Archived News:

This article was originally published by the Wisconsin Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors in its July 2006 Merit Shop Talk newsletter.

Old Merchandise in a New Package

By Jim Pease

What do you do when a salesperson calls on you with old merchandise in a new package?  You already know from your prior experience and the experiences of others that the merchandise doesn't fit your business.  Yet, the salesperson persists in trying to pressure you into a meeting to present you with "a new package" just for you.  Why?  Supposedly, because the salesperson is trying to help you.  Yet, the salesperson won't tell you what it is about the new package that is significantly different from the old merchandise that previously was peddled to you.

My hunch is that you wouldn't waste your time with that salesperson unless the salesperson could show, up front, that there was a new and significantly improved product that would substantially help you in becoming more profitable.  You'd want to see a description of this new product in black and white and to have a chance to study it.  Only then would you consider scheduling a meeting, which would take you away from other ever-present pressing business matters, to listen to what the salesperson had to say.

Unions shouldn't expect to be treated any differently than salespeople.

Recently, several unions, particularly Operating Engineers Local No. 139, have been calling and visiting targeted contractors' offices in an effort to get a meeting with members of the contractors' management.  They claim to have a new program that will help the contractor, but they won't present the contractor with proof that their package is significantly different from what the contractors have been offered in the past.

Are they offering something that will give the contractor a significant advantage over the contractor's competitors?  If they are, why don't they present that information with their introduction so the contractor will know there may be a specific benefit that would justify the contractor taking the time to consider what the Union has to present.

Based upon experience, it is quite unlikely that the Union has something new and different that will significantly help contractors.  In the past, construction industry unions generally have worked hard to take away individual contractor's advantages regarding labor so that all contractors will be on a "level playing field."  The Operators have been particularly aggressive in this effort, going so far as to tear up agreements with employers that the Union believed gave the employers special advantages.

If the Unions do have something that will help an employer's business, they should be willing to be open and up front about what that advantage is, so employers can consider it and decide in their own good time whether it is of sufficient interest to them to justify taking the time to consider it.  Instead, they seem intent upon pressuring employers into participating in meetings with Union representatives, usually several in number, without telling the employer what the Union has up its sleeve.  Do they intend to threaten the employer and don't want their threats, which may be unlawful, to be overheard by others?  Is it their intent to say something inflammatory to the employer in hopes of provoking the employer into saying something the Union representatives can secretly tape record for later use in filing charges and complaints against the employer?

I'm not talking here about unions that are claiming they represent a majority of the employer's employees in an appropriate bargaining unit.  If such a claim is made and if the employer doubts the accuracy of that claim, the employer should immediately express doubts of the union's majority status, should confirm those doubts in writing in a letter to the union, via certified mail, return receipt requested, and should not discuss matters further with the union.  If the employer doesn't stop talking to the union, the employer's continued discussion of the subject could be the basis for a claim by the union that the employer recognized and agreed to bargain with the union as the majority collective bargaining representative of the employer's employees.

Rather, I'm talking about situations in which no claim for recognition is made.  In those cases, why wouldn't a union be very up front about what it has to offer?  Why wouldn't it give its proposals in writing?  Why wouldn't it give employers time to consider those proposals at the employer's leisure?  Why would it try to pressure an employer into a meeting?

Treat union representatives like you would treat any other salesperson.  Don't let them push you around!

Go to In the News

This page is intended to provide general information about various legal issues and developments.  It is not intended to be a complete list of all recent legal developments.  This page does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon in dealing with specific factual or legal matters.