The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
A n a ly s is o f L a y o ff, R e c a ll, a n d W o r k -S h a r in g P ro c e d u re s in U n io n C o n tra c ts B u lle tin N o . 1209 U N IT E D S T A T E S D E P A R T M E N T O F L A B O R Jam es P . M itc h e ll, Secretary Bureau of Labor Statistics Ewan Clague, Commissioner A n a ly s is o f L a y o ff, R e c a ll, a n d W o r k -S h a r in g P ro c e d u re s in U n io n C o n tra c ts F rom the M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w D ece m b er 1956 and January, Febru ary, and M a rc h 1957 issues, w ith a d dition al tables. B u lle tin N o . 1209 March 1957 U N IT E D S T A T E S D E P A R T M E N T O F L A B O R Jam es P . M itc h e ll, Secretary Bureau of Labor Statistics Ewan Clague, Commissioner For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. - Price 30 cents P r e fa c e A s p a rt o f its continuing p rogram o f co llective b argain in g agreem ent studies, the Bureau o f L a b o r Statistics, in 1954, began a com prehensive analysis o f provisions dealin g w ith la y o ff, recall, and w ork-sharing procedures in all agreem ents co verin g 1,000 o r m ore workers. A selection o f illu stra tive clauses and a b rie f glossary o f term s was published ea rly in 1956 under the title C o lle c tiv e B a rga in in g Clauses: L a y o ff, R ecall, and W ork -S h a rin g Procedures (B L S Bull. 1189). In this bu lletin, the prevalen ce and in terrelation o f variou s aspects o f la yo ff, recall, and w ork-sharing practices are analyzed. T h is stu d y was conducted in the B u reau ’s D iv is io n o f W ag es and In d u stria l R ela tio n s under the general direction o f Joseph W . B loch. T h e reports, w hich appeared first in fo u r consecutive issues o f the M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w (D ecem b er 1956 to M a rc h 1957 issues, in clu sive), w ere prepared b y Joseph W . B loch , R o b e r t P la tt, and R ose Th eod ore. (H I) C o n te n ts Page Prevalence of layoff and w ork-sharing provisions; forestalling and m inim izing layoffs_________________________________________________________________________________________ In trod u ction _______________________________________________________________________________ 1 1 Scope of s tu d y ____________________________________________________________________________ Prevalence— L ayoff and w ork-sh aring_________________________________________________ 2 3 Forestalling and minim izing la y o ffs____________________________________________________ 5 Union participation in layoff procedures; advance notice of lay offs__________________ 11 U nion participation in layoff procedures______________________________________________ 11 Advan ce notice of layoff_________________________________________________________________ 14 Seniority and bum ping practices_____________________________________________________________ 19 T y p e s of seniority provisions___________________________________________________________ 20 E xceptions to seniority__________________________________________________________________ 23 Seniority u n it______________________________________________________________________________ 25 Bu m pin g practices________________________________________________________________________ 26 S hort-term or tem porary lay offs________________________________________________________ 28 R ecall procedures; w ork-sh aring_____________________________________________________________ R ecall procedures_________________________________________________________________________ W ork-sharing______________________________________________________________________________ 29 29 34 (IV ) Layoff, Recall, and Work-Sharing Procedures P r e v a le n c e o f L a y o ff a n d W o r k -S h a r in g P r o v is io n s ; F o r e s ta llin g a n d M in im iz in g L a y o ffs In trodu ction shop stewards be protected from la y o ff based on seniority? In w h a t order should em ployees be recalled to w ork? Th ese and countless oth er questions to be answered in v o lv e the jo b secu rity o f em ployees, the p rod u ctive efficien cy o f the establishm ent, the fu n ction in g o f the union, and basic principles o f equ ity. In v irtu a lly all such decisions, some w orkers m a y be ad versely affected in order to p rotect others, and optim u m efficien cy m a y be sacrificed fo r the tim e bein g fo r the pro tection o f m orale or fo r oth er considerations. T h e rules regardin g la y o ff or w ork-sharing em bodied in co llective bargainin g agreem ents m a y be re la tiv e ly sim ple in expression and operation, e. g., the last person hired shall be the first to be laid off, or all em ployees w ill share available w ork. In such situations, oth er decisions necessitated b y the reduced volu m e o f w o rk are m ade b y the em p lo yer alone, possibly in accordance w ith custom, or b y the em ployer in in form al consultation w ith the union. M o r e freq u en tly, h ow ever, particu la rly as the size o f the establishm ent increases and jobs becom e m ore diversified, the agreem ent p ro visions tend to becom e m ore com plex and are o ften a source o f adm in istrative difficulties w hich find th eir w a y in to grievan ce and a rb itration cases. T h e provisions o f a particu lar agreem ent, as im p o rta n t as th e y m a y be to insure the observance o f m inim um standards, serve in m a n y instances n ot as a precise blu eprin t to shape e v e ry step o f a la y o ff sequence, b u t rath er as a fram ew ork w ith in A l a r g e m a j o r i t y o f the collective bargainin g agreem ents co verin g 1,000 or m ore w orkers con tain provisions settin g fo rth the procedures w hich are to g o vern adjustm ents to declining em p lo y m en t needs, w h eth er occasioned b y regu lar sea sonal slumps, sporadic changes in the volu m e o f business, a general recession, or oth er factors. T h e process o f adju sting to a reduced vo lu m e o f w o rk m a y begin lo n g before the first w ork er is laid o ff and som etim es does n ot end w ith the recall o f the last w ork er to be rehired. In this process, m a n y im p orta n t decisions m ust be m ade— u n ila terally b y the em p loyer in the absence o f an agreem ent p rovision bearing upon the problem , b y the em p loyer in ad hoc n egotiations or con su ltation w ith the union, or b y the em p loyer in accordance w ith agreem ent provisions. F o r exam ple, should overtim e, subcontracting, and the hirin g o f new em ployees be restricted when la yo ffs or w ork-sharing appear im m inent? Should hours fo r all w orkers in the d ep artm en t or the pla n t be reduced before la yo ffs are m ade? T o w h a t le v e l should hours be reduced, and how lon g can reduced hours p reva il before la yo ffs are w a r ranted? I f som e w orkers m ust be laid off, in w h a t order are th e y to be le t out? Should w orkers w ho are reached fo r la y o ff be p erm itted to displace ju n ior em ployees in oth er typ es o f w ork? H o w much n otice should be given ? Should union (l) 2 w hich certain steps are fixed, others less rig id ly determ in ed, and som e le ft en tirely to the em p lo y e r’s discretion. Scope o f Study T h is study, the first o f its kind b y the U . S. D ep a rtm en t o f L a b o r ’s B ureau o f L a b o r Statistics, a ttem pts to account fo r the various w ays in w hich all m a jo r agreem ents handle la yo ff, recall, and w ork-sharing procedures. I t is essentially a prevalen ce study, despite the difficulties o f classi fy in g certain typ es o f clauses in to precise or d efin itive categories, as w ill be poin ted ou t fro m tim e to tim e. T h e entire sequence o f la yo ff, recall, and w ork-sharing procedures is covered under the fo llo w in g m a jo r topics: P reva len ce o f la y o ff and w ork-sharing provision s; m ethods o f forestallin g and m in im izin g la yo ffs and w o rk sharing; union p a rticip ation in la y o ff procedures; advan ce n otice o f la y o ff; the role o f sen iority; “ bu m p in g” practices; recall procedures; and w ork-sharing procedures.1 T a b l e 1. — La y o ff F o r this study, v irtu a lly all agreem ents effective in la te 1954 and 1955 coverin g 1,000 or m ore w orkers (exclu sive o f railroad and airline agree m ents) w ere an alyzed.2 O f the 1,743 agreem ents studied, 1,182 applied to m an u facturing establish m ents and covered 4.9 m illion w orkers and 561 applied to n onm anufacturing establishm ents w ith 2 .8 m illion w orkers under agreem ent (ta b le 1). T h e to ta l num ber o f w orkers covered (7.6 m illio n ) represents som ew hat less than h a lf o f all the w orkers under agreem ent in the U n ite d States, exclusive o f railroads and airlines. L a y o ff, recall, and w ork-sharing practices fo r all collective bargainin g agreem ents are n ot necessarily p o rtra y ed b y this analysis, because it is lim ited to agreem ents co verin g at least 1,000 workers. In oth er words, all the agreem ents 1 The Bureau is also undertaking a study of dismissal and severance pay provisions which will be published as a separate report. 3 The Bureau does not maintain a file of railroad and airline agreements; hence their omission from this study. For an analysis of the characteristics of the major agreements studied, see Characteristics of Major Union Con tracts, Monthly Labor Review, July 1956 (p. 805). and work-sharing provisions in m ajor collective bargaining agreements by industry, 1954-55 Agreements with— Number studied Industry Agree ments All industries--------------------------------------------------Manufacturing________________________________ Food and kindred products________________ Tobacco manufactures--------------------------------Textile-mill products----------------------------------Apparel and other finished textile products___ Lumber and wood products (except furniture) Furniture and fixtures__________________ — Paper and allied products------ --------------------Printing, publishing, and allied industries----Chemicals and allied products______________ Products of petroleum and coal--------------------Rubber products__________________________ Leather and leather products----------------------Stone, clay, and glass products--------------------Primary metal industries----------------------------Fabricated metal products_________________ Machinery (except electrical)----------------------Electrical machinery-------------- -------------------Transportation equipment_________________ Instruments and related products___________ Miscellaneous manufacturing industries-------N onmanufacturing__________________________________ Mining, crude petroleum, and natural gas production _ Transportation 1________________________________ Communication_________________________________ Utilities: electric and gas-------------------------------------Wholesale trade--------------------------------------------------Retail trade------------------------------------------------------ Hotels and restaurants___________________________ Services________________________________________ Construction____________________________________ Miscellaneous nonmanufacturing_________________ 1,743 1,182 110 11 64 52 21 20 54 32 61 26 21 21 37 123 72 142 106 147 29 33 561 19 95 71 70 14 76 31 54 124 7 Layoff provisions Workers Agree(thousands) ments 7,641.9 4,857.3 352.5 33.5 158.3 441.4 47.4 39.8 120.7 63.2 132.6 71.7 128.8 72.2 114.3 677.4 192.5 369.8 436.2 1,271.5 64.8 68.6 2,784. 7 303.2 608.4 542.9 198.3 23.3 195.5 156.4 161.9 570.4 24.4 1,347 1,039 96 10 55 3 17 16 53 14 61 26 21 14 32 117 63 142 102 139 29 29 308 15 52 6 8 64 1 1 48 16 26 6 2 1 Excludes railroads and airlines. N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. Work-sharing provisions No layoff or work sharing provisions Workers (thousands) Agreements Workers (thousands) Agreements 5,815.1 4,123.1 320.3 29.5 118.5 4.1 39.2 29.2 119.5 28.1 132.6 71.7 128.8 41.7 102.6 662.5 169.2 369.8 424.0 1,205. 4 64.8 61.5 1,692.0 295.0 336.9 538.5 173.2 18.6 139.6 12 0 .8 74.1 9.6 3.8 74 72 4 1 6 47 2 4 524.2 521.8 12.1 4.0 27.0 434.3 3.2 13T 322 71 14 1.2 2 .1 2 4 21.0 1 1 .2 3 5 6 9 3 9.5 11.7 14.9 23.3 11.0 3 2 6.1 2.4 2 2.4 251 4 43 3 6 3 28 15 26 118 5 1,090.2 8.2 271.5 4.4 25.1 4.7 55.9 53.6 85.4 560.8 1 0 3 2 4 2 1 8 1 Workers (thousands) 1,302.6 212.4 2 .1 0 1 .8 2 7.5 6 .1 6 1.0 2 0.6 3 2. — La y off and work-sharing provisions in m ajor collective bargaining agreements by type of employer u n it , 1954-55 T able Provisions for layoff or work-sharing Employer unit Total Layoff Work Agree ers Agree ments (thou ments sands) Reference also made to supple mental or local agree ments on Work-sharing seniority or other aspects of layoff and work-sharing Work ers Agree (thou ments sands) All types____ 1,421 6,339.3 1,347 5,815.1 Single plant... 806 1,960.7 803 1,954.0 M u ltip la n t company___ 334 2,687.3 330 2,681.1 M ultiem ployer_____ 281 1,691.3 214 1,180.1 Work Work ers Agree ers (thou ments (thou sands) sands) 74 524.2 3 6.7 4 6.3 67 511.3 100 1,512.7 21 40.7 71 1,388.3 8 83.8 N ote —Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. studied m a y be characterized as large agreem ents in the sense th a t th e y covered large establishm ents or large aggregations o f w orkers under m u lti em ployer agreem ents. U n lik e certain oth er types o f agreem ent provisions (e. g., union secu rity and su pplem en tary ben efits), w orker coverage alone m a y be a significant fa cto r in shaping la yo ff, recall, and w ork-sharing procedures. F o r ex am ple, agreem ents fo r establishm ents w ith m an y diversified operations— a characteristic o f the larger establishm ents— can be expected to p rovid e fo r la y o ff problem s created b y the m u ltip lic ity o f jobs, departm ents, and products. M o re o v e r, agreem ents co verin g large groups o f w orkers in general tend to be m ore detailed and specific than those fo r sm aller groups; certain m atters which, in a sm all agreem ent, m igh t be le ft to ad hoc n ego tiation s or unilateral determ in ation becom e fixed in the larger agreements. T h e fa c t th a t this stu dy covers fo rm al w ritten p o lic y rath er than actual practice creates another lim ita tion . In fo rm a l arrangem ents m o d ify in g the agreem ent, changes in plan t practice based on grievan ce and arbitration decisions, and decisions required b y the exigencies o f the m om ent are neither discoverable nor measurable in an analysis o f form al provisions. In actual operation, in form al procedures and techniques m a y supplant a p paren tly cum bersom e features o f the form al provisions. F o r exam ple, m an agem ent m igh t insist upon a clause p ro vid in g fo r consideration o f o th er factors in addition to sen iority in the determ in ation o f the order o f la yo ff, b u t w hen the tim e comes to la y o ff workers, m an agem ent m igh t proceed on the basis o f straigh t seniority, particu la rly if the la y o ff is expected to be o f short dura tion. N o rm a lly , a union w ou ld n ot o b ject to this m odification. P reva len ce— L a y o ff and W ork -S h a rin g A p p ro x im a te ly three-fourths o f the 1,743 agree m ents analyzed, co verin g about the same p ro portion o f w orkers, contained provision s describ in g in w hole or in p a rt the procedure to be used fo r la yoffs (ta b le 1). L a y o ff procedures w ere fa r m ore p reva len t in m anu facturing than in non m anu facturing agreem ents. N e a r ly 9 ou t o f 10 m anu facturing in du stry agreem ents contained la y o ff provisions, whereas o n ly 55 percen t o f the nonm anufacturing agreem ents contained such provisions. O n ly 4 percen t o f the agreem ents, co verin g about one-half m illion workers, p ro vid ed fo r some fo rm o f w ork-sharing in lieu o f a la y o ff procedure. U n d er such systems, the ava ila b le w ork is shared b y redu cing each w o rk er’s d a ily or w eek ly hours or b y ro ta tin g the w orkers on an altern atin g w o rk period basis. A lm o st all such arrangem ents w ere found in m anu facturing agreem ents. A lth o u gh w ork-sharing provisions w ere scattered through 10 in du stry groups, the greatest concentration was found in the apparel industries, w here m ore than 90 percen t o f the m a jo r agreem ents contained such clauses. T h is group constitu ted m ore than 80 percent o f all those covered b y w ork-sharing provisions. A lm o st a fifth o f the agreem ents m ade no pro vision fo r a la y o ff or a w ork-sharing procedure. O f these agreem ents, alm ost 80 percent w ere in nonm anufacturing groups, n o ta b ly constructiontran sportation (oth er than railroads and airlin es), reta il trade, hotels and restaurants, and services. M o r e than a third o f the agreem ents w hich con tained no provisions fo r la y o ff or w ork-sharing procedures w ere fou nd in the construction in dustry. L a y o ff provisions occasionally occurred in agreem ents o f construction firm s w hich nor m a lly offer co m p a ra tive ly stea d y em p loym en t to a regular crew o f men, such as com panies engaged in the operation o f earth -m ovin g equipm ent. A num ber o f construction agreem ents, h ow ever, con tained general lim ita tion s on o vertim e and sh ift operations, as w ill be poin ted out subsequently. 