to see congressman take even more of the so-called boondoogle trips they make around the world. As long as they travel with a member of the opposite party, I think we taxpayers should foot the bill for even more travel. Nothing helps you get to know another person like traveling together with him and his family.

Dingell gave me a wink, said “amen,” and then hobbled out onto the stage in front of me.

Under the direction of the past administration, leaders at the Department of Labor and OSHA started down a new path by encouraging voluntary compliance programs and by working with employer groups to improve safety. The feeling was that the goal of the agency should be to improve safety, not just rack up citation statistics. Unfortunately, under the current administration, that view seems to be changing.

Over the past few years, NECA and other employer associations have had some success in developing cooperative programs with OSHA. These programs would work toward identifying safety problems and then come up with industry-wide solutions to them. The most notable of these programs is the Electrical Transmission and Distribution Partnership. The members of this coalition have worked very hard to improve safety in the line construction industry. Part of the glue that has held this group together is OSHA’s participation.

While these coalitions have not been thrown out the window, the rhetoric at the Department of Labor and in Congress has changed. We now hear how OSHA was too friendly with employers. We hear that the only way that employers will improve safety is through increased enforcement. And most disturbing of all are claims that employers, in their search of profits, are purposely putting employees in harms way.

The attitude is that employers are inherently evil. They only respond to threats of punishment and have no real concern for their employees, or so we hear. This attitude reflects a very cynical view of business in general. It totally ignores the positive role that employers have in workplace safety, and it exonerates employee behavior and absolves them of responsibility for their own safety.

Everyone can come up with examples of egregious behavior by an individual or company that led to worker injury and death. But to extrapolate this into wanton employer disregard for workplace safety is offensive.

I know that NECA and its members will continue to do the right thing in improving safety in our industry. It’s too bad that some of our nation’s leaders can’t take enough time to get down from the grandstand to see how bottom-line results are really achieved.

** NECA has started a LinkenIn discussion group for electrical safety professionals. You will need a LinkedIn profile to join the group, NECA Safety. Contact aes@necanet.org if you have questions about using LinkedIn or joining the NECA Safety group.**

Almost every American has a stake in the outcome. The health care industry is a huge segment of our economy. We all use health care services and most of us are covered by some type of insurance. We almost all agree that there's something wrong with our current system. But we’re also afraid to change it.

Both sides of the reform debate seem to agree that there should be some form of mandatory coverage. Under our current system, those who have insurance end up paying more for coverage to subsidize services for those who don't. If everyone were required to have health care insurance, the overall cost should even out and insurers should be able to guarantee coverage even for people with pre-existing conditions.

The idea of allowing individuals to select coverage from a number of competitive plans also appeals to me. I understand how the concept of employer-provided health insurance got started, but is it really the best way? Why should the employer be responsible for health care, and why should an individual be restricted to the type of coverage provided by his or her employer?

Every individual has different health insurance needs - just like we do for auto or life insurance. If we had guaranteed access to coverage, we could pick the type of coverage that best suits our individual or family needs.

Now comes the harder decisions.

Should there be a public option among the competing insurance plans? In other words, should the federal government offer an alternative to private insurance? Would the government plan eventually force the private plans out of business so that we would be left with only government-controlled health insurance?

An even bigger question is how do we pay for all this? Some ideas include taxing the individual for coverage beyond a certain amount and/or limiting the deductibility of insurance premiums paid by the employer. I know the unions aren't too happy about this idea, since most unions plans offer top-tier coverage. From an employer's point of view, wouldn't that create some incentive to control the cost of health coverage in our labor agreements?

I like the fact that the United States has the best and most innovative health care system. I like the fact that we have free access to the doctors and hospitals of our choosing and that we don't have to wait months for elective care. I hate the bureaucratic morass of insurance claims statements, bloated costs, unnecessary tests, waste and fraud.

So what do I want from health care reform? Something better, but exactly what, I can't tell you.

Ed threw some slides up on the screen showing the number of IBEW-signatory electrical contractors versus the total number of electrical contractors. He broke the numbers down by district and also showed how they looked for some typical local unions. In most cases, the number of non-union contractors exceeded the number of union contractors by six or seven times or more.

No surprise there. Ed then asked the group what they were going to do about it.

He also showed slides depicting various types of work, much of which has been abandoned by the union side of the industry - stuff like residential, small commercial, strip malls, churches, and fast food restaurants.

Ed challenged the audience to go after this work. He told them that the IBEW Constitution does not allow them to decide that this is no longer union work. He suggested that every local union consider developing a small works labor agreement and to use all the tools available to capture this work — such as the CW/CE classification.

