Evaluating local union strength
29/Jan/2007 15:51
Most unions
will acknowledge that their organizational capacity
is only as strong as the individual capacity of their
local unions. This is why initiatives to strengthen
and revitalize unions almost always include measures
aimed at increasing local
capacity—for
example, training programs directed at local union
activists, or special funding for local campaigns.
But how do you measure local union strength? How do
you know which of your local unions need special
attention? How do you know if the special measures
you put in place are actually working?
A framework
for assessing local union strength was introduced to
the class last week. It suggests that local union
capacity can be measured by looking at five areas of
local activity:
1. Leadership
2. Membership mobilization
3. Bargaining and Dispute settlement/resolution
4. Member participation
5. Power of members and power of staff
Some unions in the United States have developed tools to evaluate performance in these areas. They use the results to identify local unions that are (a) operating at good capacity; or (b) need some additional resources or assistance to move to good capacity, or (c) require significant help. Then, staff resources are allocated to local unions according to need, and with the expectation that performance in the identified areas will improve.
How a union evaluates local union performance of course depends on what the union is trying to achieve. Ideally, the evaluation criteria are decided on by staff and elected leaders together. Similarly, the process of evaluation usually works best if it involves both staff and local leaders, as well as members.
In one case that we looked at, the following criteria was applied to assess local union strength:
Leadership:
• How experienced are the leaders?
• Do leaders receive ongoing training?
• Are new leaders being recruited and developed?
• How diverse is the leadership? Does it reflect the diversity of the membership?
• How inclusive is the leadership? Are those with minority viewpoints included in decision-making? Are decisions reached by consensus?
Membership mobilization:
• Does the local union have an effective internal and external communication system? Does the local union use it to mobilize around issues?
• To what extent to members participate in mobilization efforts?
Dispute settlement/resolution capacity:
• How effectively does the local union engage in collective bargaining?
• How effectively does the local union resolve member grievances?
• Are stewards and other local activists trained in these areas?
Member participation:
• Do members and activists participation in educational activity?
• Do members and activists engage in community activity?
Power of members; power of staff:
• Who is involved in making decisions about what?
• What roles do staff play in the local union? What roles to elected members play?
Of course, what is set out above, is just one possible approach to evaluation. Each union has to decide for itself what questions are appropriate. But the framework suggested gives an idea of what an evaluation tool could look like, and how it could be applied to help the union decide what work and resources are required to build strength at the base.
1. Leadership
2. Membership mobilization
3. Bargaining and Dispute settlement/resolution
4. Member participation
5. Power of members and power of staff
Some unions in the United States have developed tools to evaluate performance in these areas. They use the results to identify local unions that are (a) operating at good capacity; or (b) need some additional resources or assistance to move to good capacity, or (c) require significant help. Then, staff resources are allocated to local unions according to need, and with the expectation that performance in the identified areas will improve.
How a union evaluates local union performance of course depends on what the union is trying to achieve. Ideally, the evaluation criteria are decided on by staff and elected leaders together. Similarly, the process of evaluation usually works best if it involves both staff and local leaders, as well as members.
In one case that we looked at, the following criteria was applied to assess local union strength:
Leadership:
• How experienced are the leaders?
• Do leaders receive ongoing training?
• Are new leaders being recruited and developed?
• How diverse is the leadership? Does it reflect the diversity of the membership?
• How inclusive is the leadership? Are those with minority viewpoints included in decision-making? Are decisions reached by consensus?
Membership mobilization:
• Does the local union have an effective internal and external communication system? Does the local union use it to mobilize around issues?
• To what extent to members participate in mobilization efforts?
Dispute settlement/resolution capacity:
• How effectively does the local union engage in collective bargaining?
• How effectively does the local union resolve member grievances?
• Are stewards and other local activists trained in these areas?
Member participation:
• Do members and activists participation in educational activity?
• Do members and activists engage in community activity?
Power of members; power of staff:
• Who is involved in making decisions about what?
• What roles do staff play in the local union? What roles to elected members play?
Of course, what is set out above, is just one possible approach to evaluation. Each union has to decide for itself what questions are appropriate. But the framework suggested gives an idea of what an evaluation tool could look like, and how it could be applied to help the union decide what work and resources are required to build strength at the base.
|