4 provisions. O n ly abou t h a lf o f the m u ltiem p loy er agreem ents contain ed such provision s.3 A lm o s t all w ork-sh arin g provision s w ere fou nd in agree m ents n ego tia ted on a m u ltiem p loy er basis (ta b le 2). A s p o in ted ou t earlier, such provision s w ere p rim a rily concentrated in the apparel industry, w hich bargains p rin cip a lly throu gh em p loyer associations. O ne hundred agreem ents contained a reference to supplem ental or local agreem ents on sen io rity o r o th er aspects o f la y o ff or w ork-sharing. Th ese provision s w ere found m a in ly in agreem ents F o r ty -fiv e percen t o f the agreem ents in the tran sportation field contained no la y o ff procedure o r w ork-sharing provisions. K e y agreem ents in this group, h ow ever, covered large num bers o f em ployees o f m unicipal tran sportation systems w hich had their ow n procedures fo r regu latin g reductions in force, indepen den t o f the co llective bargain in g agreem ent. A n o th e r large group o f em ployees in the tran sportation in du stry not covered b y fo rm a l procedures fo r la y o ff or w ork sharing consisted o f longshorem en, w ho are char a cteristically h ired on a casual basis. U n lik e non m an u factu ring industries, there was no concentration o f agreem ents in m an u facturing w ith o u t provision fo r la y o ff or w ork-sharing. T h e in du stry w ith the largest p rop o rtio n o f agreem ents w hich did n ot p ro vid e fo r la y o ff procedures or w ork-sharing provision s was printin g, w here 14 o f the 32 m a jo r agreem ents had no fo rm a l p ro cedures outlined. Som e m ade reference, w ith o u t details, to a system o f ro ta tio n , h ow ever. p ro vid ed fo rm a lly fo r supplem ental arrangem ents Types of Employer Bargaining Units. A lm o s t all o f the agreem ents studied w hich w ere n egotiated b y single em ployers, w h eth er fo r one p la n t or a num ber o f plants, contained la y o ff or w ork-sharing 3 For total number of agreements negotiated by type of employer unit, see Characteristics of Major Union Contracts, op. cit., table 3. 4 Supplementary local agreements were not included in this study. An examination of local agreements for a few companies indicated that provisions dealing with seniority units or other aspects of layoff varied within the same company. T able 3. n ego tiated b y m u ltip la n t companies. T h e m aster agreem ent in such situations, w here it covered sen iority a t all, gen era lly w as lim ited to a skeletal statem en t o f p o lic y and reserved the determ in a tion o f the sen iority u n it and oth er specific la y o ff procedures to local p la n t agreem ents.4 O n the oth er hand, o n ly a fe w m u ltiem p loy er agreem ents — Provisions regulating subcontracting , overtime , shift operations , and em ploym ent practices in m ajor collective bar gaining agreements, 1954-55 Regulating provisions in— Type of regulating provision All agreements studied Agreements with no layoff or work-shar ing provisions Agreements with layoff provisions Agreements with work sharing provisions Agree ments General provisions not specifically related to impending layoffs 1 Subcontracting, total---------------------------------------Union notification or discussion prior to subcontracting.. Work subcontracted must go to union contractor or one who observes union agreement----- --------------------------Union permission required to subcontract work________ Subcontracting permitted only if company does not have necessary facilities or skilled manpower--------------------Subcontracting prohibited-----------------------------------------Other subcontracting limitations 2____________________ Overtime, total3----- ---------------------------------- -----Union permission required for overtime work__________ Daily or weekly overtime hours limited_____ _________ Overtime prohibited________________________________ Saturday work prohibited___________________________ Sunday work prohibited------------ ----------------------------Saturday and Sunday work prohibited-----------------------Other overtime limitations i --------------------------------------Shift operations, total_____ ____________________ Union permission required for operation of more than 1 shift_____________________________________________ More than 1 shift prohibited----- -------------------------------Other shift limitations *......._..................... ........................ . See footnotes at end of table. Workers (thousands) Agree ments Workers (thousands) Agree ments Workers (thousands) Agree ments Workers (thousands) 164 16 80 10 17 20 21 129 35 39 19 6 10 11 18 44 898.7 79.3 550.4 25.8 68.0 49.7 125.6 712.8 136.0 194.2 144.2 171.3 25.5 33.1 48.4 252.3 56 312.9 298.3 251.7 4.7 5.0 24.6 26.9 208.5 61.6 15.3 68.6 7.0 15.7 23.0 28.0 69.4 287.4 79.3 55.3 4.2 47.0 15.1 86.7 85.4 7.7 39.2 15.6 1.3 6.1 1.1 14.4 18.9 35 31 3 3 11 8 57 18 6 12 2 4 9 10 20 73 16 26 2 11 7 11 34 4 14 4 1 4 1 6 6 23 5 3 2 2 38 13 19 3 3 2 1 2 18 243.4 16.9 16.0 10.0 12.0 418.9 66 8 139.8 60.0 163.0 3.7 9.0 5.9 164.1 15 18 11 62.9 156.0 33.4 11 1 8 46.7 1.7 20.9 4 1 1 16.1 1.7 1.0 16 2 152.6 11.5 5 T a b l e 3. — Provisions regulating subcontracting, overtime, shift operations, and em ploym ent practices in m ajor collective bar gaining agreements, 1954-55 — Continued Regulating provisions in— Type of regulating provision Agreements with no layoff or work-shar ing provisions All agreements studied Agreements Agreements Workers (thousands) Workers (thousands) Agreements with layoff provisions Agree ments Agreements with worksharing provisions Workers (thousands) Agreements Workers (thousands) Specific provisions effective only in event of slack work Subcontracting, total__________________________ Subcontracting limited during periods of slack work; per mitted only if no layoff or work-sharing results or if present work force is fully supplied with work.______ Subcontracting prohibited or eliminated______________ Overtime, total________________ Daily or weekly overtime hours limited. Overtime prohibited_________________ Other overtime limitations...................... Shift operations, total. Operation of more than 1 shift limited - ______________ More than 1 shift prohibited___ _____ ________________ Employment practices, total7_________________ Probationary and temporary employees laid off___ ____ Employees with less than specified service (other than probationary) laid off_____________________________ New hires prohibited_______________________________ Other employment practice limitations 8....... ..................... 10 0 571.4 6 8 286.1 92 543.8 27.7 187.5 142.7 36.7 61 7 30 263.5 22.7 187.5 142.7 36.7 8 30 1 1 15 4 9 5 4 422 342 113 6 29 1 1 8 .1 23.7 16.2 7.5 1,991.2 1, 706.5 594.3 7.7 97.7 15 4 9 5 4 422 342 113 6 29 285.3 31 5 .3 0 5.0 1 (fl) 8 .1 23.7 16.2 7.5 1,991.2 1,706.5 594.3 7.7 97.7 («) (6 ) 1 General limitations appeared both in agreements with layoff or work sharing provisions, and in those without such provisions. 2 Includes agreements which prohibited or limited subcontracting only of specific types of work or of work ordinarily done by the employees, or banned subcontracting for the purpose of union discrimination. Also includes agree ments which prohibited subcontracting except in emergencies or failure to meet production schedules for causes such as slowdowns or work stoppages. 3 Includes agreements which waived overtime limitations during emer gencies or during certain seasons. Some agreements that permitted overtime only in certain departments or occupations were also included in this group. Totals are unduplicated because some agreements contained limitations applying both to daily or weekly overtime work and to work on Saturday or Sunday. 4 Includes agreements which prohibited overtime “insofar as practical,” or when more than 1 shift was working; 1 agreement which applied the prohibition to women only; and 4 maritime agreements which limited over time to that necessary for the navigation and safety of the vessel. 6 Includes agreements which prohibited shift work in specific departments only or where there was no nightwork under previous agreements, or on jobs of less than 5 days’ duration. In some instances, the prohibition was waived in event of emergencies. 6 The reduction of hours required by work-sharing in event of slack work usually involves cutting any overtime currently scheduled and, perhaps, curtailing shift operations. Seven agreements with work-sharing arrange ments contained specific provisions limiting or banning overtime or shift operations in slack periods, and 1 of these agreements prohibited the em ployer from hiring new workers during such periods. 7 Unduplicated totals; some agreements provided for more than one type of employment action. 8 Includes agreements which provided for layoff of “peak force” employees, learners, married women with working husbands, nonunion employees, or of a specified number or percent of employees. In some of these provisions, temporary or probationary employees with special skills were exempted from layoff. N o t e .— Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. on la y o ff o r w ork-sharing procedures. Such agreem ents gen era lly contained clauses w hich specified th a t the determ in ation o f the sen iority u n it and la y o ff procedures w ou ld be subject to supplem ental negotiations betw een in d ivid u a l em ployers and the union. I t is lik e ly th a t in fo rm a l arrangem ents are com m on in this area. Som e single-plant agreem ents also referred to supplem ental agreem ents on sen iority or p rovid ed th a t such agreem ents be n ego tiated as the occasion arose. m a y be elim inated, hours o f w ork reduced b elo w norm al schedules, tem p orary em ployees released, and h irin g brou gh t to a standstill. Th ese are steps th a t em ployers m ig h t choose u n ila terally to take or m igh t agree to take in the co llective b ar ga in in g agreem ent. Forestallin g and M in im izin g L a yo ffs F e w business concerns are lik e ly to m o v e head lo n g in to a la y o ff situation a ffectin g regu lar em ployees. R a th er, operations w ill be tapered o ff in advan ce o f actual la yo ffs; fo r exam ple, o vertim e 421587—57-----2 W h en a la y o ff appears im m inent, certain posi tiv e actions are p ro vid ed fo r in some agreem ents to d ela y the la y o ff, to m in im ize its extent, or possibly to a v e rt it altogether. Such measures, w hich h ave the broad purpose o f spreading a v a il able w o rk am ong regu lar em ployees, included lim ita tion s on: (1 ) em p loym en t practices, (2 ) the am ount o f o vertim e th a t m a y be w orked, (3 ) the num ber o f shifts th a t m a y be scheduled, (4 ) the nature and am ount o f w o rk th a t m a y be subcon tracted, and (5 ) scheduled w eek ly hours o f w ork. W h en lin ked b y the agreem ent to a la y o ff situation, 6 such measures are designed to serve a tem p orary purpose. O n the oth er hand, som e agreem ents contained rules regu la tin g subcontracting, the am ou nt of o vertim e, w eekend w ork, and the like, w hich w ere n ot related b y the agreem ent to slack w ork or im p en d in g layoffs. T h ese provision s w ere in effect throu ghou t the term o f the agreem ent, dur in g peak em p loym en t periods as w ell as slack, unless, o f course, m odified b y in form al agreem ent betw een the parties. T h e o b jectives o r purposes o f these rules m a y n ot h ave been lim ited to m axi m izin g w ork opportu nities fo r regu lar em ployees, b u t their sim ila rity to provision s effective o n ly in the even t o f im p en d in g la yo ffs w ou ld appear to ju s tify th eir consideration in this stu dy as m ethods designed to foresta ll and m in im ize layoffs. A greem e n t lim ita tion s on o vertim e, sh ift opera tions, subcontracting, and em p loym en t practices are discussed in this analysis as specific provision s (e ffe c tiv e o n ly in the even t o f slack w o rk ) and general or standing provision s (n o t specifically related to im pen d in g la y o ffs ). B o th typ es m a y appear in the same agreem ent; fo r exam ple, an agreem ent m ig h t lim it the am ount o f o vertim e or su bcontracting during n orm al or peak operations b u t p roh ib it all o vertim e o r su bcon tracting w hen la yo ffs are scheduled. A lso discussed are p ro visions fo r redu ction in hours w hich m a y fu rth er d ela y or m in im ize layoffs. T a b l e 4 . — Provisions regulating subcontracting , overtime , shift operations , and employment practices in m ajor collective bargaining agreements, by industry , 1954-55 Agreements with— General provisions not specifically related to impending layoffs Industry Subcontracting Overtime Specific provisions effective only in event of slack work Shift operations Subcontracting Overtime Shift operations Employment practices Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) All industries 164 Manufacturing__________________ 79 Food and kindred products 1 Tobacco manufactures___ 6 Textile-mill products.. ____ Apparel and other finished tex tile products___________ 32 Lumber and wood products (except furniture! 5 Furniture and fixtures 2 Paper and allied products. _ _ Printing, publishing, and allied industries__________________ 1 Chemicals and allied products... Products of petroleum and coal.. 3 Rubber products 1 Leather and leather products___ 2 Stone, clay, and glass products. _ 1 Primarv metal industries 1 Fabricated metal products 3 7 Machinery (except electrical)___ Electrical machinery____ 3 8 Transportation equipment____ Instruments and related products. 1 Miscellaneous manufacturing in dustries______________ 3 Nonmanufacturing_______________ 85 Mining, crude petroleum, and natural gas production. 2 Transportation i_ 1 Communication. 7 Utilities: electric and gas____ 16 Wholesale trade 1 Retail trade___________________ 5 Hotels and restaurants 2 Services ........ _ 8 Construction . ._ 42 Miscellaneous nonmanufactur 1 ing_________________________ 898.7 430.8 2.3 25.0 273.6 8.1 4.0 1.8 12.7 22.0 6.0 1.6 2.1 6.9 13.4 7.8 34.1 1.0 8.4 467.8 2.0 5.0 107.2 33.7 2.0 9.9 2.8 23.6 280.1 1.5 129 70 5 6 29 3 2 4 1 3 1 5 3 1 3 2 712.8 482.6 9.3 27.3 369.1 6.3 7.0 6.1 2.3 4. 7 1.2 27.0 4.4 2.5 5.9 4.8 2 59 4.9 230.2 6 2 9 5 5 32 44 23 1 I 17 1 3 1.6 10.0 21 75.6 13.4 13.6 2 11.0 27.6 27.8 15.5 132.2 1 1 4 13 1.7 4.0 17.0 41.8 1 Excludes railroads and airlines. N o t e .—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. 100 67 2 7 25 571.4 370.9 4.2 21.6 258.8 2 252.3 176.8 1.0 7.0 157.1 2.0 4 7 1 2 2 1 1 2 3 1 2 5 33 1 1 11 20 13.2 22.5 1.0 5.7 3.4 6.5 2.2 3.2 5.4 5.0 3.9 12.3 200.5 1.0 1.1 133.8 64.6 30 26 1 1 187.5 66.5 6.0 1.3 2 3.6 1 1.8 3 3 8 6 4.5 9.6 16.4 20.8 1 4 2. 