工会组织管理系统截图_公司正在使用员工调查数据来预测和挤压工会组织

工会组织管理系统截图

In April, Business Insider reported that Whole Foods kept tabs on stores likely to unionize through an interactive heat map based on scores derived from more than two dozen metrics. A June Vox story about Amazon’s workforce describes a similar heat map, with executives keeping tabs on potential unionization “hot spots” via a calculation that relied on employee survey data, timing of the last pay raise, and dozens of other factors.

今年 4月，《 商业内幕》报道说，全食超市通过根据来自超过两个指标的得分得出的互动式热图，对可能结成联盟的商店进行了跟踪。 June Vox关于亚马逊劳动力的故事描述了类似的热点图，高管通过依赖于员工调查数据，上次加薪的时间以及许多其他因素的计算来密切关注潜在的工会“热点”。

But Amazon isn’t the only company doing this sort of work. Thanks to a glut of tech platforms that deploy sophisticated methods for collecting and analyzing employee data, pinpointing groups of employees who are likely to unionize is a capability within reach for any employer.

但是亚马逊并不是唯一一家从事此类工作的公司。 由于大量的技术平台都部署了用于收集和分析员工数据的复杂方法，因此，精确确定可能会合并的员工组是任何雇主都可以实现的功能。

Though employee surveys and the data analytics applied to them are commonly used to monitor things like employee engagement and workplace culture, at least two employee survey platforms also use data collected through surveys to pinpoint the store locations, departments, and demographics of employees that are most likely to unionize. Littler Mendelson, one of the largest employment and labor law firms, told OneZero it is actively considering building a similar tool.

尽管员工调查和应用于他们的数据分析通常用于监视员工敬业度和工作场所文化等事物，但至少有两个员工调查平台还使用通过调查收集的数据来确定员工的店铺位置，部门和人口统计信息最多可能会合并。 最大的雇佣和劳工律师事务所之一利特勒·门德尔森(Littler Mendelson)告诉OneZero，它正在积极考虑建立类似的工具。

Under the National Labor Relations Act, employers are not allowed to question employees about their union activities or membership in a way that may restrain or coerce them, for instance in a context that offers benefits if they don’t join a union or threatens to fire them if they do. Directly asking workers whether they are favorable to a union could open a company up to legal challenges, but a regular survey with more general uses such as assessing engagement and potential turnover is less likely to raise red flags.

根据《国家劳资关系法》，雇主不得以可能限制或强迫他们的方式向雇员询问其工会活动或成员资格，例如，在不加入工会或威胁解雇的情况下提供好处的情况下。他们，如果他们这样做。 直接询问工人是否对工会有利，这会使公司面临法律挑战，但是定期进行具有更一般用途的调查，例如评估敬业度和潜在离职率，不太可能引起危险。

“With our platform, they can literally log into the platform… and say, ‘We see that 20% of that group is at risk of unionization.’”

“借助我们的平台，他们可以从字面上登录该平台……然后说，'我们看到该群体中有20％处于工会化的风险中。'”

One platform, Perceptyx, which says it counts 30% of Fortune 100 companies among its clients, includes a “union vulnerability index” as a default option in its “hot spot” feature, which uses 12 million survey responses from previous clients, as well as research from its internal team and industry sources like journals and standards organizations, to predict certain outcomes. The view allows companies to easily rank groups of employees — those who for instance share a certain age, location, department, manager, tenure, or other criteria, or a combination of criteria — by the percentage who are likely favorable, neutral, or unfavorable to a union.

Perceptyx是一个平台，该平台表示其客户中包括《财富》 100强公司中的30％。该平台的“热点”功能中包括“联合体脆弱性指数”作为默认选项，该平台还使用了以前客户的1200万次调查回复作为其内部团队和行业来源(例如期刊和标准组织)的研究，以预测某些结果。 该视图使公司可以轻松地按可能有利，中立或不利的百分比对员工组(例如，具有特定年龄，职位，部门，经理，任期或其他条件，或多个条件组合)的员工进行排名参加工会。

“We’ve all been in that meeting where a leader says, how does X relate to Y,” Brett Wells, Perceptyx’s director of people analytics, tells OneZero. “[For instance,] tell me how many employees who are high-performing and have been at the company for two years or more are at risk of unionization. With our platform, they can literally log into the platform and have the answer to that question, and say, ‘We see that 20% of that group is at risk of unionization.’”

