Labour Market and Employment (IIM)

discussion papers

FS I 88 - 8

Union Approaches to Contingent Work Arrangements

Eileen Appelbaum*

Judith Gregory**

June 1988

ISSN Nr. 1011 - 9523

*Department of Economics Temple University

Philadelphia, PA 19122

and

Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin

fiir Sozialforschung

D - 1000 Berlin 30

**Department of Communication

University of California at San Diego La Jolla, CA 92037

Forschungsschwerpunkt

Arbeltsraarkt und

BeschSftlgung (IIHV)

Research Unit Labour Market and

Doployaent (UN)

Forschungsschwerpunkt

Arbeitsmarkt und Beschaftigung (IIMV)

Research Unit

Labour Market and Employment (IIM)

Reichpietsch-Ufer 50

1000 Berlin 30

- 1 -

Union Approaches to Contingent Work Arrangements

Abstract

Unions in the U.S. were slow to recognize the legitimate needs of some workers and firms for flexibility in scheduling work. In the past, the position of most unions on part-time work was limited to staunch opoosition. The change in the hours and terms of employment of so many U.S. workers, however, has forced the trade union movement to rethink previously held attitudes toward contingent work arrangements and the workers v/ho hold these job?..

This provider, a detailed discuss*'on of the general principles and concerns of the U.S. trade union movement in organizing and bargaining for contingent workers as well as a review of the actual collective bargaining agreements governing alternative work arrangements that oarti:ular unions ^^ave achieved. The context in which bargaining over contingent work takes place is seen to have important implications for

l-.cth jnior attitudes and negotiated eutcomss. three broad contexts are

identified and analyzed in the paper; bargaining for voluntary reductions in v;.j^k time desired by workers; bargaining under conditions ot logiti-^ate fiscal or financial crisis; and bargaining where management is c-nqaged in cost-cutting measures that undermine the job security or

•''orking conditions of the incumbant v;orlc force. The last of these ofteti invol<'es attempt? by management to lay off permanent workers while simultaneously expanding the use of contingent workers.

Protecting the inte^'ssts of contingent workers while preserving the job security and working conditions of the full-time v/ork force has proven c'lall^neing to unions, but not impossible. Unions with a high proportion of wo*nen members and unions in service sector industries have pioneered in these efforts, accumulating valuable experience with bargaining over

these issues in the process.

Gewerkschaften und prekarer Beschaftigungsverhaltnisse ZusanBTjenfassung

Die Gewerkschaften in den USA waren sehr zdgernd in der Aufnahme der berechtigten Wunsche der Arbeitnehmer iind Unternehmen nach mehr Flexibi- litat hinsichtlich der Arbeitszeitgestaltung. In der Vergangenheit wurde

die Position der meisten Gewerkschaften zur Teilzeitarbeit durch eine standhafte Opposition gepragt. Der Wechsel in der Arbeitszeit und der Art der Arbeit vieler IJS-Beschaftigter zwang die Gev/erkschaften jedoch, ihre a"!ten Haltungen gegeniiber prekaren Arbeitsplatzen und den dort beschaf- tigten Arbeitnehmern zu iiberdenken.

In diesem Papier worden die allgemeinen Prinzipien und Anliegen der US- Gewerkschaftsbewegung in bezug auf die Organisation und den Einsatz flir nrekfir beschaftigte Arbeitnehmer detailliert diskutiert, und es wird ein

iihorblick der aktuellen kollektivvertraglichen Vereinbarungen in bezug

au*t alternative Arbeitsarrangements, die von den Gewerkschaften erreicht

vwden, gegeben. Der Kontext, in dem die Verhandlungen iiber prekare Be-

schaftigung stattfinden, wird sowohl fUr die Haltung der Gewerkschaften

als auch fiir die ausgehandelten Ergebnisse als bedeutend angesehen. Drei breitere Kontextbereiche werden hier untersucht: Verhandlungen Uber frei-

willige, von Arbeitnehmern gewUnschte Arbeitszeitverklirzungen; Verhand

lungen unter den Bedingungen einer tats'achlichen fiskalischen Oder finan- ziellen Krise; Verhandlungen in Fallen, in denen das Management Kostenre- duktionen durch verminderte Arbeitsplatzsicherheit oder verschlechterter

Arbeitsbedingungen der Beschaftigten erreichen will. Im letzten Fall han-

delt es sich oftmals urn Bemiihungen des Managements, die permanent Be

schaftigten zu entlassen und gleichzeitig neue BeschSftigte mit prekaren

Arbeitsvertragen einzustellen.

Der Schutz der Interessen der prekar beschaftigten Arbeitnehmer bei gleichzeitiger Erhaltung der Arbeitsplatzsicherheit und der Arbeitsbedin- qungen der Vollzeitbeschtiftigten war eine Herausforderung ftir die Gewerk schaften, aber nicht unmdglich. Gewerkschaften mit einem hohen Anteil v.'eiblicher Mitglieder und seiche im Dienstleistungssektor waren Pioniere in diesen Anstrengungen und haben v/ertvolle Erfahrungen im Aushandlungs- nrozeR und bei den zu verhandelnden Punkten gewomen.

Introduction

Convf?ntional wisdo.m in economics suggests that the increase in this decade in part-time v/ork, temporary employment, homebased work, sub contracting and other contingent work arrangements in the U.S. is the serendipitous outcome of changing labor demand and labor supply con ditions. By a happy coincidence, apparently, increased requirements for flexibility in scheduli-ig v/ork by firms occurred just as the proportion of tie work force that desires more flexible hours v;5s rising. On this

••"eadiiKj of events, the increase in the number of part-time jobs from 16 million in 1979 to 29 million in 1987 and the fact that as many as 30 nercent of the 10 million full-time jobs added since the last recession ended in 1982 may be temporary (Uchitelle, 1988; U.S. Department of

! ahtjn. 1985} are benign, even welccme, developments.

Or the demand side, in the secondary labor market, traditional peakload irrob'ens in retail sales, restaurants, and personal services are exacerbated by the needs of a still-rising number of two-earner families for longer shopping hours. Part-time work in the U.S. has grown in line with the expansion of these industries; and fluctuations in demand in this sector of the economy are met by varying the hours of part-time employees.

.".dded to this are primary labor market firms who, facing increased competition for markets at home and abroad, want a buffer of v/orkers who are easily dismissed v/hen conditions change. In addition, some primary labor market firms that employ expensive but soon-to-be-obsolete hardware want to keep the equipment in use more than the standard eight hour day in order to spread their high fixed costs over a large volume of output

?nd re.eoup their investments. The result is the emergence of alternative employment arrangements - ranging from part-time data processing work after regular hours to electronic home work, temporary jobs, and sub contract employment for clerical and professional v/crkers - in firms that traditionally offered full-time, permanent employment.

- 4 -

On the supply side of the labor market, mothers struggling to earn an income while meeting family responsibilities, teenagers trying to recon cile the demands of school work with their desire for pocket money, and

older people no longer up to the rigors of full-time employment and

nerhaps not content with being fully retired, can be observed choosing part-time work, temporary jobs, and other alternative work schedules.