5 121.1 2 1 111.1 7.2 1 2.8 9 9 23.7 23.7 3 3.4 1 2 2 1 2.2 3.1 5.2 9.8 422 352 25 1 13 1 1 8 11 1,991.2 1,507.1 64.5 1.3 28.9 1.0 1.8 15.1 20.5 19 2 12 6 2 31 24 63 32 77 13 11 40.4 4.7 24.6 20.8 2.5 80.9 65.7 202.0 59.8 813.4 36.3 22.8 484.1 70 1 53 8 2 5 1 1.6 449.4 19.8 3.6 8.3 2.0 7 Specific Provisions. O f the measures specifically designed to a vo id or m in im ize la y o ff o f regu lar em ployees, b y fa r the m ost com m on in the agree m ents studied w ere those regu la tin g em p loym en t procedures. M o r e than 400 agreem ents co verin g alm ost 2 m illion em ployees p rovid ed fo r changes in e m p loym en t practices w hen la y o ff was im pending (ta b le 3). S ign ificant concentrations o f such clauses w ere n oted in the m ach in ery and transpor ta tio n equ ipm ent industries (tw o-fifth s and oneh a lf o f the agreem ents in the respective industries) and in the com m unication in du stry (three-fourths o f the agreem ents). (See table 4.) F ou r-fifth s o f the agreem ents regu latin g em p loy m en t practices specified th a t a ll tem p orary and p rob a tio n a ry em ployees m ust be rem o ved from the p a y ro ll before regu lar em ployees m a y be la id off. T h e re was no u n ifo rm ity in the agreem ent definitions o f tem p orary and p rob a tio n a ry em ployees. Som e p rob a tio n a ry periods ran fo r as lo n g as 6 m onths or more. C lo sely lin ked to the practice o f la y in g o ff p ro b a tion a ry em ployees b efore sen iority em ployees was the practice o f re m o vin g em ployees w ith less than a certain m inim um p eriod o f service before the “ regu lar” com plem en t w ou ld be affected. O n e-fourth o f the agreem ents con tain in g clauses restrictin g em ploym en t practices a t tim e o f la y o ff specified such a measure. T h e definition o f w h a t constitu ted short service likew ise va rie d am ong agreem ents— fro m a fe w m onths o f service to several years. Such clauses w ere o ften fou nd as the second step in the la y o ff process, fo llo w in g the la y o ff o f p rob a tio n a ry or tem p ora ry em ployees. F o r exam ple: L ayoffs shall take place w ithin classification in the follow ing order: each occupational 1. T em po ra ry em ployees shall be laid off first; and then 2. E m p loyees having less than 6 m o n th s’ service shall be laid off in such order as to cause the m in im u m disturb ance to the business and when practicable in inverse order of e m p lo y m e n t; and then 3. E m p loyees having m ore th an 6 m o n th s' service shall be laid off in inverse order of seniority. Clauses w hich p ro vid ed th a t no n ew em ployees w ou ld be hired during slack periods w ere com para t iv e ly few . O ther in frequ en t provisions included 8 In some cases, the restriction or limitation on subcontracting may not have been intended primarily as a method of spreading the work among regular employees but as a method of controlling the flow of work to non union plants. those fo r la y in g o ff peak force em ployees, m arried w om en w ith w ork in g husbands, o r a specified p rop ortion o f the w o rk fo rce before la y o ff in accordance w ith sen iority was to begin. T h e n ext m ost com m on provision fo r a vo id in g or m in im izin g la yo ffs in v o lv e d the lim ita tio n or proh ibition o f su bcontracting w o rk during slack periods, fou nd in 100 agreem ents. T h e ty p ic a l clause a llow ed the em p loyer to subcontract w o rk o n ly i f (1 ) no la y o ff or w ork-sharing w ou ld resu lt or (2 ) the present w ork force was fu lly supplied w ith w ork. F o r exam ple: T h e com pany agrees th a t it will not contract any work which is ordinarily or custom arily done b y its regular em ployees, if, as a result thereof, it would becom e neces sary to lay off or reduce the rate of p a y of any such em ployees. T h e largest cluster o f clauses lim itin g subcon tra ctin g in the eve n t o f slack w ork was fou nd in apparel industries, w here subcontracting is a standard practice. A p p ro x im a te ly h alf o f the apparel agreem ents had such restrictions to a vo id reducing the am ount o f w ork available to regu lar or “ inside” em ployees. In nonm anufacturing, the com m unication and u tilities industries ac counted fo r alm ost all o f the clauses restrictin g subcontracting p rior to consideration o f layoffs. Specific lim itation s and prohibitions on o v e r tim e w o rk during slack periods w ere found in 30 agreements. F ifte e n agreem ents proh ibited o v e r tim e en tirely during slack periods. General Provisions. Som e agreem ents contained standing lim ita tion s on the am ount and exten t o f subcontracting, the am ount o f o vertim e, and extra sh ift operations, or restricted the choice o f procedures on the p a rt o f the em ployer. Th ese w ere n egotiated p red om in an tly in the apparel and construction industries (ta b le 4). T h e m ost p reva len t ty p e o f general lim ita tion was on the am ount and exten t o f subcontracting, found in 164 agreem ents. H a lf o f these agree ments p rovid ed th a t a n y w o rk subcontracted had to be giv en to either a subcontractor a pproved b y the union or one w ho agreed to observe all pertinen t term s o f the union agreem ent, particu la rly the union w a ge scale.5 Som e proh ibited subcontracting o f all types o f w o rk ; others pro hibited or lim ited subcontracting o f certain types o f w ork, such as m aintenance and repair, or set 8 T a b l e 5 . — Provisions fo r reducing the workweek as a com ponent of layoff procedures in m ajor collective bargaining agreements, by industry , 1954-55 Industry Number with Number with provisions for reduction in layoff provisions workweek prior to layoff Agree Workers Agree Workers ments (thou ments (thou sands) sands) All Industries........................................... . 1,347 Manufacturing.............. ............................. 1,039 Food and kindred products................. 96 Tobacco manufactures_____________ 10 Textile-mill products___ __________ 55 Apparel and other finished textile products___________ ______ ______ 3 Lumber and wood products (except furniture)............................................ 17 Furniture and fixtures. ........................ 16 Paper and allied products________ . 53 Printing, publishing, and allied in dustries___________________ _____ 14 Chemicals and allied products........... 61 Products of petroleum and coal.. _ 26 Rubber products__________________ 21 Leather and leather products_______ 14 Stone, clay, and glass products_____ 32 Primary metal industries.................... 117 Fabricated metal products.................. 63 Machinery (except electrical).. .......... 142 Electrical machinery______ ________ 102 Transportation equipment.................. 139 Instruments and related products___ 29 Miscellaneous manufacturing indus tries___________________________ 29 Nonmanufacturing___________________ 308 Mining, crude petroleum, and natu ral gas production_______________ 15 Transportation1__________________ 52 Communication__________________ 68 Utilities: electric and gas_____ _____ 64 Wholesale trade_____ _______ ... 11 Retail trade___ __________ ________ 48 Hotels and restaurants_____________ 16 Services____ ____ ____________ ____ 26 Construction________________ _____ 6 Miscellaneous nonmanufacturing___ 2 5,815.1 4,123.1 320.3 29.5 118.5 4.1 39.2 29.2 119.5 28.1 132.6 71. 7 128.8 41.7 102.6 662.5 169.2 369.8 424.0 1, 205.4 64.8 61.5 1,692.0 295.0 336.9 538.5 173.2 18.6 139.6 102.8 74.1 9.6 3.8 356 281 8 1 16 2 1 8 11 2,211.8 1,591.3 28.8 1.3 41.2 3.1 1.8 15.3 20.7 13 13 7 8 53 20 48 37 23 7 5 75 5 5 47 5 7 1 5 44.0 36.9 27.0 33.8 480.2 57.6 133.8 98.5 534.2 20.2 12.9 620.6 84.0 10.3 456.8 38.4 19.7 1.6 9.9 1Excludes railroads and airlines. N ote —Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. up specific conditions under w hich w ork could be subcontracted. F o r exam ple, certain construc tion agreem ents proh ibited su bcontracting unless the subcontractor supplied the m aterials as w ell as the labor. Som e agreem ents proh ibited sub con tractin g except in em ergency situations. A num ber o f agreem ents requ ired the com pan y to n o tify the union p rior to subcontracting, either m a k in g specific union perm ission a prerequisite to such action or p erm ittin g the union to enter a grieva n ce p rotestin g the action i f it so desired. A clue to the considerations w hich m ig h t guide the union in determ in ing w heth er an em p loy er’s requ est to subcontract was reasonable w as sup plied b y a fe w agreem ents w hich p rovid ed th at su bcon tracting w ou ld be p erm itted o n ly if the co m p a n y did n ot h ave the necessary facilities or the skilled m an pow er required. T h e am ount o f o vertim e th a t could be w orked was regu lated b y 129 agreem ents co verin g alm ost three-quarters o f a m illion em ployees. T h ir t y nine agreem ents lim ited d a ily or w e e k ly o vertim e hours, as in this exam ple fo r the garm en t in d u stry: O vertim e is lim ited to 5 hours per week during 3 m onths of each of the 2 [peak] seasons of the year, and the workers shall be paid for overtim e a t the rate o f tim e and one-half. T h ir ty -fiv e agreem ents m ade union perm ission a prerequ isite fo r o vertim e w ork. N in eteen agree m ents coverin g about 150,000 em ployees fla tly proh ibited all o vertim e w ork. T w en ty -sev en agreem ents, a p p lyin g to about 230,000 em ployees, contained specific proh ibition s against w o rk on S atu rd ay or S unday or on both S atu rd ay and Sunday. A grou p o f 44 agreem ents, a p p lyin g to a pproxi m a te ly 250,000 em ployees, lim ited sh ift operations. T h e bulk o f these agreem ents eith er requ ired union perm ission fo r o p era tin g m ore than 1 sh ift or p roh ib ited w ork on m ore than 1 shift. A few agreem ents proh ibited sh ift w ork in specific departm ents o n ly or w here there had been no n igh tw o rk under previous agreem ents. In some instances, sh ift lim ita tion s w ere w a ived in the even t o f em ergencies. Reduction in Hours . A ft e r o ve rtim e is elim inated and oth er devices h a ve been used, la yo ffs can be fu rth er dela yed or m in im ized b y redu cing sched uled w eek ly hours b elo w 40 or w h a teve r the n orm al schedule happens to be. In some agreem ents, the redu ction in hours is the first step possible in a la y o ff sequence p ro vid ed b y the agreem ent. A p rovision in a co llective b a rgain in g agreem ent requ irin g the em ployer, as p a rt o f the la y o ff sequence, to reduce hours represents, in its effect, a lim ited fo rm o f w ork-sharing.6 T h e agreem ent m a y fix a lo w er flo or to hours b eyon d w hich p o in t la yo ffs are to be m ade, or m a y p ro vid e th at a decision be m ade as to w heth er hours should be reduced or w orkers la id o ff.7 • In this study, the Bureau attempted to distinguish between agreements under the terms of which the hours of work may be reduced prior to and during the course of a layoff and those providing for work-sharing in lieu of layoff. In actual operation, this may be a difficult line to draw. A general reduction of hours prior to an expected layoff which fails to materialize is in effect purely a work-sharing arrangement. Contrariwise, even when a con tract provides for equal division of work, work-sharing might have to give way to layoff if work-sharing is no longer feasible. Work-sharing methods are discussed on pages 34-35. 7 Whether the union or management makes this decision, as established in the agreements, is discussed on pages 13 and 14. 9 T a b l e 6.— Level and duration o f reduced workweek p rio r to consideration of layoffs, m ajor collective bargaining agreements, 1954-55 Number with Duration of reduced workweek before layoff is considered reduction in workweek prior More than 4 More than 2 Other i 4 weeks weeks to layoff 2 weeks or less weeks but less than 4 weeks Level of reduced workweek No duration stated Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers ments (thou ments (thous- ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) Total...................................................... Number with provisions for level of reduced workweek________ ______ Weekly hours reduced: To 35......................................... To 32..................................... To 24-30._______________ As necessary______________ In accordance with other provisions establishing minimum weekly hours 2__ No provision regarding level of re duced workweek________________ 356 2,211.8 15 29.6 15 38.0 27 48.4 29 121.6 16 558.8 254 1,415.4 236 11 136 20 21 1,628.0 18.4 811.1 54.0 54.2 14 2 5 2 1 28.5 2.1 12.5 34 1.1 15 38.0 119.8 23.9 21 8.9 43.5 1.1 26.0 8.0 4.8 28 11 1 2 24 1 14 4 3 15 1 1 43.6 1.9 1.0 15 2 6 1 550.2 3.4 59.8 1.2 140 6 85 12 13 848.0 11.7 646.0 38.6 37.2 48 120 690.3 583.8 4 1 9.4 1.2 1 3.1 2 3 3.6 4.9 11 1 73.9 1.8 6 1 485.8 8.6 24 114 114.5 567.4 1Includes agreements which provided that reduced hours were to be limited to “2 or 3 pay periods,” a “reasonable” period, or a maximum number of days or weeks within a specified period; and 5 agreements covering 469,200 workers under which the duration of the period during which a reduced workweek was to be in effect depended upon the level to which hours were reduced. For example, 1 of these 5 agreements provided that the workweek could be reduced to 24 hours for not more than 2 weeks, or 32 hours for not more than 8 weeks. 2 In addition to the 5 agreements under which the level of reduced hours varied with the duration of such reduction, this group also includes agreeAbout a fo u rth la y o ff p rocedu res h ou rs to of th e a g re e m en ts p r o v id e d fo r e s ta ll la y o ff fo r ( t a b le a c o n ta in in g re d u c tio n 5 ). in A g re e m e n ts ments which specified minimum levels other than those listed, such as 36 hours or a stated percentage of normal workweek; agreements which pro vided for reducing hours in successive steps until the specified minimum was reached; agreements under which minimum hours were established by department, occupation, or seniority groups; and agreements which provided for negotiation of the level of reduced hours. N o t e — Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. w h ic h t h e r e d u c e d w o r k w e e k w a s t o b e in e ff e c t . For e x a m p le , one of th e se a g reem en ts p r o v id e d t h a t th e w o r k w e e k c o u ld b e r e d u c e d to 2 4 h o u r s p r o v i d i n g f o r a r e d u c t i o n in h o u r s w e r e p a r t i c u l a r l y fo r n o t m o re p r e v a le n t m o re th a n 8 w eek s. in p r im a r y c o m m u n ic a tio n s . in c o r p o r a t e d Of m e ta l th e p r o v isio n s 356 fo r i n d u s t r ie s and in a g r e e m e n ts w h ic h r e d u c in g h ou rs, 236 O n ly 102 on be red uced in s titu te d . O n ly 9 6 a g re e m e n ts, h o w 2 w eeks or 32 a g r e e m e n t s s p e c ifie d h o u rs fo r n o t th e num ber of w e e k s d u r in g w h i c h t h e c o m p a n y w o u l d o p e r a t e s p e c ifie d t h e l e v e l t o w h i c h t h e w o r k w e e k w o u l d (ta b le 6 ) . th a n a r e d u c e d w o r k w e e k b e fo r e la y o ffs w o u ld be T h e la r g e st g ro u p o f a g re e m e n ts w ith e v e r , s p e c ifie d b o t h t h e l e v e l o f h o u r s a n d t h e d u r a a d e f in it e p a t t e r n p r o v i d e d f o r a p e r io d o f 4 w e e k s tio n o f re d u c e d h o u r s b e fo r e la y o ffs w o u ld b e g in . o r m o r e fo r th e d u r a tio n o f re d u c e d w o r k w e e k s. A l o w e r l i m i t o f 3 2 h o u r s w a s s p e c ifie d in m o r e th a n h a lf o f th e re d u c in g h o u rs. a g re e m e n ts w ith R e la tiv e ly fe w v i d e d o t h e r f ix e d l e v e l s . in g p r o v is io n s fo r The f a il u r e of th e m a jo r it y of a g reem en ts to p r o v i d e f o r a d e f in it e t i m e l i m i t d o e s n o t m e a n a g re e m en ts p ro t h a t c u r t a ile d w o r k w e e k s w o u l d g o o n i n d e f i n i t e l y . F iv e a g re e m en ts, co v e r I n p r a c t i c e , s u c h a n o m i s s i o n p r o b a b l y r e f le c t s t h e a lm o s t o n e -h a lf m illio n e m p lo y e e s , p r o v id e d d e s ir e of th e p a r tie s to a llo w fo r fle x ib ility in