Perceptyx的人员分析总监Brett Wells告诉OneZero： “我们都参加过会议，领导者说X与Y的关系如何。” “ [例如，告诉我，有多少高绩效的员工已经在公司工作了两年或两年以上，有工会风险。 使用我们的平台，他们可以从字面上登录该平台并获得该问题的答案，然后说：“我们看到该组中有20％的人有工会的危险。””

Another platform, WorkTango, allows clients to build surveys that include questions assessing how favorable employees may be to unionization. WorkTango co-founder Rob Catalano says that the platform would allow employers to see, based on correlations established by outside research (for instance, linking right-to-work laws to the prevalence of union organizing campaigns), a company’s external data (aside from survey responses), and other factors. Employers can look at whether there are parts of the organization that have a higher propensity to unionize, whether that be specific locations, departments, or any other attribute for which the company has data.

另一个平台WorkTango允许客户进行调查，其中包括评估员工对工会的有利程度的问题。 WorkTango联合创始人Rob Catalano表示，该平台将允许雇主根据外部研究建立的相关性，例如将工作权法与工会组织运动的普遍性联系起来，来查看公司的外部数据(除调查回复)和其他因素。 雇主可以查看组织中是否有较高的工会倾向，无论是特定位置，部门还是公司拥有数据的任何其他属性。

Surveys may be sent to employees by email, a link sent to their phones via SMS, or in some manufacturing contexts, through a portal on the shop floor. Not all the questions used to assess union vulnerability are explicitly related to unionization. To assess union vulnerability, Perceptyx, for instance, includes employees’ answers to questions such as “I am comfortable discussing concerns with my manager”; “My manager treats employees with respect”; “I am appropriately involved in decisions that affect my work”; “I am able to balance my work and personal life”; “When I do an excellent job, my accomplishments are recognized”; “I am satisfied with the benefits provided by our company”; and “I am paid fairly for my contribution to the company.”

调查可以通过电子邮件，通过短信发送给员工的链接或在某些制造环境中通过车间的门户发送给员工。 并非所有用于评估工会脆弱性的问题都与工会明确相关。 为了评估工会的脆弱性，例如，Perceptyx包括员工对以下问题的回答：“我很乐意与经理讨论问题”； “我的经理尊重员工”； “我适当地参与了影响我工作的决定”； “我能够平衡自己的工作和个人生活”； “当我做的出色时，我的成就得到认可”； “我对我们公司提供的利益感到满意”； 和“我对公司的贡献得到了应有的报酬。”

Employers who view the report can dig into which questions Perceptyx has found to be driving the potential desire to unionize, and respond accordingly. For instance, they might see that among those deemed likely to be favorable to a union, a high percentage said they weren’t satisfied with their benefits. That data could help the company decide to upgrade its benefits.

查看报告的雇主可以挖掘Perceptyx发现哪些问题正在推动潜在的工会愿望，并做出相应的回应。 例如，他们可能会发现，在那些可能对工会有利的人中，很大一部分人对自己的利益感到不满意。 这些数据可以帮助公司决定升级其收益。

Perceptyx also uses non-survey data in order to draw conclusions about likelihood to unionize. As with the company’s other data tools, like those that interpret surveys to assess employee engagement, aid diversity and inclusion efforts, or investigate the cause of high turnover, groups of workers can be established using criteria such as sales data, financial metrics, ethnicity, or productivity data. “A typical implementation, we’re ingesting hundreds of data points for every employee who completes a survey,” says Wells.

Perceptyx还使用非调查数据来得出有关合并可能性的结论。 与公司的其他数据工具一样，例如那些解释调查以评估员工敬业度，帮助多元化和包容性工作或调查高离职原因的工具 ，则可以使用销售数据，财务指标，种族，或生产力数据。 威尔斯说：“典型的实现是，我们为完成调查的每位员工吸收数百个数据点。”

The company can similarly factor in non-survey data when making predictions. “Employees in states that do not have right-to-work laws are far more open to unionization,” he says. “Other indicators or demographics that play into it are things like company size. We don’t see the small companies unionizing, but extremely large companies.”