In this conventional economic view, the lower compensation (wages plus benefits) paid by firms to workers in contingent jobs reflects employers' perceptions of lov(t?>^ productivity or higher absenteeism and turnover of these workers. Among contingent workers, data on compensation are most readily available for part-time employees. According to the Department of labor, median v/eekly earning o' all full-time wage and salary v/orkers in 1986 were S 369, or about $ 9.25 an hour. For full-time workers paid by the hour, the median hourly wage rate was $ 7.24. In contrast, the median wage of oart-time workers was only S 4.24 an hour (Bureau of Labor Statistics, unpublished data from the March 1987 Current Population Survey). In addition, full-time v/orkers employed by medium and large firms also receive a wide range of employee benefits. Nearly all have

•i-iirl ho11'tv./s anr! .acations, 96 percent have health insurance for :heni- selves, 93 percent have heaMh insurance for their dependents, 96 percent

! l i f e insurance, and 82 percent harn retirement pensions (Bureau of I '.bor Statistics, 1^84). Among part-time workers, however, 70 percent '10 retir'^ment. benefits and 42 percent have no health coverage ( Bm s i n.?s s Week, 1986).

Acceptance of lov/er compensation is believed to be a price willingly paid

!•/ workers who place a premium on convenience in scheduling v/ork.

legislation mandating an increase in the minimum wage and establishing

•minimum health coverage is seen as unwarrarted interference with the market mechanism that will only reduce employment opportunities for chose yith a preference for aUernative work schedules. After all, wages will rise in response to nmrket fences v/hencver the siipply of labor to these jobs decr-^ases - cither hecnus? workers are dissatisfifd with the com pensation and working conditions associated with contingent v/ork or hfcau*:o of demonraphir shifts that alter the numbers who -want such jobs.

5 -

An Alternative View

It i-- true, of course, that many workers in jobs that either are not full time or lack permanent status have chosen these jobs. Nevertheless, this free-market view of alternative work arrangements is overly sanguine and

is challenged by the fev; data that are availabe.

Consider, for example, the part-time employment of women. While the number of women workers and the proportion of mothers of young children in the U.S. labor force have both risen (Hayghe, 1986), there is little support for the contention that it is the preferences of women that;

accounts for the continued increase in their part-time employment. On the contrary, the proportion of workers employed part-time voluntarily peaked in 1979 and has edged down since then for v/onien as well as men (Appel- baum 1987).

In fact, the number of people who usually v/ork part-time increased by 2.4 million between 1979 und 1986. but only 600,000 of these workers

voluntarily sought part-time employment (Nardone, 1986: 15). The rest are

people v/ho wanted full-time jobs but, unable to obtain them, worked part time involuntarily. Involuntary part-time employment increased from 1.6 million in 1967 to 3.2 million in 1977 and 5.5 million today. Nearly the entire growth in part-time employment has been involuntary.

Thus, while most part-time employment is still voluntary, the proportion in this category is shrinking, not rising. Moreover, the meaning of

"voluntary" in this context is distorted by the severe shortage of affordable day care and the unavailability of parental leave provisions in most U.S. workplaces. The "voluntary" choice of part-time, temporary, and other contingent work arrangements by mothers may be the only alternative available to women who need to work but find that day care is unavailable and that permanent or full-time jobs make no provision for managing their dual responsibilities.

While women with children at home have traditionally accepted marginal employment at low wages, the rise in involuntary part-time work by women

- 6 -

challenges the view that these jobs meet the needs of the increasing

number of women workers. It also suggests that firms that depend on part- time workers will have to improve compensation and conditions of employ

ment in order to continue to attract them.

Changing demographics are also contributing to a shrinking of the low wage, part-time labor force. Not only is the supply of female workers to these jobs no longer increasing, but the number of younger workers, another important source of low wage labor, is declining. The Bureau of Labor Statistics projects a total of 7.4 million workers between the ages of 15 and 19 in the labor force in 1992 compared with 9.4 million in 1980 (Collins, 1987). Operation of the laws of supply and demand means that the compensation of lov/-paid workers in these jobs is bound to rise.

Unless, of course, a new source of supply of labor for these jobs can be

found.

Seeking Alternative Labor Pools

Among firms in technologically stagnant industries that rely on a low

•vaqe labor force - including retail trade, restaurants, motels, day '•are/early childhood education, and nursing homes, the search for new sources of supply of low wage labor is already underway. Welfare mothers and the trainably mentally retarded are among the population groups newly targeted for training and employment. Older people are an even more important candidate population for these jobs, especially older workers who retired early, whose retirement income is inadequate, and who prefer partial to full retirement. Not only is this group growing in numbers, but many in its ranks are experienced workers.

An increasing number of older people may, in fact, be available for contingent jobs. Surprisingly, this is not because improved health care and increased logevity have increased the proportion of older Americans.

Whilo the number of people in the U.S., including those above 55, has

increased steadily, the proportion of the population aged 55 to 64 has

remained virtually unchanged since 1950, and only a small increase has been registered in the proportion aged 65 to 74. Not until 2010, when the baby boom cohort begins to pass the 55 year mark, will the proportion of older Americans rise sharply (U.S. Bureau of the Census, cited in 9 to 5,

1987\

Instead, it is the decline in labor force participation rates of older men and the leveling off of participation rates of older women since 1970, resulting in a rapid increase in the proportion of people over the age of 55 outside the labor force, that signals the potential availabil ity of this age group for contingent work. One reason older workers have left the labor force is that they have been laid off and are discouraged about finding anot'io»' job. Among all workers who lost their jobs because '^f p'.'^nt closings or em-rloyment cutbacks over the January 1981 to January 1986 period, approximately 14 percent left the labor force; but among workers over 55 years o-p age, more than 33 percent left (Horvath, 1987).

Farly retirement is the other reason for declining labor force partici pation in the over-55 age group. Since 1974, many of the private pension plans at. large companies surveyed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics have reduced the normal retirement ace. Nearly all allow early retirement, most at age 55. and many have reduced the penalties associated with electing to retire at this age (Bell and Marclay, 1987). The percentage of the population aged 60 to 64 electing early retirement under Social Secu'^ity pension provisions also increased from 14.1 percent in 1970 to 23.2 percent. inl984 (Mirkin, 1987).

The result is that by 198^, 50 percent of the women aged 55 to 59 and 20 percent of the men were outside the labor force; among those 60 to 64 years of age, 67 percent of the women and 44 percent of the men were outside the labor force (Mirkin, 1987). Combined with the expressed desire of a large majority of older workers for partial, as opposed to complete, retirement (see surveys cited in Kahne, 1985: 65-66), the sharp decline in median household income after age 55 (Kahne, 1985: 67), and

8 -

the fact that most firms make no provision for older workers to reduce their hours and move into partial retirement (Kahne, 1985: 36, 133;

Gustman and Steinmeier, 1983), the over-55 age group is potentially a significant source of new recruits for part-time and contingent work

schedules.