t h a t t h e l e v e l t o w h ic h h o u r s w o u l d b e r e d u c e d r e g u l a t i n g t h e w o r k f o r c e in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e d e p e n d e d u p o n t h e d u r a t i o n o f t h e p e r io d d u r in g n e e d s o f p r o d u c tio n . U n io n P a rtic ip a tio n in L a y o ff P ro c e d u re s ; U n io n P a r t i c i p a t io n i n L a y o f f P r o c e d u r e s O f th e n e g o tia tio n s o n la y o ff p r o c e d u r e s d o n o t n e c e s s a r ily c e a s e w it h th e s ig n in g o f th e c o lle c tiv e b a r g a in in g a g r e e m e n t. M e th o d s a n d d e t a ils o f o p e r a tio n o f t e n m u s t b e w o r k e d o u t a t th e tim e la y o ffs b e c o m e im m in e n t in th e lig h t o f t h e s p e c i f ic c i r c u m s t a n c e s t h e n e x i s t i n g . U n i o n p a r tic ip a tio n m a y b e a n in fo r m a l p r o c e d u r e , n o t c o v e r e d b y th e c o n tr a c t, o r i t m a y b e fo r m a lly p r o v id e d fo r in t h e w r it te n a g r e e m e n t. I n e ith e r e v e n t, jo in t a g r e e m e n t m a y b e s o u g h t in a d v a n c e o f a n y p a r tic u la r a c tio n , o r m a n a g e m e n t m a y f u l f ill i t s o b l i g a t i o n s b y c o n s u l t i n g w i t h , o r s i m p l y n o t if y in g , th e u n io n o n a n im p e n d in g a c tio n . I n p r a c tic e , th e d is t in c t io n b e t w e e n o b ta in in g u n io n c o n s e n t (jo in t a g r e e m e n t) a n d c o n s u ltin g w it h th e u n io n m ig h t d e p e n d n o t so m u c h u p o n th e p r e c is e m e a n in g o f th e s e te r m s in a g r e e m e n t la n g u a g e a s u p o n th e im p o r ta n c e m a n a g e m e n t le n d s to o b t a i n i n g u n i o n a p p r o v a l. U n io n -m a n a g e m e n t U n i o n p a r t i c i p a t i o n is g e n e r a l l y l i m i t e d t o p r o b l e m s i n v o l v i n g a c h o ic e o f p r o c e d u r e s , s in c e t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h e n e e d f o r a r e d u c t i o n in f o r c e o r a n e q u i v a l e n t r e d u c t i o n in w o r k i n g t i m e is i n v a r ia b ly a m a n a g e m e n t r e s p o n s ib ility . T h u s , th e a b s e n c e o f a p r o v i s i o n in t h e a g r e e m e n t e s t a b li s h in g a n a re a o f u n io n p a r tic ip a tio n m ig h t s ig n ify A d va n ce 1 ,7 4 3 p roced u res N o tic e o f L a yo ffs m a jo r a g re e m e n ts stu d ie d , la y o ff w ere fo u n d in v o l v i n g 5 .8 m i l l i o n w o r k e r s . 1 ,3 4 7 ag reem en ts in O f th e se , 2 4 5 , c o v e r in g m o r e th a n o n e -fo u r th o f th e w o r k e r s , p r o v id e d fo r s o m e d eg re e o f u n io n p a r tic ip a tio n in h a n d lin g l a y o f f p r o b l e m s d u r in g t h e t e r m o f t h e a g r e e m e n t .8 (S e e ta b le 7 .) T h e a r e a o f p a r tic ip a tio n v a r ie d fr o m a ll la y o ff p r o b le m s u n d e r s o m e a g r e e m e n ts to o n ly o n e o r m o r e s p e c i f ic a s p e c t s u n d e r o t h e r s . S o m e c la u s e s c o n s is te d o f a g e n e r a l s ta te m e n t to th e e ffe c t th a t th e c o m p a n y w o u ld d is c u s s o r n e g o t ia t e w it h th e u n io n b e fo r e a n y la y o ff a c tio n w a s ta k e n , o r p r o v id e d fo r u n io n p a r tic ip a tio n in d e te r m in in g la y o ff p r o c e d u r e s a fte r th e in itia l la y o ff o f te m p o r a r y o r p a r t - t i m e e m p l o y e e s . F o r e x a m p le : In the event of a severe reduction of working force, re quiring a layoff of individuals with seniority, the company and the union will jointly discuss and agree upon the problem at the time of such layoff, with reference to the length of the workweek and the schedule of hours. * * * * * In the event there is a lack of work in any department, excluding operators, which necessitates either the re duction of work or the furloughing of employees, or both, before either method is determined upon, the company agrees to confer with the [union] for the purpose of deter mining which method will be used. t h a t ( 1 ) t h e l a y o f f s e q u e n c e is e x p l i c i t l y d e f in e d in th e ag re e m en t, or (2 ) m anagem ent r e ta in s th e r i g h t u n i l a t e r a l l y t o m a k e t h e v a r i o u s d e c is io n s n o t c o v e r e d b y th e a g r e e m e n t, o r (3 ) th e p a r tie s are c o n te n t to r e ly upon cu sto m a ry m e th o d s of w o r k in g o u t th e se p r o b le m s o n a n in fo r m a l b a sis. 8 The prevalence of union participation clauses may be slightly higher than indicated. Reference to local negotiation of seniority and layoff was found in 68 multiplant contracts having no provision for union participation; over 900,000 workers were involved. It is possible that some supplemental agree ments at the plant level granted the union a voice in determining layoff policies or represented, in their inception, the exercise of unions’ right to participate. 12 7 .— Provisions fo r u n ion participation in layoff procedures in m ajor collective bargaining agreements , by industry , 1954-55 T able Industry Number with layoff provisions Number with pro vision for some degree of union participation1 Agree Workers Agree Workers ments (thousands) ments (thousands) All industries................................... 1,347 Manufacturing..... ........................... 1,039 Food and kindred products.. 96 Tobacco manufactures............ 10 Textile-mill products.............. 65 Apparel and other finished textile products__________ 3 Lumber and wood products (except furniture)________ 17 Furniture and fixtures............ 16 Paper and allied products___ 53 Printing, publishing, and allied industries ________ 14 Chemicals and allied prod ucts........................ ............... 61 Products of petroleum and coal.......................................... 26 Rubber products. .................... 21 Leather and leather products. 14 Stone, clay, and glass prod ucts......................................... 32 Primary metal industries........ 117 Fabricated metal products... 63 Machinery (except electrical) 142 Electrical machinery.............. 102 Transportation equipment... 139 Instruments and related prod ucts______ ____ ________ 29 Miscellaneous manufacturing industries............................... 29 Nonmanufacturing....................... 308 M in in g, crude-petroleum and natural-gas production. 15 Transportation 3....................... 52 Communications..... ................ 68 64 Utilities: electric and gas........ Wholesale trade 11 48 Retail trade.............................. Hotels and restaurants 16 Services.................................... 26 Constmetion 6 Miscellaneous nonmanufac turing..................................... 2 5,815.1 4,123.1 320.3 29.5 118.5 4.1 39.2 29.2 119.5 28.1 132.6 71.7 128.8 41.7 102.6 662.5 169.2 369.8 424.0 1,205.4 64.8 61.5 1,692.0 295.0 336.9 538.5 173.2 18.6 139.6 102.8 74.1 9.6 3.8 245 176 8 1 5 1, 533.5 1,014.7 22.7 1.3 5.8 4 5 5.3 27.5 6 2 6 4 5 40 12 32 22 17 5 2 69 2 6 46 11 2 1 13.9 20.3 11.7 9.3 19.9 447.8 42.0 100.6 68.8 201.9 10.5 5.5 518.8 10.0 10.7 429.3 54.9 11.5 1.2 1 1.3 S o m e a g r e e m e n ts p r o v id e d fo r u n io n p a r tic i p a tio n in d is c u s s io n s r e la tin g to c e r ta in t y p e s o f la y o ffs ; fo r e x a m p le , r e d u c tio n o f t h e w o r k w e e k in lie u o f im m e d ia te la y o ff; la y o ff o f e m p lo y e e s w it h o u t r e g a r d to s e n io r ity ; c o m p o s itio n o f th e u n its to b e c o n sid e r e d fo r la y o ff; tr a n sfe r o f e m p lo y e e s to o th e r g r o u p s to a v o id la y o ffs ; a n d r e v ie w o f t h e lis t o f e m p lo y e e s s e le c te d fo r la y o ff. O f t h e 2 4 5 a g r e e m e n t s w i t h p r o v i s i o n s f o r u n io n 1 o r m o r e a s p e c ts o f la y o ff, 1 3 6 , c o v e r in g a b o u t a m illio n w o rk e rs, re q u ire d jo in t a g r e e m e n t ; i. e ., t h e u n io n w a s g r a n t e d a n e q u a l in m a k in g d e c is io n s . In som e in sta n c e s, t h i s w a s l i m i t e d t o a s p e c ific a s p e c t o f t h e l a y o f f p r o b l e m ; in o t h e r s , i t a p p l ie d t o a n u m b e r o f d e c is io n s o r a ll p h a s e s o f t h e l a y o f f s e q u e n c e in t h e p a r tic u la r q u ir e d e s ta b lis h m e n t . th e e m p lo y e r to P r o v is io n s c o n s u lt w ith w h ic h th e re u n io n , e it h e r o n s p e c ific o r a ll a s p e c t s o f t h e l a y o f f p r o b le m , w ere fo u n d th e in th ird of f in a l d e te r m in a tio n 106 w ork ers. ag reem en ts, U nder w as le ft th e se to c o v e r in g c la u s e s , th e a th e e m p lo y e r . C l a u s e s c o m b i n i n g c o n s u l t a t i o n o n c e r t a in a s p e c t s o f l a y o f f w i t h n e g o t i a t i o n o n o t h e r s w e r e f o u n d in 1 Includes agreements which required employer consultation with the union, as well as agreements which required agreement between the employer and union, on 1 or more aspects of layoff policy before action was taken. 3 Excludes railroads and airlines. N o t e .— Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. p a r t i c i p a t i o n in v o ic e th e th re e r e m a in in g a g re e m en ts w h ic h p r o v id e d f o r u n io n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . N in e a g r e e m e n ts w h ic h r e q u ir e d e ith e r c o n s u lta tio n o r n e g o tia tio n o f so m e a s p e c ts o f la y o ff r e s e r v e d t o t h e u n i o n t h e f i n a l d e c is io n i n v o l v i n g a c h o ic e b e tw e e n r e d u c tio n o f th e w o r k w e e k a n d la y o ffs . V i r t u a l l y a ll m a j o r a g r e e m e n t s p r o v i d e f o r a g r i e v a n c e p ro c e d u r e w h ic h s a fe g u a r d s th e u n io n ’s r ig h t t o c h a lle n g e a n y m a n a g e m e n t a c t i o n t h a t a p p e a r s to v io la te th e a g r e e m e n t. B u t u n io n p a r t i c i p a t i o n in t h e g r ie v a n c e p r o c e d u r e d iffe r s s i g n i f i c a n t ly f r o m p a r tic ip a tio n in th e f o r m u la tio n of p rocedu res to g u id e m a n a g e m e n t a c tio n a n d c o n s e q u e n tly it is n o t i n c l u d e d in t h i s s t u d y . 9 be n o ted ced u res th a t m ig h t th e o p e r a tio n open in fo r m a l H o w e v e r , i t s h o u ld of g r ie v a n c e aven ues fo r p ro u n io n p a r tic ip a tio n , a t le a s t to th e e x te n t o f a t t e m p t in g to a v o id fu tu r e g r ie v a n c e s. C hoice Between Reduction in Hours and Layoff. O n e o f t h e d e v i c e s d e s ig n e d t o f o r e s t a l l o r m i n i m i z e l a y o f f s is t h e r e d u c t i o n o f h o u r s b e l o w n o r m a l s c h e d u l e s .10 e m p lo y e e s B y r e d u c i n g t h e w o r k w e e k , a ll r e g u la r s h a r e in th e a v a ila b le w o r k f o r c e is k e p t i n t a c t . w ork , and th e O n th e o th e r h a n d , if la y o ffs are m a d e a s s o o n a s w o r k s la c k e n s , m o r e p r o t e c t i o n is a f f o r d e d c e r t a in e m p lo y e e s , u s u a lly t h o s e w i t h l o n g e r s e r v ic e , a t t h e e x p e n s e o f t h o s e w h o are la id o ff. B e c a u s e o f t h i s c o n f l ic t o f i n - • As indicated later in this report, a substantial number of agreements pro vided for advance notice of layoffs to the unions involved. These also have been excluded as a type of union participation for purposes of this section. 10 For a discussion of the prevalence of provisions in union agreements to reduce hours as a part of the layoff sequence, see pages 8 and 9. 13 te r e s ts a m o n g e m p lo y e e s , th e u n io n h a s a n e s p e c i a l l y i m p o r t a n t r o le i n e s t a b l i s h i n g p o l i c y . T h e d e c is io n to r e d u c e th e n o r m a l w o r k w e e k in t h e e v e n t o f s la c k w o r k m a y b e m a d e b y th e p a r tie s w h e n th e a g r e e m e n t is n e g o tia te d . I n t h is c a s e , th e r e d u c tio n w o u ld b e in s t it u t e d a u t o m a tic a lly b y m a n a g e m e n t, u n d e r th e te r m s o f th e a g r e e m e n t, w h e n c ir c u m s ta n c e s w a r r a n t t h is a c tio n . r e m a in in g a g r e e m e n ts w ith la y o ff p r o v is io n s (9 9 1 ) c o n ta in e d n o r e fe r e n c e t o th e r e d u c t io n o f h o u r s p r io r t o l a y o f f s , p r e s u m a b l y r e s e r v in g t o m a n a g e m e n t , w ith o u t r e str ic tio n o r r e q u ir e m e n t re g a r d in g u n io n c o n s u l t a t i o n , t h e p o w e r t o m a k e w h a t e v e r d e c is io n s w ere deem ed a p p r o p r ia te . M oreover, 4 2 a g r e e m e n ts m a k in g re fe r e n c e t o r e d u c e d h o u r s s p e c if ic a l l y s t a t e d t h a t t h e c h o ic e b e t w e e n l a y o f f s and red u ced m ent P r o v i s i o n s p e r m i t t i n g o r r e q u i r in g a r e d u c t i o n ( t a b le h ou rs 8 ). w o u ld T h u s, be in m ade by m anage a p p r o x im a te ly 300 in t h e n o r m a l w o r k w e e k in lie u o f i m m e d i a t e l a y o f f a g r e e m e n t s , t h e u n i o n h a d a v o i c e in w ere in c o r p o r a te d in o v e r a f o u r t h p r o c e d u r e s e it h e r in t h e n e g o t i a t i o n o f t h e c o n t r a c t m a jo r w ith a g re e m en ts T a b l e 8 .— la y o ff (3 5 6 ) o f th e procedu res. d e te r m in in g o r a t th e tim e la y o ffs w ere im m in e n t. The Method o f decision to reduce norm al workweek in lieu of immediate layoff, as provided in m ajor collective bargaining agreements, by industry, 1954-55 Number with pro In period of slack work, decision to reduce workweek in lieu of immediate layoff made by— visions for reduc tion in workweek Employer and Employer Automatic con Other * prior to layoff Union union jointly 1 tract provision Industry Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) All industries___— ____ _____________ Manufacturing------------------ ----------------Food and kindred products............. - Tobacco manufactures____- _____ Textile-mill products - .......................... Apparel and other finished textile products __ - _____ _ Lumber and wood products (except furniture). __ ___ ___ Furniture and fixtures Paper and allied products________ Printing, publishing, and allied in dustries _______ ___________ Chemicals and allied products - Products of petroleum and coal__ Rubber products _______ _.. . Leather and leather products _ __ Stone, clay, and glass products............ Primary metal industries----------------Fabricated metal products._. . _ .... Machinery (except electrical)__ Electrical machinery_____ ____ ____ Transportation equipment--------------Instruments and related products____ Miscellaneous manufacturing indus tries N onmanufacturing___________ __ ______ Mining, crude petroleum, and natural gas production _ _ Transportation 3_ Communications____ _________ Utilities: eleetrie and gas Wholesale trade Retail trade _ TTntels and restaurants Services _ _ C nnstrn et.ion Miscellaneous nonmannfactnring _ 356 281 8 1 16 2 8 11 13 13 7 8 53 20 48 37 23 7 5 75 5 5 47 5 7 1 5 42 31 112.7 77.8 Z.5 4 8.8 3 2 4.3 7.2 1 2 1.8 2.5 3 6.8 19.6 5.4 2.0 21.9 6.4 40.7 51.4 38.3 10.5 5.5 422.1 2.8 5.7 368.0 38.4 6.0 1.2 3 3 7.2 8.6 2 1 1 9 4 I§.8 2.2 1.4 20.7 9.4 1 11 1 5 1.5 34.9 2.6 18.1 4 1 12.6 1.6 2,211.8 1,591.3 28.8 1.3 41.2 3.1 1.8 15.3 20.7 135 86 4 3 661.8 239.6 16.3 44.6 36.9 27.0 33.8 480.2 57.6 133.8 98.5 534.2 20.2 12.9 620.6 84.0 10.3 456.8 38.4 19.7 1.6 9.9 4 2 1 11 5 17 15 9 5 2 49 1 3 37 5 2 1 1 Includes 3 agreements which gave the union option to choose between reduced workweek or layoff when employees with greater than specified amount of seniority were affected. * Includes agreements (1) which combined automatic layoff of employees having a specified minimum seniority, or of a stated percent of the work force, with union participation in determining whether to reduce or rotate the work 421587—57---- 3 5 3 19.4 14.3 1 1.3 1 1 3.3 9.8 2 5.1 1 3.1 1 2.0 156 149 3 1 8 2 1 4 7 1,113.5 1,076.1 9.0 1.3 25.3 3.1 1.8 9.3 11.0 7 6 5 6 37 13 30 9 6 2 2 7 2 1 29.9 8.7 21.7 21.8 440.0 45.0 91.7 13.4 327.4 9.7 6.0 37.3 10.0 19.5 1 3 18 12 1 i 304.5 183.4 3.5 3.6 1 2 1 3 3 10.6 3.2 4.0 9.7 149.4 6 1 1 4 121.1 68.5 1.5 51.0 1.1 6.8 week in lieu of layoff for the remaining workers; (2) which provided for auto matic reduction of the workweek in specific occupations or departments only; and (3) which did not clearly state procedure to be used. 3 Excludes railroads and airlines. N o t e .