在做出预测时，公司可以类似地考虑非调查数据。 他说：“在没有工作权法的州，员工更容易加入工会。” “影响公司业绩的其他指标或人口统计资料还包括公司规模。 我们看不到小公司会联合，而会看到超大公司。”

Perceptyx and WorkTango aren’t specifically designed to root out union organizing. “I think it’s the cherry on top for some clients, but by no means is it the meat and potatoes of their decision-making process,” Wells says. WorkTango’s Catalano says it’s not in the top five or 10 reasons that companies choose to use the platform, though some clients have chosen to use it this way.

Perceptyx和WorkTango并不是专门为消除工会组织而设计的。 威尔斯说：“对于某些客户而言，我认为这是最重要的事情，但这绝不是决定客户决策过程中的关键。” WorkTango的Catalano表示，尽管有些客户选择以这种方式使用它，但这并不是公司选择使用该平台的前五或十大理由。

“You can nip it at the ‘hey we’re unhappy’ stage versus ‘hey we’re unhappy and we think a union is the answer.’”

“您可以在'嘿，我们不开心'阶段和'嘿，我们不开心，我们认为工会就是答案”的阶段来解决这个问题。”

Union membership in the United States has declined dramatically over the last several decades, with just 6.2% of private sector workers belonging to a union in 2019, compared to 16.8% in 1983. Beginning in the 1950s, an industry of consultants and law firms started advising companies on how to avoid unionization campaigns. Based on an analysis of publicly available reports filed with the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Labor-Management Standards, the Economic Policy Institute estimates that employers now spend nearly $340 million per year on union avoidance firms. These firms often provide so-called union vulnerability assessments, which are usually based on employee surveys or interviews. A pamphlet from the Hutchison Group, a management and labor relations consulting firm, describes its assessment like this: “We can help to discreetly determine your vulnerability to potential union organizing. Having worked with both union and nonunion companies over the past 30 years, we have learned to identify key warning signs and recommend proactive steps to reduce your risk of a union organizing campaign.”

在过去的几十年中，美国的工会会员人数急剧下降 ，到2019年，只有6.2％的私营部门工人加入了工会，而1983年为16.8％。从1950年代开始，顾问和律师事务所产业开始向公司提供有关如何避免工会运动的建议。 根据对美国劳工部劳动管理标准办公室备案的公开报告的分析， 经济政策研究所估计，雇主现在每年在避免工会组织上花费近3.4亿美元。 这些公司通常提供所谓的工会脆弱性评估，该评估通常基于员工调查或访谈。 管理和劳资关系咨询公司和记集团(Hutchison Group)的小册子对此进行了评估，内容如下：“我们可以帮助谨慎地确定您对潜在工会组织的脆弱性。 在过去的30年中与工会和工会组织合作，我们学会了识别关键警告信号并建议采取积极措施以降低您参加工会组织运动的风险。”

As the sources of workplace data increase and analysis techniques become more sophisticated, the focus of these firms has shifted, says John Logan, a professor of labor and employment studies at San Francisco State University who studies the union avoidance industry. “The emphasis on the areas of expertise, the tools, the knowledge to best help you conduct those types of vulnerability assessments, they’ve changed over the years,” he says. While in the ’70s and ’80s, union avoidance consultants typically advertised their understanding of behavioral science and industrial psychology as the key to assessing unionization risk, “more recently the emphasis has been on tech and big data and algorithms and other tech innovation.”

旧金山州立大学劳工与就业研究教授约翰·洛根(John Logan)说，随着工作场所数据来源的增加和分析技术变得越来越复杂，这些公司的重点已经转移。 他说：“多年来，对专业知识，工具和知识的重视已在不断变化，它们可以最好地帮助您进行这类漏洞评估，” 在20世纪70年代和80年代，避免工会顾问通常会宣传他们对行为科学和行业心理学的理解，这是评估工会风险的关键，“最近，重点是技术，大数据和算法以及其他技术创新。”

Employment and labor law firm JacksonLewis advertises that its “data analytics group leverages employers’ rich workforce datasets to enable effective data-driven decisions for workforce-related issues.” The company did not respond to an inquiry from OneZero. Ogletree Deakins, another large employment and labor law firm, hired its first director of data analytics in 2018 and did not respond to a question about whether it uses data analytics in vulnerability assessments. There are various ways these types of firms use data analysis: They may determine whether there is a potentially illegal bias in who a firm lays off or how it pays its workforce. They may look at data relevant to a specific lawsuit, such as tracking a worker’s movement throughout the day to prove when they were working or not.