Reports in the popular press indicate that some firms in low wage industries have already begun actively seeking new employees among older people. In the child care industry, one small Arizona company that pays

$ 3.35 to start, with an increase to $ 3.85 after a year, has an intern program, funded by the state, to train and employ workers over the age of 55 v.'hose income is less than $ 5,700. The program has been cited as "a model for efforts to bring older Americans into day care" (Collins,

^987). At the largest U.S. national chain of child-care centers, with 1,100 facilities in 40 states, wages for child-care workers vary from

minimum wage (S 3.35) to $ 5 an hour in most states with a high of $ 6 an

hour in a few areas with a high cost of living. Here, too, older workers are sought for employment and the firm reports an increase in the number of its elderly workers (Collins, 1987).

Fast food is another industry that is turning to older people as it seeks to expand hiring. Labor shortages are projected for 1995 in the food service and lodging industries, where many jobs are part time and low payinn. Mc.lonald's efforts to cope by hiring older v/orkers, exemplified hv the "MciMasters Program" that trains and hires older workers and the

"flev Kid" comir.ercials. are probably test known; but other firms are likely to follow suit (Kingsori, ""RSB).

Inoror.sed opportunities for training and employment for groups disadvan-

togod hy "ircumstanres, including advanced age, are much to be applauded.

In addition, many workers have expressed a strong desire for alternative work schedules at particular stages of the life cycle - students, women

with young children, and older workers approaching retirement among them.

The economic marginalizaticn of these v/orkers through consignment to

!ow-w5ge jobs, howeve"^, is another matter. The concern is two-fold: to

- 9

prevent the economic exploitation of easily stigmatized groups that lack economic clout, and to keep the grov/th of part-time and contingent work arrangements from undermining the wages and working conditions of full-

time workers (and, we might add, the profits of the firms that employ them). It would be unfortunate, for example, if employers were to

discojnt the need cf elderly workers for security and a stable source of income and hire them as casual workers; and worse yet if they were able to court on them to accept "'ow wages, few benefits or even none, and dead-end jobs.

Hilda Kahne, in Rrcnncr-ivin;^ Part-Time h'ork (1985: 33), distinguishes between what she calls "old concept part-time work" and "regular, new conceot part-time v/ork" - which may include job sharing and phased retirement as well as permanent part-time employment. Old concept part- time work refers tc the proliferation of short-hour jobs in the U.S. in

whicfi firms have at best e weak commitment to workers. Without such a

commitment, firms have little incentive to provide these part-time wobkers with the training and advancement opportunities that would make them more valuable and responsible employees or to offer wage and benefits packages that would link them more tightly to the firm. Unlike most old concept part-time jobs, in new concept part-time work, "(t)he structure of the part-time job is viev/ed as permanent and having career potential, rather than temporary and intermittent in its nature, and fringe benefits are generally included in the earnings package." Unfortu nately, old concept part-time work can be demeaning and exploitative and new concept reduced-hour work scheduling is not widespread (Kahne, 1985:

41).

Legitimate requirements by firms for part-time or other alternative work arrangements, to meet scheduling problems for example, do not depend on the payment of low wages or the absence of a long term commitment to employees. And workers who prefer flexible schedules should not have to sacrifice pay and career opportunities by accepting them. New concept part-time work encourages firms and workers to choose flexible scheduling on the one hand and reduces the stress on employees on the other. Unlike old concept part-time work, it does not rely on the ability of firms to

10

offer part-time workers reduced compensation, nor does it undermine the

pay and working conditions of those who work full time. Moreover, new

concept part-time work reduces the incentives employers now have to

eliminate full-time positions and replace them with part-time jobs to evade the responsibilities most firms have toward permanent full-time employees.

Where will the impetus for change to new concept flexible scheduling come from, not only in the treatment of part-time workers but of the increas ing number in temporary jobs or other precarious employment relationships as v/ell? How will the struggle for decent compensation and working conditions be waged? The legislative process - through which minimum wages can be established and raised, minimum benefit standards mandated, and the standard v/ork v/eek reduced - is one arena of struggle; the office, store or shoo floor is the other. Unions have an important role to play in each.

Changing Union Responses

Unions were slow to recognize the legitimate needs of workers and firms for flexibility in scheduling work. In the past, the position of most U.S. unions on part-time work v/as limited to staunch opposition. The change in the hours and terms of employment of so many U.S. workers, hov/ever, has forced the trade union movement to rethink previously held attitudes toward contingent v/ork arrangements and the workers v/ho hold these jobs.

Until recently, most traditional unions have explicitly or tacitly opposed creation of jobs with part-time hours or other alternative work schedules. They have done little to extend union contract protections to part-time, temporary, or other contingent workers v/ho have often been outside the bargaining unit.

n -

However, unions which have high proportions of women members and unions which are based i'i public or private service sector industries (the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW), the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and District 925/SEIU, District 65/lJAW of the United Auto Workers, and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) are prominent, examples) have pioneered in develoning job-sharing programs, providing equitable and permanent part- time oositions, organi.'ing part-time and long-term temporary employees, and arranging for the transition of temporary positions into permanent ones. They have sometimes been successful in requiring some say for the union regarding the use of contingent workers - including when they may to h'rpd, the conditions under which they work, and the effecti contiinent emp''oyment has on the mainstream workforce.

i'ith some justification, unions have traditionally viewed the extension of part-time work as a nanagement strategy for replacing full-time jobs, intensifying work, reducing wages, denying fringe benefits, and excluding wobkers from promotion and access to higher qualifications within the comunny (see, for example, the AFL-CIO Draft Resolution on Part-Time Work, 1985). In addition to opposing the introduction of part-time or continnont work where possible, unions have consigned part-time workers (typically defined by weekly working hours of less than 20 )iours) and other contingent workers to a "no man's land" outside the bargaining unit. Not only does this leave such v/orkers without union protections or oay scales, this kind o^ arrange.ment can be used by an aggressive manage ment as a loophole through which more contingent workers can be hired while simultaneously diluting union strength. More recently, however, unions have develooed a more active and sympathetic approach to the organizing of contingent workers. Their approach to contingent work today can be seen as responsive to two distinct concerns - the need for parity in pay and working conditions and a less precarious employment relation ship for workers who require flexible schedules and the protection of the economic status of incumbent, permanent full-time workers.

- 12

An Example

The example of the use of contingent workers by Wisconsin Physicians

Services (WPS) as a tactic to evade union contract provisions governing

wages and working conditions of bargaining unit employees and, at the same time, to weaken the union may clarify the interest of unions in representing these workers. WPS developed its homeworker program after the 1979 contract with the UFCW allowed it to hire non-union part-time employees. WPS quickly expanded the experimental program from 12 to an estimated 200 participants. Homev/orkers performing essentially the same work as clerks in the main office were paid a penny above minimum wage, received no benefits, had no access to promotions, and worked a maximum

of 19 and 3/4 hours a week. The homeworker program and other uses of

part-time workers undermined the job security of full-time workers. In addition, the ratio of bargaining unit members in relation to the total WPS workforce declined, reducing the union's strength in the next round of bargaining and in future relations with the company (Gregory, 1983;

Costello, 1984).