— B ecause o f ro u n d in g , su m s o f in d iv id u a l ite m s do n o t n e ce ssa rily e v u a l to ta ls. 14 T 9. — Provisions fo r u nion pa rticipa tion in reducing norm al workweek in lieu o f immediate layoff , m ajor collec tive bargaining agreements, 1954— 55 able Workers Extent of union participation in reducing workweek Agree (thousands) ments n e g o tia tio n 356 2, 211.8 140 58 70 7 5 216 681.2 228.3 387.1 46.4 19.4 1, 530.6 m ost p r e d o m in a n t O n ly to of In one agreem en t le ft th e c h o ic e to o f u n io n p a r t i c i p a t i o n w a s n o t c le a r . A d v a n c e N o tic e o f L a y o ff A dvance n o tic e o f la y o ff to th e a ffe c te d em p lo y e e s , t h e u n i o n , o r b o t h , is a c o m m o n r e q u i r e n o tic e w ere P r o v is io n s fo r a d v a n c e in c o r p o r a te d in m ore th a n o n e -h a lf ( 7 0 7 ) o f t h e 1 ,3 4 7 a g r e e m e n t s w i t h l a y o f f c la u s e s , c o v e r i n g n e a r ly h a l f o f t h e w o r k e r s ( 2 .8 m i l l i o n ) . D u r in g th a t h o u rs w ere a u to m a tic a lly ty p e U n d e r th e re m a in in g tw o , th e e x te n t m e n t in l a y o f f p r o c e d u r e s . 1 Includes agreements which allowed the employer to reduce the work week pending negotiation or to invoke arbitration in the event of dispute, and agreements which provided for consultation combined with union option to choose between reduced workweek and layoff when employees with greater than specified amount of seniority were affected. p r o v is o th e 1 9 , th e e m p lo y e r w a s r e q u ir e d t o c o n s u lt w it h th e u n io n . th e u n io n . Total with provision for reduction in workweek prior to layoff _______________ ______________________ Number with provision for union participation in choice of reduced workweek or immediate layoff____ Employer to consult with union....... ......................... Employer and union to negotiate (joint agreement) Other arrangements for employer-union considera tion 1 _____________________________________ Union to choose between reduced workweek or layoff______________________________________ No provision for union participation..... ........................... The w as a r r a n g e m e n t — p r o v i d e d f o r in 3 8 a g r e e m e n t s . th e p e r io d o p p o r tu n ity to of n o tic e , r e v ie w th e th e u n io n s itu a tio n , has an v e r ify th e in v o lv e d , and b e r e d u c e d w a s w r i t t e n in t o 1 5 6 a g r e e m e n t s c o v e r s e n io r ity in g m o r e t h a n 1 .1 m i l l i o n w o r k e r s . m a k e su g g e s tio n s re g a r d in g th e m a n n e r o f la y o ff. m e n ts, p r o v is io n w as u n io n c o n s i d e r a t i o n w hen th e n e ed m ade fo r In 135 agree jo in t e m p lo y e r - (n e g o tia tio n o r c o n s u lta tio n ) arose. F iv e a g re e m e n ts le ft th e c h o ic e u p t o t h e u n io n . Of th e of th e e m p lo y e e s T h e e m p l o y e e is e n a b l e d t o d e t e r m i n e h is d i s p la c e m ent r ig h ts under th e b u m p in g and se n io r ity p r o v is io n s o f th e a g r e e m e n t, a n d h a s s o m e o p p o r t u n it y to p re p a re fo r e c o n o m ic a d ju s t m e n t . e m p lo y e e s are assu red c o n s id e r a tio n , 7 0 r e q u ire d n e g o tia tio n b e tw e e n th e g r ie v a n c e s are m in im iz e d . e m p l o y e r a n d t h e u n i o n , w h il e 5 8 r e q u i r e d c o n s u l m e n t s , p a y m e n t f o r p a r t o r a ll o f t h e n o t i c e p e r io d or a g re e m en ts d is c u s s io n p r o v id in g ( t a b le 9 ). As fo r T h u s, jo in t ta tio n 135 sta tu s p r e v io u s ly in d i c a t e d , t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n n e g o t i a t i o n a n d c o n s u lta tio n m ay not be e n tir e ly fa ir tre a tm e n t, U nder som e and agree w a s m a n d a t o r y i f t h e e m p l o y e r f a il e d t o g i v e t h e r e q u ir e d n o t ic e to th e e m p lo y e e . In B e c a u s e o f th e n e e d fo r q u ic k a d ju s tm e n t o f th e g e n e r a l, h o w e v e r , t h e r e q u i r e m e n t f o r n e g o t i a t i o n w o r k f o r c e d u r i n g e m e r g e n c ie s , m a n y o f t h e a g r e e p resu p poses agreem en t w hereas re q u ire m e n t fo r th e b e fo r e c le a r c u t . of a c tio n is c o n s u lta tio n ta k e n , m e n ts m a d e s o m e p r o v is io n fo r w a iv e r o f th e n o tic e w o u ld re q u ire m e n t. E scap e fo r th e e m p lo y e r ran ged a p p e a r t o n a r r o w o r l i m i t t h e u n i o n ’ s r o le . fr o m g e n e ra l s ta te m e n ts t h a t n o tic e w o u ld b e g iv e n A d d i t i o n a l R e d u c tio n s i n the W o rk w e e k . ite m iz a tio n o f re a so n s fo r w a iv e r . “ w h e r e v e r p r a c t i c a l ,” a b le w ork a fte r an is s t i l l in s u f fi c ie n t in it ia l n o r m a l w e e k ly r e d u c tio n le v e l, g iv e n to fu rth e r resort to la y o ff. m in in g w h eth er of p r e v e n t la y o ffs h ou rs c o n s id e r a t i o n c u ts in U n io n to to cut w o r k in g fr o m fr o m th e is s o m e t i m e s tim e p a r tic ip a tio n h ou rs I f a v a il b e fo r e in b e lo w t h e n o r m a l w o r k w e e k w a s p r o v i d e d in 6 0 a g r e e m e n ts c o v e r in g 6 6 3 ,0 0 0 w o rk e rs. f lo o d , or o th er “ a c ts of T h e s e in c l u d e d G o d ,” and cau ses b e y o n d m a n a g e m e n t ’ s c o n t r o l , s u c h a s f a il u r e o f u t i li t i e s , breakd ow n of m a c h in e r y , and la c k of m a t e r i a ls . d eter le v e ls fir e , o r “ i f p o s s i b l e ,” t o s p e c ific A d va n ce N o tic e to U n io n . A p p r o x im a te ly a g r e e m e n ts , c o v e r in g m o r e th a n p r o v id in g 400 a fo u r th o f th e U n d e r som e of w ork ers t h e s e a g r e e m e n t s , t h e u n io n p a r t i c i p a t e d in b o t h r e q u ire d t h e i n it ia l r e d u c t i o n a n d in t h e d e c is io n t o r e d u c e ( t a b l e 1 0 ) . 11 O f t h e s e , 2 0 4 a g r e e m e n t s a ls o r e q u i r e d h o u rs fu rth e r . U n d e r oth ers, p a t e d o n l y in t h e l a t t e r s t e p . c o v e r in g th e in i t i a l th e u n io n p a r tic i A s in t h e p r o v i s i o n s r e d u c tio n , e m p lo y e r -u n io n under ag reem en ts advance n o tic e of la y o ff to fo r th e la y o ff, u n io n 11A number of these agreements excluded temporary or occasional em ployees, or those with specified minimum seniority, from the requirement for advance notice to the union. 15 n o tic e t o e m p lo y e e s . A l l b u t 7 o f t h e 2 1 4 a g r e e m e n t s w h ic h r e q u ir e d U n io n -n o t ic e r e q u ir e m e n ts w e re m o s t p r e v a le n t in t h e e le c t r ic a l m a c h i n e r y n o tic e of 1 w eek o r le s s w e r e in m a n u fa c tu r in g a n d c o m m u n ic a tio n s in d u str ie s, w h e r e o v e r t w o - in d u str ie s. N o t i c e p e r io d s o f m o r e t h a n th ird s o f th e w o rk e rs u n d e r a g r e e m e n ts w ith la y o ff w ere fo u n d p r e d o m in a n tly in n o n m a n u fa c tu r in g , p r o v is io n s w ere in v o lv e d . p a r tic u la r ly The 274 A ll p e r io d o f n o t i c e r e q u i r e d w a s s p e c ifie d in of th e c la u s e s . 408 The ag reem en ts r e m a in in g w ith 134 u n i o n -n o t i c e re q u ire d th e em of in th e c o m m u n ic a tio n s c o m m u n ic a tio n s 1 w eek. T h e b u lk — 21 3 0 d a y s ’ n o tic e . in g la y o ffs w ith o u t in d ic a tin g th e a m o u n t o f n o tic e . r a n g in g fr o m p e r io d s to th e th a n 1 d a y to 9 0 d a y s . u n io n ran ged fr o m le s s T h r e e o u t o f fo u r a g re e u t i lit ie s . ag reem en ts o u t o f 3 4 — p r o v id e d fo r T h e o t h e r 1 3 p r o v i d e d f o r p e r io d s 10 to 90 d a y s. S ev era l a g re e m en ts m a d e t h e p e r io d d e p e n d e n t o n t h e r e a s o n f o r l a y o ff. L o n g e r p e r io d s, v a r y in g f r o m 3 0 to 9 0 d a y s , m e n t s t h a t s p e c ifie d t h e p e r io d o f n o t i c e p r o v i d e d w ere fo r n o tic e s y s t e m s o r to o t h e r te c h n o lo g ic a l c h a n g e s . of 1 w eek r e q u i r in g l e s s t h a n 1 w e e k ’s n o tic e T able w as o r le ss, w ith 1 w e e k ’s n o tic e . p r o v id e d in 60 th e m a jo r it y M ore th a n a g re e m en ts. w h ic h s p e c ifie d t h e p e r io d o f n o t i c e r e q u i r e d m o r e t h a n p lo y e r to g iv e th e u n io n a d v a n c e n o tic e o f im p e n d N o tic e and 1 w eek set fo r p e r io d s , fr o m la y o ffs 10 to due 30 to in s t a lla t io n d a y s, w ere of d ia l S h o rte r p r o v id e d fo r la y o ffs d u e to o th e r ca u ses. 10 .— Provisions fo r advance notice of layoff to un ion in m ajor collective bargaining agreements , by industry , 1954-65 Number with provisions for advance notice 1 day or less to union ‘ Period of notice3 3 or 4 days 2 days Industry 5 days or 1 week More than 1 week Not specified» Work Work Work Work Work Work Work Agree ers Agree ers Agree ers Agree ers Agree ers Agree ers Agree ers ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) All industries_________ _________________ 408 1,672.4 Manufacturing_________________________ 326 1,198.8 Food and kindred products___________ 17 41.3 1 Tobacco manufactures_______________ 1.3 Textile-mill products_________ ____ 4 6.0 Apparel and other finished textile prod ucts_____________________________ Lumber and wood products (except 1 furniture)_________________________ 1.0 Furniture and fixtures________ _______ 5 12.5 6 8.3 Paper and allied products____________ Printing, publishing, and allied indus 8.5 tries________ ____ _______________ _ 4 Chemicals and allied products________ 11 28.4 Products of petroleum and coal_______ 4 7.1 2 6.0 Rubber products________ ____ ____ Leather and leather products. _______ 4 5.8 3 Stone, clay, and glass products. _ ____ 5.8 Primary metal industries_____________ 34 80.3 Fabricated metal products__ ________ 20 55.1 Machinery (except electrical)_______ _ 73 162.4 Electrical machinery. ____________ _ 58 327.6 Transportation equipment___ ____ 59 387.6 Instruments and related products___ _ 14 37.7 Miscellaneous manufacturing indus 7 15.9 tries_____________________________ Nonmanufacturing___________ ______ _ 82 473.6 Mining, crude petroleum, and natural 1 gas production_____________________ 1.0 Transportation *_____________________ 3 7.7 Communications__________ _________ 46 369.2 Utilities: electric and gas_____________ 19 47.4 Wholesale trade.____________________ 7 27.5 Retail trade_________________________ Hotels and restaurants_______________ 2 15.5 3 3.3 Services____________________________ 1 Construction___________ ____ ________ 2.0 Miscellaneous nonmanufacturing ___ 62 61 3 284.6 282.6 12.2 33 32 3 74.5 64.5 5.1 2 7.8 2 3.5 2 1 4.5 1.8 1 3 7 11 13 14 1 3 1 1.2 4.5 15.5 15.9 38.0 172.5 1.0 7.8 2.0 1 5 1 7 2 6 3 2 1 1 1 2.0 1.8 7.1 1.0 10.4 3.1 23.3 3.7 5.5 10.0 10.0 1 1 2 11 5 23 9 15 1.0 1.7 3.2 39.0 12. 6 53.2 76.3 55.0 197.8 184. 6 1.4 60 13 327.3 39.5 2 249.0 249.0 7.0 45 41 1 4.0 2 2.5 2 2 3 3.2 4.0 5.9 4 2 11 14 2 3 12.0 2.1 18.3 127.6 5.5 11.2 1 2.7 2 3 2.5 21.3 4 13.2 3 1204 agreements covering 908,000 employees provided for notice to the employees in addition to notice to the union. 3 Includes agreements with qualified provisions, such as those requiring advance notice “if possible” or “wherever practical.” * Includes 5 agreements which specified the period of notice; 4 varied the 69 69 2 7.7 47 1 3 34 8 287.8 1.0 7.7 263.9 14.1 1 5.5 1 1.0 139 110 8 1 4 539.2 378.6 15.7 1.3 6.0 1 1 1 1.0 1.2 1.1 7 1 1 1 2 10 5 21 18 19 7 2 29 23.1 1.2 4.3 1.4 4.0 14.9 23.8 64.6 80.2 110.1 21.8 2.6 160.6 12 8 7 2 105.3 25.6 27.5 2.3 period according to size or cause of layoff, and 1 required 36 hours’ notice. *Excludes railroads and airlines. N o t e .—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. 16 T a b l e 11. — Provisions fo r Period of notice2 Number with pro visions for advance notice to employees 1 Industry advance notice o f layoff to regular employees in 1 day or less 2 days 3 or 4 days 2 5 days or 1 week Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers ments (thousands) ments (thousands) ments (thousands) ments (thousands) ments (thousands) All industries_________________________________ Manufacturing________________________________ Food and kindred products ________________ Tobacco manufactures ____________________ Textile-mill products_______________________ Apparel and"other finished textile products___ Lumber and wood products (except furniture) Fnrnitnra and fivtnrAS Paper and allied products___________________ Printing, publishing, and allied industries........ Chemicals and allied products_______________ Products of petroleum and coal______________ Rubber products___________________________ Leather and leather products_______________ Stone, clay, and glass products______________ Primary metal industries___________________ Fabricated metal products ________________ Machinery (except electrical)_______________ Electrical machinery_______________________ Transportation equipment _______________ Instruments and related products___________ Miscellaneous manufacturing industries______ N onmanufacturing____________________________ Mining, crude petroleum, and natural gas production. Transportation 8___________________________ Communications___________________________ Utilities: eleotrie and gas Wholesale trade _ ____ 2, 063.1 1, 789.9 45.1 10.6 12.4 2.5 5.0 33.7 12.1 77.0 17.2 43.6 3.2 39.7 96.6 32.5 217.5 280.9 801.9 48.4 10.1 273.2 7.3 39.4 79.6 72.9 2.0 23.0 16.6 31.2 1.3 503 428 21 3 8 1 4 13 5 35 10 14 2 12 35 18 88 56 78 19 6 75 2 13 10 26 1 11 4 7 1 ______ Retail trade.. . ___________________ ___ Hotels and restaurants __________________ Serviees Cnnstrnetion __ _ _ ____ Miscellaneous nonmanufacturing____________ 99 97 6 2 56 54 1 153.1 137. 7 2.4 1 5.8 1 1.1 8 3 23 18 34 1 1 2 1.2 13.2 9.0 45.6 53.0 564.5 1.0 1.6 5.5 2 1 1 5 4 18 6 10 4 1 2 1 3.0 1 2.5 349.8 347.8 2.2 1.1 2.5 11.5 10.3 3.5 15.1 3.2 27.8 41.9 7.4 78.5 71.3 58.0 10.5 3.1 2.0 133 105 6 4 426.4 329.2 8.3 7.5 7.6 1.0 1.8 8.9 4.3 28.8 10.2 64.9 5.2 1.5 15.4 89 88 1 1 1 1 6 1 6 2 5 10 3 24 13 9 3 2 1 1 3 21 4 4 6 9 5 15 11 11 4 1 28 1.6 5.1 44.4 5.4 7.1 10.2 25.2 6.5 43.5 114.6 40.5 7.6 1.4 97.2 1 5.4 1 2.0 1 10.0 3 2 6 1 11 1 4 16.4 8.2 17.1 2.0 23.0 2.5 28.0 < Includes agreements which specified varying periods of notice: 13 agree ments were based on length of service and others on occupation, type of work or product, shift, size, or cause of layoff. Also includes agreements which 1 See footnote 1, table 10. 2 See footnote 2, table 10. 