Of course, capturing or recapturing work isn't the sole responsibility of the IBEW. In fact, they can't do it alone. For many reasons, both good and bad, we collectively have decided to walk away from huge segments of electrical construction work.

We need to sit down in each local area, assess the work that we're not doing, and come up with a plan to do it. It's as simple, and as hard, as that.

Based on Ed Hill's challenge to his local union leaders, I think NECA chapters may find a more sympathetic partner in attempting to seriously address these issues with their IBEW counterparts. And they will expect our contractors to be ready to accept the challenge as well.

This isn't the time to score political gains. It’s the time to do what we're not doing.

One of the most frequently asked questions I hear concerns whether any areas are agreeing to wage freezes or rollovers. The simple answer is yes. With the dramatic change in the construction economy this year, many local unions are taking a sober and realistic look at work prospects in their area. So far only a few have agreed to a wage freeze, but wage increases definitely appear to have moderated.

On the other hand, I’ve heard quite a few stories about union opening letters with demands that show no recognition of current economic realities. We’ll soon find out whether these were just opening ploys or serious demands.

The second question I hear most often is, "how were some local chapters able to negotiate wage freezes?" That answer isn’t as simple. 

Certainly, low market share and a book full of laid-off journeyman can be a big factor. Not every area, however, requires an economic two-by-four in the face to get the negotiating committee’s attention.

If there is any silver bullet/magic solution in any of these situations, it’s that there’s a good working relationship between the local chapter and the local union. That may seem self-evident, but it’s not. Some think that it’s a lot like winning the lottery: You either are lucky enough to get a cooperative business manager or you’re not. But if we dig deeper, we find that chapters that have a good relationship with their local unions work at it.

Working at it means good communications. The chapter leaders are constantly meeting with and talking to their union counterparts about industry issues — not just during negotiations, but year-round. Local LMCCs meet regularly and honestly discuss problems. NECA contractors talk and listen to their regular employees, taking time to explain the realities of job costs, estimating, and customer demands.

This is the message that NECA President Rex Ferry has been preaching at meetings this year. He admits that this is all easier said than done, and he even more readily admits that he hasn’t always been successful in his own communication efforts. The important thing is that he keeps trying, and he believes that if we are ever to achieve a long-term solution in labor-management relations, this is the key.

Ten or fifteen years ago, a number of chapters were particularly proactive in developing solid working relationships with their local union counterparts. Today, it’s a more common occurrence — and also why we’re seeing some more encouraging results at the bargaining table.

Our country is in financial trouble. All the proposals I’ve seen for correcting this mess focus on raising taxes, specifically on those individuals earning over $250,000 a year. On the other hand, these proposals also call for reducing taxes on other income groups. The net result is that over fifty percent of Americans won’t pay any federal income taxes at all. That leaves it up to the $250,000+ earners to bail us out.

Some analysts claim that we would have to tax 100% of the income of these high-wage earners to pay for everything that’s being proposed. In my mind, that misses the point. Why aren’t monuments being planned for the National Mall (shovel-ready, job stimulating projects, mind you) and parades organized to honor our new American heroes – the remaining taxpayers? Shouldn’t we create a national day off from work to recognize them? Instead of holding tea parties in protest, we should all sit down and write thank-you notes to these people.

Note to officials at the Department of Homeland Security: I’m being facetious.

The meeting locations may seem a bit extravagant considering the tough economic times. They were booked a couple years ago when the work picture for our industry was much better. Still, those who attended found that the money invested in attending these meetings was well spent. Sure they had a good time, but the meeting program and discussions with fellow contractors were at least as important. 

A comment from the keynote speaker at the Eastern Region meeting made it all worthwhile for me. Captain Gerald Coffee (U.S. Navy ret.) told us about his seven years as a prisoner of war during the Vietnam conflict. He related how he and other POWs, like John McCain, survived the ordeal at the so-called Hanoi Hilton.

Coffee said that during his first few months of captivity he felt sorry for himself. He prayed for his release and an end to the misery. But then he slowly began to realize that this was the wrong attitude. He decided instead that his job was to make each day as productive and positive as possible. From then on, he worked hard to improve himself and the lives of his fellow prisoners. 

If someone being tortured and held in a small, dank cell in a foreign country can have an attitude like that, then how much easier is it for us to live our lives in a positive and productive manner? It really puts it all in perspective.