Although the homework program was advertised as providing employment for the homebound, a former WPS manager described the intent of the program

as an attempt by management "to disable the union, to reduce its effec

tiveness." A former supervisor explained that "management was building up

the homev/ork program as a strategy in the event of a strike" (Costello, 198A).

The accumulation of such experiences has begun to teach unions that it is folly to leave part-time and contingent workers outside the bargaining

unit. Unions continue to oppose the marginalization of workers and the

growth of involuntary part-time employment. But they have begun to see

their role as assuring that such workers earn wages and benefits

comparable to those of full-time workers and have access to grievance

procedures and other job protection and due process mechanisms.

As a result, unions have increased their organizing efforts in the

long-neglected service sector where a substantial minority of employees

- 13 -

work part-time, many of them voluntarily, and where the number of part- time and other contingent v/orkers continueri to increase. Furthermore, they have begun to develop general principles for assuring that the choice of alternative v-'ork schedules is voluntary and that workers who make such choices achieve parity with full-time workers.

Trade Union Principles and Concerns

The thrust of trade union initiatives has been to halt the marginaliz- atior of jobs and of the workers who hold these casual jobs, and to assure thr?.t flexible, temporary or reduced-time schedules are voluntary.

9 to 5, v/hich has been deeply involved in efforts to organize such v/orkers, argues that v/hat is needed to end such marginalization is:

adherence to the principle of a livable wage, with decent pay and emolover-provided benefits for part-time, temporary and home-based

wo'rkers; family policies such es child care, parental leave, and flexible

work schedules in permanent jobs so that parents are not forced to choose marginal jobs in order to care for their families; union organization of marginal v^orkers to give them a voice in pay and working conditions;

qovernment recognition of the importance of these social goals and of its responsibility to set social policy: and business planning for long-term economic growth in a world context (Nussbaum and Meyer, 1986).

To redress the worst inequities associated v/ith part-time work, the Draft Resolution demands that part-time v/orkers "(1) be protected from the social point of view through an overall inclusion into social security schemes; (2) be guaranteed all benefits accruing from company policy and collective bargaining agreements; (3) be covered by the provisions laid dov/n in the collective bargaining agreements also when they work on a capacity-oriented working time basis; and (4) be eligible for promotion, further training and retraining in the same way as full-time workers ..."

The Draft Resolution characterizes the introduction of individual flextime as unsuitable and objects to job sharing. Unions have been wary

- 14

of job sharing and flextime programs for a number of reasons: concern that the hours of the day may be extended; concern that programs are not truly voluntary, either because of management or peer pressure; concern over the possible loss of opportunities for overtime or premium pay; and concern over potential reductions in the number of full-time jobs.

Despite these objections, however, union locals confronting particularly difficult situations have shown a willingness to bargain realistically

and creatively over new forms of working arrangements.^ Opposition in

principle to particular work arrangements doesn't mean a refusal of union locals to compromise; and a collective bargaining agreement covering particular forms of contingent work does not necessarily signify an endorsement in principle of the work arrangement by the union.

Finally, unions stress the importance of the careful testing of a pilot program, evaluated by both union and management, to the successful devel opment of alternative work agreements. AFSCME urges that locals interested in alternate work schedule programs first create a labor- managm.ent committee to carefully analyze employees' needs and interests, rnsure that participation by employees is voluntary, develop and evaluate

a pilot project, and allow either management or the union to "request

termination of the program upon 30 days written notice." The New York

City Coalition of Labor Union Women (CLUW) also stresses the importance

of a needs assessment, conducted by the union, to identify the variety of needs among employees and to provide unions with better information for

devising contract provisions which can be used to design solutions to

stresses and strains in workers' lives (NYC CLUW, 1985). Such a needs

assessment would be equally valuable to workers and firms considering Dhased retirement and to organizations developing experimental programs

for reemploying older workers.

^ See, below, the job-sharing arrangement negotiated by the Association of

Fliqht Attendants with United Airlines, for example.

15 -

Collective Bargaining Over Alternative Work Arrangements

While the national labor movement has announced its support for extending collective ba>^gaining coverage to workers on part-time schedules, for organizing service industries v/hcre contingent workers are most numerous, and for directing organizing efforts specifically toward part-time and other contingent workers, it is at the local level that such policies must he implemented. Because of their lack of attachment to a particular emolover, unions have found it especially difficult to organize these workers. Workers who view these jobs as a. temporary expedient while still

in school or v/hile home reponsibilities are particularly burdensome may not feel the need to jo^n a union. Young workers, in particular, may not a;)preci2te the importance of health and pension benefits, may view their interests as very different from those of permanent full-time employees, and may have negative opinions of unions. At the same time the precarious position of contingent v/orkers, who can easily be fired by employers, may make them reluctant to ioin a union organizing drive. The result is an extremely low level of unionization among part-time workers. Only 1.27 million nart-time workers belonged to unions in 1985, about 7.3 percent of the labor force, and only 8.8 percent are covered by union contracts.

This is about one-third of the rate of unionization of fulltime workers, 20.4 nercent of v/hom belong to unions and 23.1 percent of whom have union representation. Among union members, about one in fourteen works part

time (Monthly Labor Review, May 1986: 45). Unionization among temporary

workers and contract employees is virtually nonexistant.

Despite the difficulties encountered in organizing contingent workers, there are notable examples of union locals which have organized and barga-'ned for these v/orkers. We obtained the information on collective bargaining over alternative v/ork arrangements reported in this paper by asking unions with experience representing contingent workers - AFSCME, UFCW, SEIU, 9 to 5, District 65/UAW, and CWA - to share with us their most successful organizing and/or bargaining experiences. Our goal was to identify situations in which the needs of workers who require flexibility in scheduling and those v/ho require full-time schedules have been suc cessfully reconciled. In addition, we made use of the survey of contract

- 16

language covering contingent workers prepared by Cornell University's School of Industrial and Labor Relations (Bronfenbrenner, 1988).

What Unions Have Accomplished

In 1986, SEIU Local 790 organized 700 part-timers when the union found that the City of Oakland v/as replacing full-time employees with part-time v/orkers, often without significant reductions in workload. The union already represented 1,200 full-time workers and saw the situation of part-time workers as "analogous to a tv/o-tier wage system" in the public sector v/ith "part-time workers hired to work side-by-side v/ith full- timers v;hile receiving no benefits and, in many cases, lower wages."

According to the union, major issues for the part-timers were health and v/elfare benefits, equal pay for equal work, a grievance procedure, and

"the right to speak out on the job without fear of getting fired or netting fewer hours of work."