8 Only 4 of these agreements provided for 4 days’ notice. A d v a n c e N o t ic e to R e g u la r E m p lo y e e s .1 2 717.4 711.9 17.2 M o r e th a n o n e -fifth of th e a g reem en ts w ere in v o lv e d . In a th ird o f th e w o r k e r s u n d e r a g r e e m e n ts w ith l a y m o s t o f th e se a g r e e m e n ts , n o tic e o f 8 o r 2 4 h o u r s o ff p ro c e d u r e s w a s d e s i g n a t e d ; a f e w s p e c ifie d le s s t h a n 8 h o u r s . w h ic h w ere re q u ire d e m p lo y e e s th e advance covered by e m p lo y e r n o tic e 503 to a g re e m en ts g iv e o f la y o ffs N o t ic e o f 5 d a y s o r 1 w e e k w a s th e m o s t c o m m o n r e g u la r ( t a b le 1 1 ). p e r io d in te r m s o f n u m b e r o f a g r e e m e n ts S u c h c la u s e s w e r e m o s t p r e v a l e n t in m a n u f a c t u r P r o v is io n s in g in d u s t r i e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y in c h e m i c a l s , m a c h i n e r y a g r e e m e n t s , a n d f o r 2 d a y s in ( e x c e p t e l e c t r i c a l ) , e le c t r ic a l m a c h i n e r y , t r a n s p o r e q u ip m e n t, p ro d u c ts. and in stru m e n ts and d a y s ’ n o tic e 41 ag reem en ts. n o t ific a tio n w ere e m p lo y e e o f m o r e by c la u s e s r e q u i r in g n o t i c e to th e e m p lo y e e . T h e p e r io d o f n o t i c e t o e m p l o y e e s w a s s p e c ifie d in 4 5 0 a g r e e m e n t s . F o u r o u t o f f iv e p r o v i d e d f o r n o t i c e o f 1 w e e k o r le s s . P e r io d s o f 1 d a y o r le s s a p p lie d to a p p r o x im a t e ly t w o -fift h s o f th e w o r k e r s u n d e r th e 450 a g reem en ts, a lth o u g h o n ly about fo u n d 5 6 ; o n ly 4 in 85 agree to A s in t h e c a s e o f p r o v i s i o n s f o r w o r k e r s u n d e r l a y o f f p r o v i s i o n s i n t h e s e in d u s t r ie s covered w ere P e r io d s o f m o r e t h a n 1 w e e k w e r e f o u n d in o n l y r e la te d B e tw e e n a h a lf a n d tw o -th ir d s o f th e 3 (1 3 3 ). m e n t s s p e c ifie d 4 d a y s ’ n o t i c e . ta tio n fo r th e u n io n , th a n n o tic e p e r io d s to th e 1 w eek w ere m o re p re v - 12 Advance notice of short-term layoffs was not commonly required and was not included in this section. Only 29 of 400 agreements which distinguished between indefinite and short-term or temporary layoffs required advance notice to the employees for short-term layoffs; virtually all specified a shorter notice period than for long-term or indefinite layoffs. This section deals with provisions which did not distinguish between short- and long-term layoffs and with the advance notice provisions relating to long-term or indefinite layoff in cases where such a distinction was made. For a discussion of short term layoffs, see table 23 (p. 28). 17 m ajor collective bargaining agreements, by industry , 1954-55 Period of notice *—Continued More than 1 week If employer fails to give notice, he must pay for— Other * Not specified Full notice period Less than full notice period Industry Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers ments (thousands) ments (thousands) ments (thousands) ments (thousands) ments (thousands) 41 90.3 53 182.2 32 143.9 107 346.8 15 29.0 All industries. 12 3 31.4 4.7 46 3 9 3 161.7 8.7 9. 2 3.8 26 1 1 70.2 1.7 1.4 74 3 235.9 4.5 13 26.5 3 4. 5 2 3 2 3 2 1 2.3 6.4 4.1 9.6 2.4 15.0 l 2 1 12 6 5 1.6 2.3 2.8 19.8 12.3 15.8 1 1.2 2 2 2 6 7 5 1 3 1 5.1 1.8 10 15 9 2 1 16.5 103.2 33.8 10.3 1.7 1 5 6 2.0 9. 5 13.8 Manufacturing. Food and kindred products. Tobacco manufactures. Textile-mill products. Apparel and other finished textile products. Lumber and wood products (except furniture). Furniture and fixtures. Paper and allied products. Printing, publishing, and allied industries. Chemicals and allied products. Products of petroleum and coal. Rubber products. Leather and leather products. Stone, clay, and glass products. Primary metal industries. Fabricated metal products. Machinery (except electrical). Electrical machinery. Transportation equipment. Instruments and related products. Miscellaneous manufacturing industries. 4 1 6.2 2.2 1 4.3 2 4.4 3 3 5.1 5.9 3.8 4.3 12.6 13.8 42.5 20.7 2.6 1 1 6 2 5 1 3.7 1.0 8.5 17.8 19.7 1.0 2 1 11.9 2.2 29 1 58.8 1.0 7 1 20.5 6.2 6 73.8 33 1 110.9 1.0 2 2.6 7 4 13 12.6 12.1 28.2 1.4 12.9 3 2 57.9 14.8 2 4 10 11.5 17.6 27.9 1 1 5 1.5 1 1.1 1.1 9 2 5 18.8 5.0 29.1 1 2 1.6 2.1 1 N onmanufacturing. Mining, crude petroleum, and natural-gas production. Transportation.® Communications. Utilities: electric and gas. Wholesale trade. Retail trade. Hotels and restaurants. Services. Construction. Miscellaneous nonmanufacturing. 1.3 1 provided for notice only to employees with a minimum length of service, to employees in certain departments, to those replaced by returning veterans, or for notice only in event of plant shutdown. a le n t in p e r io d s n o n m a n u fa c tu rin g of 1 w eek o r le s s in d u s t r ie s , w e re m o re and n o t ic e p r e v a le n t in 5 Excludes railroads and airlines. Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. N o t e .— th e above c a te g o r ie s q u a lific a tio n s in th e becau se of v a ria tio n s or c la u s e s . m a n u fa c tu rin g . T h e th e re m a in in g p e r io d 32 o f n o t ic e a g re e m e n ts w h ic h w e re not d e s ig n a te d c la s s ifie d in an y of P a y i n L i e u o f N o t ic e . lie u (t a b le T a b l e 12.— Provisions fo r payment f o r fu ll notice period in lieu o f advance notice of layoff to regular employees in m ajor collective bargaining agreements, by period of notice required , 1954— 55 Period of advance notice Agree ments Workers (thousands) 1 1 ). p lo y e r to fa ilu r e th e 107 346.8 1 day or less_______________________ _____ ______ 2 days_______________________________________ 3 days________________________________________ 5 days or 1 week_______________________________ More than 1 week___ ____ _____________________ Other1 ________________________ _______________ 11 4 20 54 13 5 35.1 4.8 101.3 155.8 35.4 14.4 p ay to g iv e fo u n d in 122 a g re e m e n ts c la u s e s e it h e r r e q u ir e d th e e m p lo y e e s as a th e em p e n a lt y fo r t h e n o t ic e d e s ig n a t e d , o r p e r m it t e d e m p lo y e r P aym en t th e c h o ic e fo r th e r e m a in in g if fu ll th e of g iv in g n o t ic e or of th e re o f. n o t ic e la y o ff p e r io d (o r fo r any d u r in g th e occu rred n o t ic e p e r io d ) w a s p r o v id e d in 107 a g re e m e n ts a n d f o r le s s t h a n t h e f u ll n o t ic e p e r io d in t h e r e m a in in g 15. A bo u t h a lf p a y m e n t p ro v id e d 1 i In 4 agreements, the period of notice varied by length of service; the re maining agreement did not specify the period of notice. T h ese m a k i n g p a y m e n t in lie u t im e Number with provisions for payment of full notice period______________________________________ P r o v is io n s f o r p a y m e n t in o f la y o f f n o t ic e w e r e w eek q u ir e d (t a b le in 20 of th e c o n tra c ts re q u irin g fu ll f o r a d v a n c e n o t ic e o f 5 d a y s o r 1 2 ). T h ree a g re e m e n ts days’ re q u irin g n o t ic e fu ll w as re p aym en t. Seniority a n d B u m p i n g Practices T h e th at p r in c ip l e am on g e m p lo y e e s le n g th -o f-s e r v ic e m e rit s p e c ia l d iffe re n c e s c o n s id e r a t io n in h o w e v e r , s e n io rity p r o v id e s n o o f jo b s e c u rity . t h e e v e n t o f la y o ffs o r r e d u c t io n s in fo r c e is w id e ly w id e a c c e p t e d in p r iv a t e a n d G o v e r n m e n t e m p lo y m e n t . m e n ts T h e c o n tin u e b a s ic is s u e s m a n a g e m e n t in th at a ris e b e tw e e n u n io n s c o lle c t iv e b a r g a i n i n g r e la t e and to th e s h ift s in (s u c h to th e as w o rk e r w ith m ount situ a tio n s , h e to d is c r e t io n o r c h o ic e t o b e r e s e r v e d t o m a n a g e m e n t . event H is t o r ic a lly , m ost s e c u rity fo r w o rk e rs, d u r in g m ay e n jo y s a to lo s e w h ic h th e sta tu s e m p lo y m e n t. expect a b le tan ta In le s s to dep art r e p a ir ) p la n t la y o ffs , s e n io rity gu aran teed and o r in oth er t im e in th e re m a in s . aspect need m a in t e n a n c e h ig h d e t e rm in in g th e o r d e r o f la y o ff a n d a b s o lu t e a s s u ra n c e e s t a b lis h m e n t s n o t s u b je c t o p era te s p e c ific w e ig h t to b e a s s ig n e d to le n g t h o f s e r v ic e in th e a m o u n t o f In o f jo b s e n io rity r u le g o v e rn s, th ereby a n d , w ith O n th e it, th e of th e of w ith a le n g t h e lim in a t in g p o s s ib ilit y hand, la y o ff, s e r v ic e o f b ia s it saw of th e in d iv id u a l fit n e s s an d o th er c ie n c y , in a d d it io n re c o g n iz e A r u le le n g t h m a tte rs to a as fit , w o u ld s p e c ific g e n e r a lly w e ig h t has sought a llo w w o r k e r ’s re la tin g c h o ic e d e t e rm in in g m uch or a lo n e fa v o rit is m . has a fre e h a n d in q u a lifie d s e n io rity r u le w h ic h s id e ra tio n or t h is s tra ig h t m anagem ent a llo w in g as fo r o f s e r v ic e m anagem ent to m a in t a in ord er le n g t h con cern ed p ressed have u n d e r w h ic h oth er a tte m p te d u n io n s to a fo r c o n fix e s cons e x te n s iv e ly of p o s s ib ilit y s e n io r it y fo r m a n y th e w o rk er a g a in s t u n c e rta in ty stan d s. as d is c r im in a t io n th at W o rk e rs p a r tic u la r th at, in w o rk er g r o w in g com pany th e ir th e a b ilit y are to o ld e ffi w ork er, m a in t a in e d , m ake w o rk er T h e w o r k e r ’s s t a n d i n g o n a s e n i o r i t y f i s t i s , la y o ff th e been th e it lo y a l w o r k th e is m in im iz e s w h e re fo rc e . r u le of O n he e m p lo y of a b y fa c t o th er th e jo b s a ssu ra n c e s fo r one p ro tects d im in is h e s , t h e ir s e n io r it y , h e n c e t h e ir s e c u r it y , in p la n t of a an d c o m fo rte d o b t a in Such to O n know s in i n c r e a s e s . 13 c o m m itm e n t of have y e a rs. e m p lo y m e n t to sta tu s an d th e h a n d , it is c la im e d t h a t a s e n io r it y s y s t e m th at th e p ro s d ebated bu t and r e la t iv e to t h a t o f o t h e r e m p lo y e e s in th e e s t a b lis h m e n t. T h e la y o ffs , a b ilit y o f s e r v ic e . o f s e n io rity of a th e ir to s t a b le th e an d th e o t h e r h a n d , it is a r g u e d s e n io r it y e n c o u r a g e s in e ffic ie n c y . d is c o u ra g e s a b ilit y an d R e lia n c e o n s e n io rity m a y le a d to a g e n e r a l a n d u n b a la n c e d a g in g o f th e w o r k fo r c e in th e p a r tic u la r e s t a b lis h m e n t o r in d u s tr y . in m a n y w a y s , a m e a s u r e o f h is jo b s e c u r it y a n d is h ig h ly la y o ffs v a lu e d as re m a in s su ch. A s lo n g s u b je c t to b u s in e s s as th e e x te n t of flu c tu a tio n s , 1 See Older Workers Under Collective Bargaining—Hiring, Retention, 3 Job Termination, BLS Bull. 1199-1. 20 Order of Layoff Provided in 1/743 Major Agreements, 1954-55 th e q u e s tio n u n it w ill w ork ers of as be w h o s k ills to la id are an d w h e th e r o ff equal w age d is p la c e m e n t m itte d . T h us, in w ork ers d e te rm in e d b y io rity in In lo w e r w o r k e r in of th e la s t of jo b a th e p la n t m ay lo w to or p er o rd er p a y r o ll ty p e of h ir e d is b u m p in g th e an d in sen e lim in a t e r e s u lt in s e n io rity be th e u n it, a n d need la b o r e r fo r w o rk , th e o f th e one ju n io r h ie r a rc h y to fro m s e n io r it y u n s k ille d changes th e o p e ra tio n , in u n it “ b u m p in g ” w ill se p a ra te d th e in c o n tin u e or th eo ry , s k ille d th e a n o th e r th e in t e ra c t io n e ffe c t, p r iv ile g e s . or ac tu a l a re in rates w h eth er w h ic h s e n io r w o r k e r s w h ile a one la y o ff n um ber w ork ers a lo n g w ay. Types of Seniority Provisions T h e w id e s p re a d p r in c ip le in p r e v a le n c e e s t a b lis h m e n t s g a in in g is d e m o n s t r a t e d b y a fo u rth fa ile d le n g th o ffs. of to th e of under th e s e n io r it y c o lle c t iv e b ar t h e f a c t t h a t le s s t h a n 1 ,7 4 3 m a j o r a g r e e m e n t s s t u d i e d p ro v id e s p e c ific a lly o f s e r v ic e in (S e e c h a r t .) fo r c o n s id e r a t io n d e t e rm in in g th e ord er 14 of o f la y T h e se agreem en ts w e re p re d o m in a n t ly in n o n m a n u fa c t u r in g in d u s tr ie s ; a ll b u t 12 p e rc e n t o f th e m a n u fa c tu rin g a g re e m e n ts p ro v id e d th at r e la tiv e s h a ll b e th e fa c t o r , in 1 Exclusive of railroad and airline agreements. 3 Includes small number of agreements classified as “other.” s e n io r it y , o n ly e s t a b lis h in g S tr a ig h t S e n io r it y . F ro m a bro ad er m a in t a in e d th at s e n io rity d e te rs in d u s try to an d th u s fo rc e . p o in t th e of v a lu e m ovem ent in d u s tr y , ten d s to and as th is stu d y of it is w ork ers fro m jo b fro m im m o b iliz e T h e is s u e is f a r f r o m sen se, v ie w , fre q u e n tly p la c e to to of an o r d e r o f la y o ffs . S t r a ig h t s e n io r it y , u n d e r w h ic h w as th e o n ly fa c to r to th e m a jo r a g re e m e n ts bo th w ork b a rg a in in g s e r v ic e , im p o rta n t fro m re g io n , N a t i o n 's M o r e o v e r , a s lo n g a s h ig h th e le n g t h le a s t a p p ro x im a te ly in be con a th ird m a n u fa c tu rin g of an d n o n m a n u fa c t u r in g in d u s t r ie s , c o v e r in g a b o u t o n e h a lf o f t h e w o r k e r s in s e n io rity sy ste m s, th e la t t e r g r o u p . under w h ic h Q u a lifie d v a ry in g w e ig h t p ro w as v is io n s s h o w s . s e r v ic e at s id e re d , w a s p r o v id e d b y r e s o lv e d in a n y g e n e r a l c o lle c t iv e of e ., or upon jo b , r e g io n th e le n g t h i. fa c to r, g iv e n to le n g t h of s e r v ic e , w as th e p re d o m i e m p lo y n a n t fo rm o f s e n io rity in m a n u fa c tu rin g , fo u n d in m e n t le v e ls p r e v a il, it is n o t lik e ly t h a t t h e p ic t u r e as a w h o le w ill be m a t e r ia lly changed th ro u gh m o re th an h a lf of th e a g re e m e n ts. U n d er a g r e e m e n t s in T h e or a p p lic a t io n q u a lifie d , of s e n io r it y , becom es e s p e c ia lly w h e th e r e x a m p le , m anagem ent of a re it c o m p e t it io n to be e s t a b lis h e d is u s u a lly n e g o tia tio n s or ran k ed such u n its in n ecessary to e s t a b lis h w ith in o rd er u n its , th e of in in u n io n - fix e d w h ic h p a rtie s m u s t a re a s e m p lo y e e s re te n tio n . la y o ff p ro c e d u re s b a s e d th e n u m b e r of w ork o n s tra ig h t s tra ig h t c o m p lic a t e d e n t e r p r is e s w i t h a h ig h d e g r e e o f jo b s p e c ia liz a t io n . F o r a ll in d u s t r ie s , e rs c o v e re d b y c o lle c t iv e b a r g a i n i n g . m a jo r H a v in g th en fa c e s e n io rity b y w as q u a lifie d r o u g h ly th e sam e as th o se c o v e re d s e n io rity p r o c e d u re s . I n d u s t r y c h a r a c t e r is t ic s a n d th e r e q u ir e m e n t s o f p r o d u c t io n m in in g th e w ere u n d o u b t e d ly typ e of im p o r t a n t in s e n io rity p ro c e d u re d eter to be 1 4 Each agreement covered 1,000 or more workers. For scope of study, see see pages 2 and 3. 