When NECA contractors get together for meetings, far away or close to home, they most often find that they learn something that will improve their lives and their businesses. A great opportunity is coming up at our NECA National Convention in Seattle this September. We’re pulling out all stops to make sure that the program is relevant and useful in today’s economic climate. 

It will cost to attend. But it could cost more not to.

While I was expecting the unexpected, I didn’t expect it to happen so quickly. 

I had planned for a bad economy. I had planned for a drop in revenue from member dues, meeting attendance and magazine advertising. I had planned for an increase in government relations activities. I knew this would be an active year for the National Electrical Code panels.

What I didn’t expect was for NECA and ELECTRI International to become the victim of a financial scandal — in this case, the SEC takeover of the Stanford Financial Group. The past four weeks have been a constant stream of conference calls with boards, meetings with attorneys, and recasting and reformulating budgets and programs.

However, it’s probably not all that different from what many NECA members are going through right now as they see their backlog shrink and their prospects for new work evaporate. We are forced to look at the fundamentals of our business and decide what to trim, what to strengthen and what to eliminate entirely.

Rex Ferry has addressed these issues in his recent “From the President’s Desk” columns in ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR magazine. He casts it as an opportunity to step back and prepare your business for the next period of growth. It’s also a test of management skill and resourcefulness to be able to react to the unexpected and change course in business as conditions warrant.

So my best laid plans from a couple months ago need some reworking. On the other hand, constantly revising our plans may be the best plan of all. Tell me — what changes are you making in your business these days? Use the link below to send me your stories of what you're doing to get by.

They were both Midwesterners — Jerry Nixon from Chicago and Jerry Hill from Madison, Wisconsin.

Both stood out at industry gatherings. Jerry Nixon was always well dressed and sported a bold, often amusing necktie. Jerry Hill always wore a bright red University of Wisconsin blazer.

Both were extremely passionate about whatever they did. Whether at work or play, they lived life to the fullest on their terms. 

Neither man was shy. They both told you exactly what they thought, and they often wore their heart on their sleeve.

Both loved the electrical industry. When asked for support, they each eagerly stepped forward and gave freely of their time and money. They were leaders in everything they did.

Their industry loved them back, and each had a number of awards and accolades to prove it. In fact, both earned the Comstock Award, twenty years apart; Jerry Hill in 1988 and Jerry Nixon in 2008.

While each of these gentlemen was a unique individual, they also fit the mold of many NECA contractors. They were among the best of their peers. I’ll miss them, and so will the electrical contracting industry.

John:

I am somewhat surprised that your editorial regarding the Employee Free Choice Act hits as something that has little to do with our working relationship, but is more of a personal attack on the rights of working men and women.  I understand your concern regarding the favored nations issue; however it is our opinion that this is not a real issue, but one that some of you are using to mask your disdain for the rights of workers.  I believe that in the past when your organization wanted something legislatively that we did not necessarily agree with, there was a gentlemen’s agreement that we would not get involved, but would sit it out.  I believe for the most part this has happened and for the most part when there was something that was good for the industry we were there to work with our partners.

Your buy-in of the position of the anti-union forces does surprise me, and like the rest of them you have got it all wrong.  The present situation lends itself to the control of management when it is they who decide whether to have a card check for representation or not.  As you know if there are 95% of the people want a union, and the company refuses to accept the wishes of the employees and recognize the union as their bargaining representative, then the employer can demand an election. It is then that they grind the process to a halt until they can intimidate enough people against the union that they will permit the process to continue. Well, since it has been that way and anti-union management types seem to like it, we would like to be able to have something to say about the process as well, and if there enough cards to determine that the majority want a union then they should be permitted to have one instead of being brow-beat with the threat of loss of their employment and in many cases the actual loss of their job, until there is an election held.

However, there may be a bright side to this issue. Your position of concern for the voting rights of working men and women, however narrowly applied to a single issue, may be something to smile about.

Ed

I appreciate Ed's willingness to share his response here. Feel free to use the link below to send me any additional comments on this topic.

Since most NECA members are already organized, and since we encourage the IBEW to organize non-union employers, you would think I would be in favor of this Act. I’m not.

The core reason for my opposition is the key component of the legislation which would eliminate secret-ballot elections for employees deciding whether they want to join a union. Instead of secret elections, unions would instead collect cards signed by the employees requesting union representation. If a majority of a company’s employees sign these cards, then the employer must bargain a labor agreement with the union.