The Communications '.^lorkers of America (CWA) won union recognition in 1986 for a bargaining unit of about 2,000 long-term temporary employees, mainly clerical workers, who had been classified for years as "special services employees" on the New Jersey state payroll. The CWA represents approximately 32,000 professional, clerical and supervisory personnel employed by the State of New Jersey. The "special services employees"

were "at-will employees receiving no benefits" according to Ed Sabol of

CWA District 1 (New Ycrk/New Jersey). "The showed up in the budget as

furniture, they were impossible to track in any obvious way ... They v/orked seasonally, and worked some days more than others ..." After the union organized the unit, it got the state's agreement to phase out the

"special services" category and to integrate the unit under the main

contract.

In a remarkable campaign. Local 1 of the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees (HERE) organized several hundred part-time workers employed in food services for the City of Chicago School District. The workers are

17 -

scattered throughout the city in many schools v/ith a small number of workers per site, and the bargaining unit is virtually all part-time

v/orkers.

In addition, new unions have formed, such as the national Writers Union and the Graphic Artists Guild, to organize individual contract employees.

The arts, entertainment and media unions have experience representing nerforming artists, musicians, stage hands, technical personnel, contract reporters and freelancers whose work patterns may be close to those ot

some of the newer 'erms of contract v.'ork.

Finally, the role of a union contract in transforming typically casual part-time work into "new concept" part-time jobs is clearly illustrated by the AF5CME contract covering school lunch employees in New York City.

School lunch employees work in permanent positions that are, by their natu^'e, part time. In New York City, these v/orkers are represented by District Council 37 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. Their contract provided for hourly pay ranging from

$ 7.01 to $ 8.14 (double the legal minimum wage of $ 3.35) in the last year of the contract, which expired on June 30, 1987.

In addition, the contract provided a longevity increment of 27 cents an hour to those with 15 years of service. Health insurance coverage on a 12 month basis for employees who work 20 or more hours a week, and prorated payments to the union v/elfare plan are also provided. School lunch employees are paid for all school holidays, and receive paid vacation days after 3 years of service. In addition, the contract provides for summer payments, accident insurance, severance pay for workers with 10 or more years of experience, reemployment without loss of seniority after a leave for illness or maternity leave, and sick leave allowance. Informal and formal grievance procedures are provided in the contract. Finally, school lunch employees are given preference if they wish to be considered for school aide or paraprofessional positions in their current or other work location and carry forward with them any accumulated seniority.

18

In all, 23,000 hourly employees v/orking part-time in the public sector in New York City are in jobs covered by AFSCME contracts and receive benefits like those described above. It is, perhaps, emblematic of the growth of contingent work in this decade that, in 1980, 23,000 out of a total of 25,000 part-time workers received benefits; in 1987 according to the union, it was 23,000 out of a total of 34,000. The number not receiving benefits has grown from 2,000 to 11,000 in the last 7 years.

Union demands in the current negotiations are to transition these jobs to permanent part-time positions and to guarantee v/orkers 20 hours a week.

As these examples illustrate, unions have been able to negotiate contract provisions that provide equitable working conditions for workers on alternative schedules while protecting the hard-won gains in pay, benefits and treatment of full-time workers. Such "new concept" work arrangements respect the needs of firms and workers for flexibility in scheduling work, but they have none of the impermanence or low pay characteristics of "old concept" contingent employment relations.

The Importance of Contexts

Union attitudes tov/ard negotiations over alternative work arrangements depend very strongly on the context in which such negotiations take place. Three broad contexts for bargaining on this issue can be identified: bargaining for voluntary reductions in work time desired by workers; bargaining under conditions of legitimate crisis, such as a budget crisis in the public sector or industrial restructuring in the private sector, when the union faces the threat of layoffs; and bargain ing where management is engaged in cost-cutting measures that undermine the job security and/or working conditions of the incumbant workforce, often involving simultaneous layoffs of permanent workers and expanded use of contingent workers.

19

Meeting Workers' Preferences

The development of contract provisions to address the needs of workers who require flexibility and efforts to achieve a shorter work week or ontinns for more leisiire time through voluntary reduced time/income t-ade-offs are seen by unions in the most positive light. Older workers who vould prefer reduced hours to full retirement and those who wish to reenter the labor force are among those who would benefit from the more widespread availability of such options.

The r.oalition of Labor Union Women (CLUVI), for example, advocates that unions broaden the occupational range of part-time jobs and increase job secur'ity and benefits for those who choose less-thnn-full-time employ ment. making sure that these workers are classified as permanent omol'-.yees and included in the bargaining unit. Such changes would make these jobs more attractive to older v^orkers as v/ell as to women with family demands, enabling them to meet their need for income while ful filling other responsibilities. V.'hile unions have mainly been cognizant of child care responsibilities, the home care of frail spouses or other dependent relatives is a concern of many older workers seeking employ ment. In particular, wives may need to work to support older husbands who need home care, and may want less-than-full-time hours v/hile still requiring decent v/ages and benefits. Tn contrast to the AFL-CIO objection to job-sharing, the New York City CLUW Child Care Committee suggests ways in which collective action could make job-sharing a universal option instead of an idiosyncratic arrangement as is currently the case. They propose agreements that establish the right of all employees to job share'", ensure the retention of other benefits and contract rights, and set minimum standards for implementation, thus establishing a "platform"

from which individual workers can negotiate more tailored arrangements.

Cl IIW also suggests that unions help workers find partners to share jobs and facilitate such agreements for employees who desire them (NYC CLUW,

1985).

2 Job-sharing is when two workers share on full-time job, sharing the wages pronortionately and each retaining full-time benefits and seniority rights.

- 20 -

In the case of voluntary reduced time options, part-time or other alternative work arrangements are usually temporary, with guarantees that the employee participating in them can return to full-time status at the end of the agreed-upon period. Michael Baratz, General Manager of Local 715/SEIU, which developed the Voluntary Reduced Work Hour Program, made this point especially clearly: "The attractiveness of the 6-month reduced work hour contract is the flexibility it provides and its acknowledgement that some employees want transient time off. Participating employees are not saying that they want to work part-time for the rest of their careers, but rather that they want reduced hours time for a particular half-year period to pursue other endeavors." (McCarthy, Rosenberg und Lefkov/itz, 1981).

Voluntary reduced time options with the employee's current firm may be a v/elcome alternative for older workers prior to retirement. The illness of a spouse or a preference for greater leisure may motivate the voluntary transition to shorter hours by older workers on a more permanent basis than envisioned in current voluntary reduced hour programs. In bargaining over alternative work schedules, unions need to develop a greater recognition of the opportunities that new arrangements provide for older workers in genvoral, and for older women in particular.

Finally, when the use of temporary or contingent workers is seen as essential to avoid strain or speedup for regular employees (by bringing the staffing level up to the necessary number), when such use is understood to be both temporary and necessary, it does not appear to pose oroblems for unions. Even in these circumstances, however, unions may orefer that extra hours of v/ork be offered to incumbant employees first before ar employer turns to an outside agency. This will depend on the patterns of working hours and wage levels within the workplace and indus try. UFCli contracts, for example, typically require that extra hours be offered to full-time employees first, then to part-time employees. SEIU contracts in the health care industry similarly require that extra hours

be posted for currently employed nurses befor agency nurses (temporary

woi^kers) are hired (i.'FCW, 1986; SEIU, 1986a).