21 p ra c tic e d , bu t th e o n ly o n e s. w h ic h th ese re fe rre d s e n io rity w as fa c to rs w e re a p p a re n tly Q u a lifie d S e n io r it y . not A m o n g t h e 1 ,3 4 7 m a j o r a g r e e m e n t s to th e th e o rd er of p re d o m in a n t T h e e s s e n tia l d iffe re n c e be t w e e n a s t r a ig h t a n d a q u a lifie d s e n io rity p r o c e d u re la y o ffs , s tra ig h t is t h e e le m e n t o f d is c r e t io n o r s e le c t io n r e s e r v e d t o m e th o d in m anagem ent su ch under th e la t t e r m eth o d . S tr a ig h t d iv e rs e in d u s t r y g ro u p s a s m in in g , t ra n s p o rt a tio n , s e n io r it y is s y n o n y m o u s w i t h le n g t h o f s e r v ic e a n d c o m m u n ic a tio n , o p e r a te s in p rin tin g w o rk in g g ro u p ity ; ru bber ( t a b l e 1 3 ). in p ro d u cts, le a t h e r , and I n m a n u fa c t u r in g , th e m e t a l a s a w h o le fa v o r e d tra n s p o rta tio n h o w e v e r, m e c h a n ic a l fa s h io n . o f s e r v ic e ; q u e s tio n s a reco rd s o f le n g t h q u a lifie d s e n io r e q u ip m e n t , a p lo y m e n t p ro v id e r e la tin g s e n io rity o ffe rs th an Q u a lifie d s e n io r it y , acco u n t, in b y q u a lifie d trie s s u c h s e n io rity p ro v is io n s . a s t e x t ile -m ill p r o d u c t s a n d In in d u s e le c t r ic a n d g a s u t ilit ie s , w h e r e i n t r a i n d u s t r y d iffe r e n c e s in n a tu re o f p r o d u c t io n v a ria n c e in p r a c tic e (w h ic h in m ay o th er p o s s ib ly in d u s tr ie s ) th e e m p lo y e e s e x p la in are d iffic u lt not th e tw een s tra ig h t s e n io rity an d in flu e n c e of in d ic a t in g th e p r o d u c t io n q u a lifie d fa c to rs be s e n io rity , o th er and s a t is fa c tio n of th e u s u a lly d iv id e d a b ilit y of q u a lifie d e x e rc is e th e of of s tra ig h t in te rp re t a tio n . tak es com p eten ce, o b je c t iv e ly , s e n io r it y , w ith o u t p o s s ib ilit y u n it, d iffe re n c e s w o rk ers em a c c o u n t in g o th er h an d , m easu re, assess o p e ra tio n e q u a lly fro m s e n io rity th e C o m p an y d e fin it iv e p r o b le m s on to e s p e c ia lly p r o n o u n c e d , th e m a jo r a g r e e m e n t s w it h a lm o s t th e fa c to rs la y o ff p r o v is io n s w e re fe w v a ry in g in a s id e to la r g e r n u m b e r o f w o rk e rs w e re c o v e re d b y s tra ig h t a in t o am on g s o m e t im e s at a ffe c t e d . le a s t to In th e m anagem ent can o p p o s it io n th e o p tio n of r e v e r t in g to s t r a ig h t s e n io r it y in la y o ffs , e s p e c ia lly re q u ire m e n ts . th an in a la r g e la y o ff ; u n d e r s t r a ig h t s e n io r it y , t h e o r d e r is f ix e d b y r e la tiv e le n g t h o f s e r v ic e , w i t h c e r t a in T a b l e 13 .— Length of service as a factor in determ ining the order of layoff in m ajor collective bargaining agreements, by industry , 1954-55 Number with seniority provisions affecting order of layoff Industry Workers (thou sands) Agree ments Type of seniority applied in layoff Straight seniority (length of service only) Agree ments Workers (thou sands) Qualified seniority (length of service and other factors) Agree ments Workers (thou sands) Other 1 Agree ments Workers (thou sands) All industries___ _______ ______ _____ ________________ 1,347 5,815.1 579 2,974.1 749 2, 737. 5 19 103.5 Manufacturing____ _____ ____________________________ Food and kindred products_____ ________ _________ Tobacco manufactures................................ ................ Textile-mill products_____________________ ______ _ Apparel and other finished textile products______ Lumber and wood products (except furniture)_____ Furniture and fixtures______________________ _____ Paper and allied products________________________ Printing, publishing, and allied industries_________ Chemicals and allied products____________________ Products of petroleum and coal-__________________ Rubber products..........- ______ ___________________ Leather and leather products__________ _____ _____ Stone, clay, and glass products____ _______ ________ Primary metal industries_________________________ Fabricated metal products............. ................ ............ Machinery (except electrical)______ ____ _________ Electrical machinery____________________________ Transportation equipment_____ ____ _____________ Instruments and related products.............................. Miscellaneous manufacturing industries____ _______ 1,039 96 10 65 3 17 16 53 14 61 26 21 14 32 117 63 142 102 139 29 29 4,123.1 320.3 29 5 118.5 4.1 39.2 29. 2 119.5 28.1 132.6 71.7 128.8 41.7 102.6 662.5 169.2 369.8 424.0 1, 205. 4 64.8 61. 5 388 40 8 26 3 6 4 17 11 19 8 14 9 11 30 17 46 46 55 10 8 1,605. 5 112.9 21.7 66.8 4.1 17.0 6.4 39.1 24.1 33.8 23. 5 85.3 33. 3 56. 0 79.9 25.9 148.4 140.8 653.9 16.9 15.8 635 55 2 28 2,427. 5 205.4 7.9 47.9 16 1 90.0 2.0 1 3.8 11 11 35 3 42 18 6 5 21 85 42 94 56 82 18 21 22.2 19.7 78.8 4.0 98. 8 48.1 8.5 8.4 46.6 577.9 121.7 216.7 283.3 538.9 46.8 45.7 1 1 3.1 1.5 1 35.0 2 4 2 4.7 21.6 4.7 2 1 12.5 1.2 N onmanufacturing___________ ___ _____ _____________ Mining, crude petroleum, and natural gas produc tion................................ ........................................... Transportation *____________ _____ _______ ________ Communi cation_______ _________________________ Utilities: Electric and gas___ ________ ____________ Wholesale trade_______________________ ______ ___ Retail trade______________ ______________ _____ _ Hotels and restaurants.............................................. Services____ ____ ____ _____ ______________ _______ Construction....... .................................. ...................... M iscellaneous nonmanufacturing___________ ______ 308 1,692. 0 191 1,368. 6 114 310.0 3 13.5 15 52 68 64 11 48 16 26 6 2 295.0 336.9 538. 5 173.2 18.6 139.6 102.8 74.1 9.6 3.8 6 43 61 31 5 17 9 15 4 272. 7 316.3 517.4 96.6 10.0 60. 7 52.9 34. 7 7.4 9 9 7 30 6 31 7 11 2 2 22.2 20.6 21.1 63.2 8.6 78.9 49.9 39.4 2.2 3.8 3 13.5 1 1 Includes 13 agreements specifying straight seniority for certain groups of employees and qualified seniority for others and 6 agreements not specifying which type of seniority would be applied. * Excludes railroads and airlines, N o t e .—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not n e ce ssa rily equal totals. 22 e x c e p tio n s to b e n o t e d la t e r , a n d m a n a g e m e n t h a s no a l t e r n a t i v e p r o c e d u r e . 15 T a b l e 15 .— Specified exceptions to the use o f seniority as a factor in determining the order o f layoff in m ajor collective bargaining agreements, 1954-55 T h e r e a re th re e b a s ic t y p e s o f q u a lifie d s e n io rity p ro v is io n s . a lm o s t h a lf s e n io rity T h e of m ost th e 749 p ro v is io n s com m on ty p e, a g re e m e n ts (t a b le 1 4 ), fo u n d w ith m akes th e fo llo w in g of e x a m p le s : W h en ever there is a reduction in th e w orking force or em ployees are laid off from their regular jobs, total length of continuous service, applied on a plant, departm ent, or other basis as negotiated locally, shall be th e ferred. . . . H ow ever, ability will be given consideration. * * Total with seniority provisions affecting order of layoff______________________________________ * T h e o f th e m ents . . . th e le n g t h seniority shall prevail, provided the em ployee retained or recalled is capable of th ird c la s s ific a t io n q u a lifie d A n o th er ty p e, q u a lifie d le n g t h o n ly o f s e r v ic e w hen a p p e a r in g s e n io rity as a b ilit y a in abou t a g re e m e n ts, secon d ary an d fit n e s s fa c to r, am ong e m p lo y e e s a re a p p r o x im a t e ly e q u a l. 6 20 8 8.8 74.6 53.1 of in c lu d e s a th ird of e s t a b lis h e s to g o v e rn c o m p e t in g T o illu s t r a t e : In decreases in forces or rehirings after layoffs the follow ing factors as listed below shall be considered; however, on ly where b o th factors “ a ” and “ b ” are relatively equal abou t s e n io r it y p r o v is io n s in s e r v ic e and r e la tiv e n iz e d bu t th e fix in g doing the w ork. th e 5,029.9 785.2 102.9 80.3 465.5 * or increases its working forces w ithin any of the depart of 5,815.1 1,126 221 35 20 132 N o t e .— B ecause o f ro u n d in g , su m s o f in d iv id u a l ite m s do n o t n e ce ssa rily e q u a l to ta ls. I t is agreed th a t w henever the co m p an y either reduces principle 1,347 No exceptions specified_________________________ With provision for exceptions____ _____________ During defined emergency period _________ During undefined emergency period________ During temporary layoffs___________________ At company’s discretion under special circum stances__________________________________ Jointly determined by company and union....... Other__________ ___________ _______ ________ m ajor factor determ ining th e em ployees to be laid off or trans * Workers (thousands) q u a lifie d le n g t h s e r v ic e t h e p r im a r y c o n s id e r a t io n a n d o t h e r fa c t o r s s e c o n d a r y , a s in Agreements Type of exception to seniority provisions in th e r e la tio n s h ip a b ilit y o r d e r o f la y o ff w a s of one a w e re to s ix th w h ic h th e not m ade bo th recog o th er c le a r . in In s o m e o f th e a g r e e m e n t s , th is m a y h a v e b e e n in t e n t io n a l, d e c id e th e in th at (w it h o c c a s io n been (fr o m th e th e w ith o u t aro se . In con sequ en ce p o in t h a v e r e fle c t e d w o rd s m anagem ent or an r e t a in e d u n io n o th ers, o f lo o s e o f v ie w of a th e r ig h t p a r t ic ip a t io n ) or th ird th is m ay to as have c a r e le s s w r it in g p a rty ) or m ay u n d e r s t a n d in g n o t e x p lic it in th e o f t h e c l a u s e . 16 E x a m p le s fo llo w : shall continuous service be the determ ining factor: (a) A b il ity to perform the w ork ; (b) Physical fitness; (c) C ontin uous service. * * * * * W h e n ability and other qualifications are relatively equal, seniority shall govern when em ployees are prom oted, dem oted, laid off, or reem ployed. T a b l e 14 .— Types o f qualified seniority determ ining the order o f layoff in m ajor collective bargaining agreements, 1954-55 All industries Manufacturing Nonmanufac turing Qualifications of seniority Total_________ ____ _____ Seniority governs, pro vided senior employee is competent to do avail able work_________ _ __ Seniority secondary, i. e., governs only if ability is equal to competing em ployee_________ ___ _ Consideration given sen iority not clear _______ Other ~ ____ Work Work Work ers ers Agree Agree ers Agree ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou sands) sands) sands) 749 2,737.5 635 2,427.5 350 1,039.5 313 264 1,101.6 125 10 557.8 38.6 114 310.0 937.2 37 102.3 215 979.9 49 121.7 97 10 471.9 38.6 28 86.0 i Includes agreements in which the type of qualified seniority varied by length of service or type of occupation. N o t e .— B ecause o f ro u n d in g , su m s of in d iv id u a l ite m s do n o t n e ce ssa rily e q u a l to ta ls. Seniority is defined as the length of an em ployee’s continuous service w ith the com p any and it shall apply, m erit considered, as to dem otions, prom otions, layoffs, and rehirings within a departm ent. Such layoffs shall be arranged w ith due consideration for seniority in the line-of-advancem ent, ability, length of service w ith the com p any, and fam ily responsibility, and in reem ploym ent the sam e consideration shall prevail. * * * * * In the event of a reduction of, or any increase in, the working forces, the case of each em ployee affected, that is, his transfer, layoff, or recall, will be based upon (1) his seniority and (2) his ability to perform the work. 1 The distinction between a layoff procedure and a discharge procedure 8 should be borne in mind. As a rule, layoff procedures are not intended to cover the removal of incompetent or untrustworthy employees. Most agree ments provide that management may discharge workers for “ just cause,” which, when defined, includes such reasons as incompetence, inefficiency, dishonesty, drunkenness, and insubordination. 1 6 Because of their lack of precision and the use of subjective phrases, quali fied seniority clauses in general are known for the number of grievances they create and for the difficulties they present to arbitrators of grievance disputes (see, for example, Arbitration of Labor-Management Grievances, Bethlehem Steel Co. and United Steelworkers of America, 1942-52, BLS Bull. 1159). In the present analysis, the Bureau of Labor Statistics attempted to be con sistent in interpreting the language of not one but a large number of agree ments. In classifying 749 qualified seniority provisions according to the weight given to length of service, the Bureau obviously does not wish to lay claim to an insight that arbitrators, or even the parties who negotiated the contracts, may lack. 23 Exceptions to Seniority1 7 a n tic ip a t io n of s p e c ia l c ir c u m s t a n c e s m ig h t ju s t ify w a iv e r o r s u s p e n s io n r u le , abou t a s ix th of th e w h ic h a g re e m e n ts M o re th an h a lf of th ese a g re e m e n ts fo r o th er u n io n re p re s e n ta tiv e s , g ro u p s. e m p lo y e e T o in s u r e re p re s e n ta tio n d u r in g to 1 5 ). u n io n m em b ers to accept su ch r e s p o n s ib ilit ie s , fo r to p s e n io r it y to u n io n r e p re s e n ta tiv e s stew ard s rary not th ese a g re e m e n ts th e u n io n re p re s e n ta tiv e s ; ra th e r, th e b u lk d e fin e d in w h ic h th e w e re v a r io u s ly agre e m e n ts. A d e fin e d or fo u rth of g e n e r a l e x c e p tio n s a p p lie d to “ e m e r g e n c y ” p e r io d s , a ls o a n u n d e fin e d t e r m M o re com m on s e n io rity , or a w e re p la c e and o v e r 4 0 p e r c e n t o f th e la y o ff a g re e m e n t s p r o v id e d e x c e p t io n s o r s u s p e n s io n o f s e n io r it y d u r in g t e m p o la y o ffs , key c o n tin u e d a ft e r a la y o ff, a n d p o s s ib ly to p r o v id e a n in c e n tiv e c o n ta in e d a llo w e d or e x p e r ie n c e d o f t h e s e n io r it y p r o v is io n s fo r s u c h g e n e r a l c o n tin g e n c ie s (t a b le lis t , p e r s o n n e l, In re te n tio n v is io n s (t a b le lis t e d 1 6 ). th e O n ly gra n ted a s m a ll and s u p e r s e n io r it y c a te g o r ie s of sh op p ro p o rtio n u n io n to of a ll o f th e p ro rep re se n ta- in a n u m b e r o f a g r e e m e n t s . p ro v is io n s at or g ra n t in g of 1 7 Temporary and probationary employees may be laid off before seniority provisions come into play. This study deals with the provisions as they affect regular employees. su p er- th e near to p th e T a b l e 16 .— Superseniority provisions fo r u nion representatives d uring layoff in m ajor collective bargaining agreements , by industry , 1954-55 Industry Number with Number pro seniority viding provisions superseniority for union affecting order of representa tives layoff Superseniority for- All union representa tives Fixed number or proportion of union repre sentatives Listed cate gories of union repre sentatives Fixed number or proportion of listed cate gories of union representa tives Other 7 WorkWork Work Work Work Work Work Agree ers Agree ers Agree eis Agree ers Agree ers Agree ers Agree ers ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) All industries_____________ _____ ________ 1,347 5,815.1 590 2,998.6 28 364.6 46 288.0 319 1,467.5 176 701.6 21 176.9 Manufacturing_________________ ____ ____ 1,039 4,123.1 Food and kindred products.................... 96 320.3 Tobacco manufactures_____ _ _________ 10 29. 5 Textile-mill products________ _______ 55 118. 5 Apparel and other finished textile prod ucts__ ____ ______ ____________ ____ 3 4.1 Lumber and wood products (except furniture)___________ _____ _________ 17 39.2 Furniture and fixtures.. _____________ 16 29.2 Paper and allied products____________ 53 119.5 Printing, publishing, and allied in dustries.____ ________ ________ . . . 14 28.1 Chemicals and allied products_______ 61 132. 6 Products of petroleum and coal___ _ 26 71. 7 Rubber products___ _____ ___________ 21 128. 8 Leather and leather products_________ 14 41.7 Stone, clay, and glass products _______ 32 102.6 Primary metal industries_____________ 117 662.5 Fabricated metal products_______ ____ 63 169.2 Machinery (except electrical)________ 142 369.8 Electrical machinery ___________ ____ 102 424.0 Transportation equipment____________ 139 1,205. 4 Instruments and related products... . . . 29 64. 8 Miscellaneous manufacturing industries. 29 61.5 545 2,692.8 20 38.1 2 2.7 76.5 31 26 1 359.0 3.4 39 1 110.9 1.4 1 1. 8 668.9 9.1 1.3 5.0 173.7 4.8 4.7 165 4 1 3 19 2 3 296 1,380.4 19.4 12 1 1.4 65.1 24 1 1.2 1 1 1.6 1.0 1 1.4 1 2 6 3.7 5.0 15.3 3 1 2 138.4 1.0 2.9 2 3.2 2 3.2 Nonmanufacturing_____________ _________ Mining, crude petroleum, and natural gas production...__________ ________ Transportation 2 _____________________ Communication____ ______ _____ _____ Utilities: Electric and gas__________ Wholesale trade_____________________ Retail trade______________________ __ Hotels and restaurants_______________ Services_____________ ______ _________ Construction____ _________________ __ Miscellaneous nonmanufacturing in dustries.