What’s the difference? Eliminating secret ballots opens the process to the potential use of intimidation and corruption. Our government, and the AFL-CIO, demand that governments and labor organizations around the world use secret-ballot elections. It’s the essence of democracy and freedom. How, then, could we deny that same right to our own citizens when it comes to decisions regarding union membership?

The real issue for unions under the current process is that, too many times after they win an organizing election, the employer stonewalls them and never legitimately bargains a labor agreement. The EFCA addresses this problem with an expedited bargaining timetable and the requirement for arbitration if a settlement can’t be reached. Those provisions are a more reasonable approach— and ones that I am more likely to support.

However, there is a caveat about arbitration that concerns me and that I’ve asked union leaders promoting the legislation to consider. In a multi-employer setting like we operate in, what is the impact when an arbitrator’s decision is at odds with the prevailing NECA-IBEW labor agreement? If the arbitrator grants a lower wage rate, it might be to NECA’s advantage to invoke the “favored nation’s clause” in our agreements. But what if the arbitrator imposes a different apprentice program? What if the arbitrator says the employer will pay into NECA-IBEW benefit plans at a different contribution rate?

I’m sure the framers of the legislation are focused on single-employer settings, but mutli-employer differences need to be addressed.

My guess is the when the EFCA is ready for a vote in Congress, it will include a compromise that retains secret-ballot elections. Until that happens, I can’t support the legislation.

Bill Kuhr, Executive Director, Western Region, NECA

Born in Osaka, Japan, Bill has lived most of his life in California. He earned his undergraduate (Government) and graduate (Business) degrees from the University of San Francisco. The product of a military family, he himself served in the U.S. Army Reserves, attaining the rank of Major.

Bill’s career with NECA began as an assistant manager with the San Francisco Chapter. In 1988, he became manager of the Redwood Empire Chapter and joined the NECA field staff in 1992 as a field representative in the Western Region. In August 2000 when Emerson Hamilton retired, I tapped Bill to be the next Executive Director of the Western Region. It was a good decision.

Besides his wealth of experience, Bill brings his great sense of humor and personable nature to the job. He’s bright, thoughtful and highly motivated. You don’t have to ask Bill twice to get the job done. In fact, you don’t have to ask him the first time. He’s already on it.

A bit secretive about his hobbies (see paragraph one above), I know Bill enjoys shooting and riding motorcycles. I believe he’s also a bit of an oenophile. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that). Bill and his wife, Bonnie, live in Marin County, California.

I decided to ask some of the senior staff at NECA what resolutions they were making for the New Year.

Eastern Region Executive Director Rich Parenti has resolved to spend more quality time with his family and to be more tolerant of others’ views as well as being a better listener. I have a feeling those are all related somehow.

Southern Region Executive Director David Roberts has resolved to transfer all seriously controversial phone calls to my office. (In turn, I have resolved to reconsider David’s pay raise). David also resolved to do his part to increase NECA membership — thereby partially offsetting the first ill-advised resolution.

Always an optimist and in fundraising mode, Electri International President Russ Alessi plans to increase foundation support through contributions and planned gifts. Russ sees the foundation as a shelter in the economic storm.

Government Affairs Executive Director Lake Coulson has resolved to fight any unreasonable regulations against electrical contractors coming from the new administration. Lake also plans to complete a marathon in under 4 hours.

Midwest Regional Executive Director Drew Gibson is committed to help NECA members navigate rough economic waters. He resolved to address problems head-on and build a positive, can-do attitude among chapters, national staff, and leadership.

Rob Colgan, Executive Director of Marketing, plans to promote NECA contractors’ expertise in energy efficiency, energy conservation, and alternative energy resources. Rob also vowed to never eat at buffets or drink beer from a bottle with a screw-off cap.

Dan Walter, NECA VP and COO, has vowed to make the new NECA sponsorship program a success, thereby helping to strengthen NECA finances. Dan also wants to lower his golf handicap but admits that’s more of a wish than a resolution.

Western Region Executive Director Bill Kuhr has resolved to concentrate on the facilitation of “follow through” by the members of NECA, his staff and their IBEW counterparts towards the accomplishment of the goals and objectives set by our membership through the utilization of strategies and tactics already developed but yet to be completely implemented. (I'm going to hold him to that one, assuming I figure out what it means.)

And you would expect the Management Education Institute (MEI) guy to have some nice pithy sayings. Greg Mankevich says: “It is nice to be important, but more important to be nice” and “None of us is as important as all of us”. I guess he’s resolving to be humble and nice.

As for me, I don’t make New Year’s resolutions. For some reason my wife always encourages me to do so. I wonder why?