21

Job Saving Strategies

Unions have been innovative in negotiating alternative work arrangements as r. job-saving strategy when bargaining with employers v/ho face a

legitimate crisis. For example, the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA) negotiated a job sharing program with United Airlines called the

Partnership Time Off programm. It was agreed upon in the context of a layo''"f crisis in 1979-1980 when 200 attendants were deemed "surplus". The AFA 'legotiated a contract allovnng flight attendants in pairs to share a job, sick days and leaves of absence for a 3-mcnth period. The program provided time off for attendants with seniority (8 years or more), with narfial pay and continued henefits. It allowed the partners to decide on how to divide tine off, work time and payment. The union commented that

"a benefit of the program is that so long as one of the partners covers the flying assignments, there is no constraint by the company on how they divide out their time" (letter from AFA to flight attendants, February 21, 1980).

The program saved money for the airline during a period of distress, allowed more of the newer attendants to retain their jobs, and thus kept the union workforce more intact than would have been possible otherwise.

Although the program was a response to a crisis, the union hopes to build this kind of v/ork-time option into on-going contract provisions under

normal business conditions.

The Voluntary Reduced Work Hour program negotiated between the SEIU Local 715 and Santa Clara County, California, described earlier, was also developed under duress, and evolved into an ongoing arrangement.

Not all reductions in work time negotiated as an alternative to outright

layoffs work out as well as these two programs. In cases involving reduc

tions in force, there are underlying strains and pressures, and it is often questionable how voluntary participation can be, though part-time work may be accented as the lesser of tv/o evils.

22

Responses to Cost-Cutting Measures

The least favorable context for negotiating over alternative work arrangements occurs when firms have implemented these arrangements primarily to realize "budgetary savings," and not in deference to the preferences of workers or the requirements of the production process. In this context, unions are mainly concerned with negotiating a transition from casual to permanent status for workers. Failing this, unions put fonvard demands for wage parity, increased hours, rest breaks, vacations, seniority rights, and health and pension benefits to reduce the disparities between permanent and marginal employment.

SEIU Local 790 v/as successful in "transitioning" some 200 long-term

"temporary" employees working for the City of San Francisco in the early 1980s. At least half of the "temps" had worked for the city for more than two and a half years on either full-time or part-time schedules.

Permanent workers doing the same work earned approximately 20 percent more in straight wages, since they received step increases according -to time en the job. The temporary workers v/ere covered by health benefits, but not by retirement plans which represent approximately 17 percent of nayroll for permanent v;orkers.

In Los Angeles County, more than 11,000 temporary employees were on the payroll at last count in May, 1986, with 1,339 of these "temporary"

workers employed continuously by the county for at least 2 years. The Chief Administrative officer for the county stated the rationale for this employment policy directly: "The hiring of temporary employees in place

of permanent staff results in budgetary saving (as employee benefits are

not required), allows management the greatest flexibility in pursuing

contracting efforts, permits efficient staffing for seasonal workload and, in many instances, satisfies employee desires." (Memo of the Board of Supervisors re Temporary Employees from Chief Administrative Officer, dames C. Hankla, July, 1986) SEIU Local 660's contract with the county covers temporary v/orkers in terms of salaries and access to grievance orocedures, but these workers have no layoff or disciplinary appeal rights and do not receive health and dental benefits, retirement

- 23 -

benefits, or bilingual oay. The issue of temporary workers is a top bargaining priority for the union.

Union-, have also had to deal v/ith simultaneous layoffs or threat of layoffs and hiring of part-time v^orkers, temporaries and contract employees as management attempts to organize the work force on a ring and core basis. For example, prior to telephone industry bargaining in 1986, the Communications Workers of America (CWA) faced a situation in which a major local telephone company v;as contracting out technical work and installation work while threatening to lay off technicians from the bar gaining unit.

The union was successful in stepping this practice and in winning coritnct protections against such action. The national contract, negotiated later in the summer of 1986, provides that the company cannot contract out projects involving traditional telephone work if contracting

out will involve layoffs of employees within the affected work group (a

commiit-ing area of approximately 35 miles in radius). Furthermore, the company cannot lay off union members until they first release contract technicians within the area. The Personnel department of the company must report information on the use of contract employees at intervals not less often than 6 months, end the union is to have an opportunity for input as to whether the v/ork could be done by bargaining unit members instead.

Another successful union initiative occurred at Blue Cross in northern California, a health insurance company. In 1986, Local 20 of the Office

and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU) experienced

substitution of temoorary employees for workers who had previously worked full time. Of the 1,300 clerical workers, the union estimated that in any given week 100 were workers from outside agencies, a dramatic increase from previous years. At the same time, layoffs of full-time workers were rising. In negotiations with the company, the union was able to restrict the hiring of outside agency temps and to require the company to create a pool of laid off workers from whom any temporary positions were to be filled (9 to 5, 1986).

- 24

From these and other contract negotiations, a picture emerges of the standards to which unions would like to see companies adhere in develop ing alternative work arrangements. The annotated listing of contract provisions in the next section may help clarify what unions are demand ing. The list is intended to be illustrative rather than exhaustive.

Review of Contract Provisions Governing Part-Time, Temporary and Contract

Work

A review of contract provisions governing alternative work arrangements suggests the kinds of pay, protections and working conditions that will eliminate the contingent aspect of these employment relationships while nreservipq desired flexibility in scheduling. The guarantees bargained by unions improve the economic status of workers on less-than-full-time schedules, allowing workers v/ho require flexibility to meet their needs for income as well. Such changes may increase the attractiveness of these jobs to older workers in the future. Currently, most contingent workers

are women, often with children, and i t is their needs that are most often explicitly addressed in union contracts.

However, the protections that have been negotiated improve the quality of these jobs for nil workers who require new employment options including older workers. Provisions for transitioning contingent work arrangements

to permanent full-time jobs may be of less interest to older workers v/ho

may prefer the shorter hours, if not the economic status, of contingent jobs. Unions might consider negotiating to make the jobs permanent positions, with all that implies, while allov/ing employers to continue to achieve less-than-full-time hours in some jobs via voluntary phased

retirement options. Like other voluntary reduced time options negotiated by unions, this protects workers while providing firms with a way to

reduce hours.

As the contracts reviewed here show, narrowing the gap in compensation

and achieving wage parity between full-time, permanent employees and

- 25

other-; performinq essentially the same tasks is a high priority for union;. Equity and affirmative action are also important concerns. SEIU l.ocal 790 successfully used affirmative action arguments in the campaign to arrange the transition from temporary to permanent status for long- term temporary workers, since women, particularly minority women, were overropresented among these employees. Unions are concerned about provid ing p'-o-rated or full benefits coverage for health and life insurance, vacation days, paid sick days, pension plans and eligibility for other

benefits.