就业和劳工法律公司JacksonLewis在广告中宣称 ：“数据分析小组利用雇主丰富的劳动力数据集，为与劳动力有关的问题做出有效的数据驱动决策。” 该公司没有回应OneZero的询问。 另一家大型雇佣和劳工法律公司Ogletree Deakins在2018年聘请了第一位数据分析总监，但没有回答有关是否在脆弱性评估中​​使用数据分析的问题。 这些类型的公司使用数据分析的方式有多种：他们可以确定公司的解雇人员或薪资支付方式是否存在潜在的非法偏见。 他们可能会查看与特定诉讼相关的数据，例如全天跟踪工人的活动以证明他们何时工作。

Aaron Crews, the head of data analytics at Littler Mendelson, says he has begun working on how to use data analytics as a way to predict union risk that is similar to how data analytics platforms predict this risk.

Littler Mendelson数据分析负责人Aaron Crews说，他已经开始研究如何使用数据分析作为预测工会风险的方法，类似于数据分析平台如何预测这种风险。

He says if a company can identify data that correlates to the tendency to organize, it can work to preemptively address specific concerns likely to drive unionization. “You can nip it at the ‘hey we’re unhappy’ stage versus ‘hey we’re unhappy and we think a union is the answer,’” he says.

他说，如果一家公司能够识别与组织趋势相关的数据，那么它就可以抢先解决可能推动工会发展的具体问题。 他说：“您可以在'嘿，我们不开心'阶段和'嘿，我们不开心，我们认为工会就是答案”的阶段来解决这个问题。”

Crews describes these dashboards as early experiments for some employers and firms like his, and said he’s skeptical of how well such assessments accurately assess the likelihood of unionization efforts. “I’m sure it’s possible,” he says. “I’m not sure there’s good data of sufficient quantity to drive it yet.”

克鲁斯将这些仪表板描述为像他这样的一些雇主和公司的早期实验，并表示他对这种评估能否准确评估工会工作的可能性持怀疑态度。 他说：“我相信这是可能的。” “我不确定是否有足够数量的良好数据来驱动它。”

The legality of deploying a survey that can theoretically be used to identify whether employees are likely to unionize has been challenged in the past. Wilma Liebman, a former chairman of the National Labor Relations Board under Obama, cites a 1990 decision adopted by the NLRB in a case where a company’s psychological tests of prospective employees was challenged. It was alleged that the test, which measured whether individuals would be “loyal,” likely to “promote friction,” or loyal to “company interests,” could also ascertain an applicant’s union sympathies. In the decision, an administrative law judge wrote that he “could find no evidence that the tests revealed a person’s union sympathies.”

过去，进行调查的合法性在理论上可用于确定员工是否可能工会的合法性。 奥巴马领导下的国家劳资关系委员会前主席威尔玛·利布曼(Wilma Liebman)引用了NLRB在1990年做出的一项决定，该决定对公司对潜在员工的心理测验提出质疑。 据称，该测试衡量个人是“忠诚”，可能“促进摩擦”还是忠于“公司利益”，也可以确定申请人的同情心。 在该决定中，一名行政法法官写道，“他找不到任何证据表明这些测试表明了某人对工会的同情。”

Liebman says that even if companies could use these tests to try to weed out “troublemakers” or union supporters, “I did not come across any case that held merely using these kinds of tests alone was unlawful.” She says that if companies were to make it clear that they would remedy grievances expressed in a survey, but only if workers did not join a union, or if managers were to imply the purpose of the survey was to assess workers’ views on unions, that would more likely be deemed illegal activity.

利勃曼说，即使公司可以使用这些测试来消除“麻烦制造者”或工会支持者，“我没有发现仅仅使用这些测试是非法的。” 她说，如果公司要明确表示他们将纠正调查中表达的不满，但前提是工人没有加入工会，或者管理人员要暗示调查的目的是评估工人对工会的看法，那更有可能被视为非法活动。

“It’s about what they do with it,” she says.

她说：“这与他们的处理方式有关。”

翻译自: https://onezero.medium.com/companies-are-using-employee-survey-data-to-predict-and-squash-union-organizing-a7e28a8c2158

工会组织管理系统截图