The U''CW Southern California Retail Meet Agreement, for example, extends v/age and benefit provisions to part-time workers. Employees with 32 hours a week or more are treated as full time, although the basic work week is defined as 40 hours. Workers with 25 or more hours are covered by many of the contract provisions and workers with fewer than 25 hours are guaranteed a minimum of 16 hours a week (12 hours in some jobs) and covered by all general provisions. Benefits are based on straight-time hoiirs worked and step increases in pay are provided at intervals of hours (at accumulated time of 520 hours or 1,040 hours). Time accumulated by hours is recalculated towards months of experience needed to advance to a higher experience r?te of pay or job class (UFCW, 1986).

Benefits coverage of part-time and temporary workers negotiated in con- t»*acts follows several patterns. One pattern, typical of UFCW contracts in the retail food industries, where 16 and 12 hour v/ork weeks are common, is to base all benefits on straight-time hours worked, with all employees covered (that is, no weekly hours cut-off). Alternatively, ben efits may be prorated and based on length of employment rather than accumulated hours of employment. Finally, some unions have won full ben efits for part-time employees. This is often the case when reduction in hours is an alternative to layoffs. Thus, full benefits were provided for workers who participated in the Partnership Time Off program (AFA) and the Voluntary Reduced Work Hour program (SEIU Local 715) described above.

Full benefits may also be won where unions are strong enough to win pro visions that act as a disincentive to employers to use part-time workers except v/here this is required by peak work periods. This is the case, for

26 -

example, in the contract between United Auto Workers (UAW) Local 2071 and Wayne State University, and in certain contracts of The Newspaper Guild.

Unions seek to limit the use of contingent workers, particularly tem porary v/orkers and contract employees, in v/ork which is similar to bargaining unit work. The Bureau of National Affairs notes that if a workplace is 50 percent or more unionized, companies are less likely to make extensive use of temporary workers, or of on-call or short-term hires (Bureau of National Affairs, cited in 9 to 5, 1986), though sub- cont*'acting increases. Other restrictions include limits on the number or proportion of part-time or temporary workers, options for incunibant part- time employees to bid for extra hours when work is necessary, and options for full-time employees to temporarily work fewer hours on a voluntary

basis.

The UFCW 1985-1988 Master Food Agreem.ent for Manchester, MO, for example, requires that 50 percent of budgeted monthly time be scheduled in 40 hours per week positions, and 40 percent scheduled in positions with 25

to 40 hours. The 1981 contract between the International Brotherhood of

Teamsters (IBT) and Pacific Southv/est Airlines limited part-time employees to 10 percent of the workforce. A contract between the Commu nications Workers of Canada and Saskatchewan Telecommunications limited .'••art-time employees to 10 percent of the staff in any office.

Unions have limited the use of contracting out or subcontracting by neqctiating clauses which require notification and regular reporting of information regarding contracting out as well as protections against

displacement of incumbant employees by contract employees. The 1986 tele

phone company contract discussed earlier provides an example of such con- 'ract. protections. Altern.atively, a union contract may specify which jobs can he contracted out, as in a contract negotiated between the Telecom- muni cations Workers Union/ClC and the British Columbia Telephone Company and Canadian Telephones and Supplies Ltd. (Canadian Ministry of Labour,

19831.

27

Qthor provisions limiting the use of contingent workers prohibit the simultaneous layoff of full-time workers and the expansion of part-time, temporary or contract jobs.

Unions are concerned with creating permanent and, v/here appropriate, full-time positions based on the identification of situations in which temporary or part-time work is actually continuous and/or virtually full- time. At Kaiser Pernianente in northern California, the contract v/ith OPEIU provides that if a temporary position lasts more than 90 days, then a full-time position must be created for the job. Wayne State Univer sity's contract v/ith UAW Local 2071 limits temporary workers to 1,000 hours a year, beyond which point a full-time position must be created, posted and filled using the negotiated seniority systeni (9 to 5, 1986).

Unions are also concerned with providing career opportunities for penaanent part-time v/crkers. Contract provisions include job evaluations and Pioans of advancement in pay and job classification for part-time employees and long-term temporary employees, so that they are included in promnt''onal pools and are eligible for any salary increases available to other employees. Inclusion of pert-time employees for training and promotion purposes are also important. SEIU locals in Seattle, Washington and Santa Clara County, California, for example, have negotiated minimum propr;»'tions of part-time career positions (SEIU, 1986b).

Finally, and very important, unions have pressed for contract provisions that v/ould make part-tine work an option for many individuals at some point during their working lives, rather than a permanent status for some workers. Voluntary job sharing or other reduced time options to enable workers to pursue education, training, parental responsibilities or increased leisure is one example of such provisions. Parental leave at the time a child is born or adopted and a "phased return to work"

following parental leave, in the form of a part-time work arrangement for a specified period of time, are other examples. Phased retirement or other voluntary reduced work time options for older workers to enable them to cope with the care of an ill spouse or other elderly dependent or

28 -

to enjoy increased leisure are additional work alternatives for which unions should negotiate.

Other, related, contract provisions will be mentioned briefly. Language against speed-ups or intensification of work, including contractual agreements over adequate rest breaks for part-time and temporary workers, provide important protections to these workers. As at-will employees, they are more subject to management pressures and arbitrary orders. Part- tine workers are often required by management to v/ork with virtually no breaks since their time on the job is shorter. A major issue in the unionization of workers in the City of Oakland, for example, was the intensification of v.'ork as management replaced full-time workers with part-time workers without reducing the workload.

Overtime provisions vary, depending on the history of the workplace, wage levels in the industry and workplace, and patterns in the distribution of

hours. All of these affect whether extra hours are considered desirable

or are to be avoided. In general, unions *vith large memberships of women are more likely to bargain for restrictions on overtime than has been the case for industrial unions in v/hich men are concentrated. Unions with

large female memberships seek to restrict mandatory overtime or require advance v.ritten notice, and to provide some compensation for extra baby sitting costs or other auxiliary costs. In industries where hours tend to be on the short side and wages are generally low, as in retail trade and i^ealth care, unions may require that extra hours be offered to full-time emnlovees first, and then to part-time employees, both based on seniority, since premium pay may bo involved.

Unions have also been concerned that policies to aid working parents may load to de facto discrimination against workers with children unless anti-discrimination rights are guaranteed explicitly. Anti-discrimination clauses are particularly relevant to v/orking mothers, who are most likely to need alternate work arrangements at some point in their work lives.

CI.UW suggests that a general clause to prohibit discrimination based on parenthood be included in union contracts. The Canadian Union of Public Cmoloyee'^ !.cc?l 2189, which won a child care subsidy in its contract with

tho Toronto YWCA, included ?. claupe explicitly prohibiting the employer from di-scriminfitinii against job applicants because of the number of dependents they may have (Canadian Ministry of Labour, 19831.

Conclusion

Union:' have accumulated an important body of experience in bargaining for part-'ime and temporary employees. Collective policies have been developed which facilitate individually-tailored solutions to workplace stresses on workers while ensuring that employer v/orl requirements are met. Contractual agreements help build an equitable, across-the-board

"floo-" for benefits. They also define transitions for temporary and part-time 'workers to permanent or -Pull-tine status, and outline proce dures. for the creation of full-time positions when ongoing contingent

^.'ork indicates that, there is sufficient work to warrant this. Mechanisms

for Guaranteed minimum hours, paid rest breaks, access to training, nccumnlation of hours for step increases in pay for part-time and tempo- rarv workers, as well as regular evaluations and accumulation of hours toward": promotion to more experienced job classes are all means of addressing affirmative action concerns for otherwise "marginal" or

"perioheral" workers. In -addition, unions have bargained restrictions on the use of contingent workers in order to preserve the job security and working condit-'ons of the full-time workforce.

- 30

Bibliography

AFL-CIO (1985), Draft Resolution on Part-Time Work. Washington, D.C.:

October 1985, AFL-CIO Convention.

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) (1984), District Council 37 Contract with the New York Board of Education Covering Hourly School Lunch Employees. New York: District

Council 37.

Appelbaum, E. (1987), "Restructuring work: Temporary, part-time and at- home employment." In: H. Hartmann (ed.). Computer Chips and Paper

Clips, Vol. 2, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Bell, D./W. Marclay (1987), "Trends in retirement eligibility and pension

benefits." Monthly Labor Review, April, 18-25.

Bronfenbrenner, K. (1988), "Survey of contract language governing

contingency workers." New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University.

Bureau of National Affairs (BNA) (1986), "Flexible staffing." BNA

Employee Relations Weekly. Cited in Working at the Margins. Cleve land, Ohio: 9 to 5, National Association of Working Women.

Bureau of Labor Statistics (1984), "Employee benefits in medium and large

firms." Bulletin 2213, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Labor.

Business Week (1986), "The disposable employee is becoming a fact of cor

porate life." Business Week, 52-56.

Canadian Ministry of Labour (1983), Commission of Inquiry into Part-Time

Work; Part-Tine Work in Canada, Ottawa.

Collirs, G. (1987), "Wanted: child-care v/orkers, age 55 and up." New York

Times, December 15, Al.

Costello, C. (1984), On the Front: Class, Gender and Conflict in the

Insurance Workplace. Ph.D. Dissertation, Madison, WI: Department of

Sociology, University of Wisconsin.

Gregory, J. (1983), "Electronic office homework from the perspective of a

clerical workers' organization." Presented at National Executive Forum: Office Work Stations in the Home, National Academy of

Sciences. Washington, D.C. An edited version appears in Office Work

Stations in the Home, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Gustman, A.L./T.L. Steinmeier (1983), "Minimum hours constraints and retirement behavior." Contemporary Policy Issues, a Supplement to Economic Inquiry, No. 3, April, 77-91.

Hayqhe, H. (1986), "Rise in mothers' labor force activity includes those

with infants." Monthly Labor Review, 43-45.

Hnrvath, F. (1937), "The pulse of economic change: Displaced workers of

1981-1985." Monthly Labor Review, June, 3-12.

- -tl

; C i'' T fr"? v1HQ r n-'t-Tinv' WOfk. lotO'/i, .AiJ" <vMi'-i; <"i

'•' ' -'f !••••• !r'.

i ' • «:i. d 'H !}, "'oliJen yS'Ts fiprnl: iinJer (loldcn arches." flo*. Yrr

••/. "'.r./' /i. ''use u;i;rr/C. ' Lfkovri t - .' -i. •arin'';

'ivtv. k- 1 '".0;. MI; Upiu'-I i» Si Mut:' • •>" ! mp)-- K.

!'..d iiNw.. 'l7.A>dy : An ini;!'i I ../or'viev;.

'.i:iU 'y I. o;>t • itiv, r1;^rcA, i';-33.

.I'f!;!:'" arior ; ' OAA), "drioii ot 'oy - v/Of ii dr;' WA ." t o'sth iy I. cbur ' ovu./ , kiay,

A-:'A.. .vO!'k';i:.: .JA .

- vie. . rA hr',.- . : - if;.

• C' A; rl' l.-bo- Aii^h i;:;.,-:. i.^n. [ -.o;..

A.- . • • ' f r : i f ' - i u , . ' . ;•

'•• ; Y'r' Y'AV ridl " Or? "i U'v :•.

;i'!' - o - i on or inn (19o7), Anni.;! j . ^C! ^i'•

' =•••••;;:•; i •• i I'' ' t Zo ^ . cd '"lii'T C 1li'/O 1 :..,rl, . :ia. 3 ••

: ' ; • ^-pria-:on nk r'n'-ki;":; 'xpau, i n .

; • ••nW.ial .A i ;ti.i on -.f Orkinn (1006/» norlnnn nl tl., 'v'.io" f'I'i •''i.iir onn "riip:,.'-ar-, !-'ork;;fo in ihe Dtiiir. i)V,.jteo.

ilnv^y-, ;i. r-nrv

•1 ' . 'i./iV i.v'/p.' 'I' Ai). "MvP-^jncii ruifins LroiiAI . iiu' uov'.

• . " p . - i n tn-rp?:.: pf Arfairs, Th;: ri5rii)in«. 'nni placv.

-pi:i.••• S i n o ai:!; otdffinQ. >!?stn-ci:n-n, ij.n,: uuren ;

i( iV.;';,.!( • I ••* I'tiirs.

A • A. -.-, 1, n. "C'nUiOinn tiin-cs: The use of redncs-d Limo opr.icns i.

'Jrri'-.ed •••. a " •ridernati pn.a] Labour !-:fvie:v, i22, 'i7y-py2.

V.i'/i;-? EAtol.ny - V inte^mfttionrl I'f "•;»•,n (f.ilU) (19o6ri), iiealth Car- A.: - in: I'-";-; Ccntroct Cl'-titp.-,. 'iashiiigton, D.C.: SlilU Researc::

•V'|)'T."L:nont .

Se- vi OS I-I.i'niar ior.al Union (SCIU} (lDv%b), Clerical Urirgaininq Cl'.'sis. Washington, D.C.: Si-IU Research Department.

Vcnitdle. I.. (IDSo), "Reliance on teniporr-.ry jobs points at ecoriomi.-;

fi'-agi Ii ty," Mow Vnri-' Times, March -G, Al.

nnit.i;--! Food and Conniercial Wcrksrs (UFCW) (1986), Selected Contracts tii'oofil! 198G provided hy the Research Department. Wa.shington, D.C.:

'if^CW Research Department.

A.9. i'cpart'T.ent Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (1985), Handbook of

ahor StaMstios, 57-59.

ZITIERWEISE/CITATION:

Eileen Appelbaum, Judith Gregory:

Union Approaches to Contingent Work Arrangements

Discussion Paper FS I 88 - 8

Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin fur

Sozialforschung 1988.

MITGLIEDER DES PUBLIKATIONSKOMITEES

PUBLICATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Friederike Maier (Vorsitz)

Egon Matzner Gunther Schmid

Christoph Deutschmann Bernd Reissert