____ _ _____________ _____ 308 1, 692.0 15 52 68 64 11 48 16 26 6 295.0 336. 9 538.5 173.2 18.6 139. 6 102.8 74.1 9.6 2 1 12 7 1.8 22.8 11.4 1 20 1.5 55.0 3 9.6 7 11.3 530.6 72 42 117.6 111 308.9 338.8 73 110 1,097. 5 35. 5 16 33.3 17 3 4 2 4 4 3 4.2 7.1 2.7 5.2 10.1 307.6 1 45 305.8 2 7 7 17.8 199. 8 13 2 33.1 2. 2 25.9 2. 5 18. 0 6.4 2 1 4.9 2.4 1 10 1.5 27.6 8 13.0 9.6 1.0 9 4 11 5 3 1 2 27.4 25.8 31.1 8. 7 5.7 1. 3 5.1 2 42 23 46 42 59 11 6 4.7 449.0 64.1 138.0 165.4 368.1 28.0 13.6 2 16 11 44 22 42 3 6 2.4 43.5 20.0 119.2 154.6 277.7 5.1 10.7 5.6 7 177.1 23 87.1 11 32.7 1 2 1.0 165.0 4 4 7.9 30.8 2 1 8.9 4.0 3 8.6 1 2. 5 2 1 2 1 5 4 4.5 1.0 19. 8 2. 5 14.3 6.4 4 1 1 11.3 1. 2 3. 6 2 3.8 3.8 4 1 7 4 1 Includes agreements which provided that the union representative must have a specified length of service before being entitled to superseniority; prohibited the exercise of superseniority over employees with a specified length of service; and limited superseniority to certain administrative sub divisions only or granted it subject to the union representative’s ability to do the work. 13.0 1.8 15.2 8.0 3 1 1 8 5 2 5.6 2 Excludes railroads and airlines. N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. 24 T a b l e 17 .— Superseniority provisions fo r special groups ( other than u n ion representatives) during layoff in m ajor collective bargaining agreements, by industry , 1954-55 Superseniority for l— Number with seniority provi sions affecting order of layoff Key or excep tional employees, specialists * Industry Work Work ers ers Agree (thou ments (thou sands) sands) Agree ments All industries............ .............. ................................. . 1,347 5,815.1 1,039 4,123.1 96 320.3 10 29.5 55 118.5 3 4.1 17 39.2 16 29.2 53 119.5 14 28.1 61 132.6 26 71.7 21 128.8 14 41.7 32 102.6 117 662.5 63 169.2 142 369.8 102 424.0 139 1,205. 4 29 64.8 29 61.5 190 12 N onmanufacturing__________________________ _____ Mining, crude petroleum, and natural gas pro duction------------------------------------------------------Transportation *_________________________ _____ Communication_____ _______________ _________ Utilities: Electric and gas______________________ Wholesale trade------------ ---------------------------------Retail trade___________________________________ Hotels and restaurants______________ ________ Services______ _______________________________ Construction.------- ----------------------------------- -----Miscellaneous nonmanufacturing................... ....... 308 1, 692. 0 Agree ments Work ers (thou sands) 36 455.0 230 1,157.0 Manufacturing............................... ................................. Food and kindred products----------------- ------ -----Tobacco manufactures................. ........................... Textile-mill products---------------------------------------Apparel and other finished textile products--------Lumber and wood products (except furniture)----Furniture and fixtures ............... - - - ................... Paper and allied products---------------------- --------- Printing, publishing, and allied industries----------Chemicals and allied products--------------------------Products of petroleum and coal-------------------------Rubber products---------------- ------------ --------- -----Leather and leather products---------------------------Stone, clay, and glass products-------------------------Primary metal industries......................................... Fabricated metal products-------------------------------Machinery (except electrical)--------- ------------------Electrical machinery---------------------------------------Transportation equipment------------------ --------Instruments and related products---------------------Miscellaneous manufacturing industries-------------- 16 52 64 11 48 16 26 32 116.3 15 47.9 98.7 12 1 38.3 4.8 650.2 1.5 2.0 20.0 3.3 _________ _____________________________________________________ 18.4 4.4 3.1 7 29 14 38 23 33 8 3 38.8 73.6 25.8 144.0 124.5 463.3 22.8 6.5 40 187.1 1.2 _____________ _______________________________________ _____________ _______ 4.9 _____________ ________________________________ 1.1 6 17.2 1 2.2 1 1.2 8 19.9 1 1.5 2 3 13.3 4.2 41.2 4.2 562.1 3 3 4 4 1 6 9 1 1.0 1 2 163.7 4.5 1 1 1.0 10.9 4 8.6 2.6 1 6 1.0 1.9 9.6 2 17.6 5.5 75.7 4.5 342.0 12 1 3 1.1 4.6 5.8 37.7 10.3 7.0 11.2 8.0 5.3 5.6 6.2 13.3 1.0 ------- --------- 3.3 2.0 3 2 2 3 2 9.2 1 1.3 1 1 1 1 J. O L 27 74.1 9.6 3.8 Other * Work Work Work ers Agree ers ers Agree (thou ments (thou ments (thou sands) sands) sands) 4.6 102.8 6 2 Agree ments Disabled veterans3 463.7 969.9 29.3 2 1 2 1 11 2 2 295.0 336.9 538.5 173.2 18.6 139.6 68 Superannuated, disabled employees Students, trainees 2 6.9 14.9 4.5 1 The total number of agreements and workers are nonadditive; 41 agree ments in the sample covered more than 1 category of employees. 2 44 of these agreements limited superseniority to a fixed number or pro portion of employees in this category. 3 8 of these agreements granted superseniority to all veterans. * Includes agreements which provided for superseniority for other special groups such as employees on the basketball team and employees hired before a specified date; and agreements in which superseniority provisions were not clear. 3 Excludes railroads and airlines. N o t e .—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. t iv e s p lo y e e s to be c o v e re d , p ro te c tio n p ra c tic e m ent of to of a fix e d o r lim it e d n um ber s a fe g u a r d in g u n io n p r e v a le n t in th e th e s e n io r it y c o n tin u e d re p re s e n ta tiv e s w as u n io n re p re s e n ta tiv e s 1 7 ). tra ted m a in ly e m p lo y c a tio n C o n tracts in Such p ro v is io n s w e re th e m e ta lw o rk in g a ls o p ro v id e e x tra s e n io rity s e c u rin g c la u s e s s e n io r it y su p e ran n u a te d a b le d v e te ra n s. or d is a b le d C la u s e s e m p lo y e e s , e x e m p t in g p r o v is io n s , m a n a g e m e n t fr e q u e n t ly s e e k s s e n io r it y a t e d o r d i s a b l e d e m p l o y e e s 18 f r o m s e n io rity to m a in e s s e n tia l o p e ra tio n s , p la n t s a fe ty , o r fo r o th e r reaso n s. Som e c o n s id e r a t io n a g re e m e n ts m ade o b je c t th e f o r t h e o t h e r ; t h a t is , s u p e r s e n i o r i t y w as gra n ted to a n and u n io n re p re s e n ta tiv e s . s ix th o f th e s e n io rity one equal n um ber of key fo r key e m p lo y e e s A p p r o x im a t e ly a g re e m e n ts c o n ta in e d p r o v is io n s or c o m m u n i p rotec t io n to o t h e r g r o u p s , s u c h a s s t u d e n t s a n d t ra in e e s , w a iv e r s fo r k e y o r e x c e p tio n a l e m p lo y e e s ta in and concen in d u s t r ie s . p a r tic u la rly fro m (t a b le T h e th e m e t a lw o r k in g in d u s tr ie s . J u s t a s u n io n s a re in t e r e s t e d in e x e m p t in g e x tra o r p ro p o rtio n . a c la u s e s w a i v i n g e x c e p tio n a l em m e n ts, w ere fo u n d p a r tic u la rly in th e 4 of m e n ts p r o t e c t e d o t h e r s p e c ia l g ro u p s . a s p e c ia l w a iv e r fo r th e a g re e m e n ts t ra n s p o rt a tio n e q u ip m e n t in d u s tr y . p ro v id e d d is la y o ffs b a s e d o n p ercen t m a jo r and su p eran n u a gree in th e F e w e r a g re e O n e c la u s e m em b ers of th e c o m p a n y ’s b a s k e t b a l l t e a m . 1 8 For clauses granting special protection to older workers, see Older Workers Under Collective Bargaining, op, cit. (p. 22). 25 T able 18.—Extent of definition of seniority unit in m ajor collective bargaining agreem , by type of em ents ployer u ity 1954-55 n Extent of definition of seniority unit N umber with seniority provisions affecting order of layoff Type of employer unit Single plant Multiplant company Multiemployer Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers (thousands) (thousands) (thousands) (thousands) Total........................................... . Defined............................ .............. Fully defined; no reference to local agreements_____ Defined in master agreement; subject to change lo cally.______________ _________________________ Defined for certain situations only________________ Not defined______________ Not defined in master agreement; established in local __________ agreements_________ _____ Not defined in single plant agreements; to be nego tiated_______________ . __ ............. Referred to but not defined............................................ 1,347 5,815.1 803 1,954.0 330 2,681.1 214 1,180.1 1,101 1,080 4,369.8 3, 727.8 729 728 1,794.4 1, 782.9 254 236 1,869.6 1,248.4 118 116 705.7 696.5 17 4 246 602.6 39.4 1,445.3 1 74 11.5 159.5 16 2 76 597.0 24.2 811.4 1 1 96 5.6 3.7 474.3 40 678.1 38 675.6 2 2.5 9 197 23.1 744.1 9 65 23.1 136.4 38 135.8 94 471.8 N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. S en iority U n it 1 9 In contrast to the practice o f p ro vid in g supersen iority to special groups, a fe w agreem ents p ro vid ed less-than-norm al sen iority p rotection to certain em ployees otherwise considered as regu lar em ployees. F o r exam ple, 2 agreem ents required th a t in a slack period m arried w om en whose hus bands w ere em ployed w ere to be la id o ff w ith ou t regard to sen iority; 3 agreem ents specified that apprentices w ere to be la id o ff w ith o u t regard to sen io rity; and 1 agreem ent p ro vid ed th a t n on union w orkers w ere to be la id o ff before union m em bers. O f greater significance was the estab lishm ent o f separate sen iority lists fo r m en and w om en em ployees, discussed la ter in this section, w hich in operation m a y p rovid e less sen iority p ro tection to w om en than to men w ith equ ivalen t years o f service. T able T h e second m a jo r com ponent in the procedu re o f determ in ing the order in w hich em ployees m a y be laid o ff is the sen iority u nit; th a t is, the area in w hich em ployees com pete in term s o f len gth o f service and oth er factors th at m a y be in v o lv e d in seniority. S en io rity units are necessarily ta ilored to fit the needs o f the particu lar establishm ent. A m o n g establishm ents in general, the m ore h o m o geneous the w ork force in term s o f operations and skills, the w id er the sen iority unit tends to be. In diversified operations, each jo b or occupational classification m a y com prise a separate u nit; on the 19 For a description of a seniority system in operation, see The Practice of Seniority in Southern Pulp Mills, Monthly Labor Review, July 1955 (p. 757) 19.— Type of seniority unit specified for layoff purposes in m ajor collective bargaining agreem , by type of em ents ployer u n it y 1 9 5 4 -5 5 Type of employer unit Total Single plant Type of seniority unit specified Agree ments All types of seniority unit _______________________ Job, craft, occupation, classification.__ ________ ___ Job or occupational families___ _________________ ___ Job and department_____________ ________________ Department- ______ ________________ ______ ___ Plant__ _____ ____________________________ ______ Unit varies with type of layoff____ _________________ Unit broadened if layoff caused by technological dis placement, Unit varies by craft or occupation . . ______ ____ Unit varies with length of service_____________ _____ Other i____________________________________________ 1,101 151 38 193 299 71 28 6 61 25 229 Workers (thousands) 4, 369.8 360.3 140.0 633.3 846.5 156.9 106.4 350.4 173.5 157.3 1, 445.2 1 Includes agreements with seniority units defined by administrative subdivisions such as “district," “wage group," “payroll location," “station," office," “zone"; agreements with combinations of the seniority units listed Agree ments 730 91 34 145 215 45 20 3 50 20 107 Workers (thousands) 1, 795. 5 224.6 128.6 340.2 400.4 77.1 58.4 6. 4 139.6 85.2 335.0 Multiplant company Agree ments 254 24 4 37 53 17 7 3 10 4 95 Workers (thousands) 1,869. 6 44.2 11.4 215.1 356.6 53.9 46.8 344.0 28.4 64.8 704.5 Multiemployer Agree ments Workers (thousands) 117 36 11 31 9 1 704.7 91.4 78.1 89. 5 25.9 1.2 1 1 27 5.6 7.3 405.8 separately in the table; and agreements in which the seniority units were not clearly defined, N o t e .—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. 26 T able 20.—Provisions in m ajor collective bargaining agree m ents for separate seniority lists for m and wom , by en en industry, 1954.-55 Number with Number with separate sen other related iority lists provisions i Industry All industries__________________________ Manufacturing___ ____ ________________ Food and kindred products__________ Tobacco manufactures............................ Textile-mill products___________ ____ Apparel and other finished textile prod ucts______________________________ Lumber and wood products (except furniture)________________________ Furniture and fixtures_______________ Paper and allied products____________ Printing, publishing, and allied indus tries_____________________________ Chemicals and allied products_______ Products of petroleum and coal_______ Rubber products____________________ Leather and leather products_________ Stone, clay, and glass products_______ Primary metal industries...... .................. Fabricated metal products__________ Machinery (except electrical)________ Electrical machinery________________ Transportation equipment__________ Instruments and related products____ Miscellaneous manufacturing indus tries_____________________________ N onmanufacturing___ __________________ Mining, crude petroleum, and natural gas production___________________ Transportation 2____________________ Communication ___________________ Utilities: Electric and gas____________ Wholesale trade ___________________ Retail trade________________________ Hotels and restaurants______________ Services____________________________ Construction ___________________ Miscellaneous nonmanufacturing . Work Work Agree ers Agree ers ments (thou ments (thou sands) sands) 92 89 24 1 596.5 571. 2 110.8 2.5 14 9 2 42.5 25.8 2.1 3 3 3.8 7.1 1 1.4 6 4 4 4 5 12 9 7 4 3 3 9.4 8.0 5.3 5. 2 11.1 54.0 16.9 324.6 4.9 7.6 25.4 2 24.3 1 1.1 1 2 1 1 1 2.2 6.6 1.2 2.9 9.4 5 16.8 1 2 1 1 3.9 5.0 1.6 6.3 1 Includes agreements which provided separate seniority lists for women in certain departments only or for women hired after a specified date, excluded women from exercising seniority to displace employees in specified classifica tions, confined hiring and firing of women to certain classifications for senior ity purposes, specified separate job classifications for men and women, or otherwise indicated separate seniority lists. One agreement permitted women to bid on certain jobs if there were at least 3 such jobs in the unit, 2 of which were filled by men; 1 permitted interchangeability of male and female operators by determination of the general foreman and shop steward. Women were classed as temporary employees under one agreement, with no seniority rights except among themselves; they were to be replaced by men as soon as an adequate supply of men became available. 2 Excludes railroads and airlines. N o t e .—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. oth er hand, in some situations the plan t as a wholem a y be considered as a single unit. T w o lim ited aspects relatin g to sen iority units in agreem ents w ere studied: w heth er the agree m ent defined the sen iority units and the ty p e o f unit specified. Since these aspects m a y be a fu n ction o f size, it is im p orta n t to em phasize th a t each o f the agreem ents analyzed covered at least workers. A b o u t 1 out o f ev e ry 5 agreem ents coverin g the order o f la y o ff fa iled to describe the nature o f the sen iority unit (ta b le 18). M o s t o f these agree m ents, w hich included a substantial proportion o f m u ltiem p loyer agreem ents, referred to sen iority units b u t did n ot define them . Since sen iority is m eaningfu l o n ly in the con text o f a given area o f application, it is lik e ly th a t in these situations the sen iority u nit was n egotiated a t the local le v e l or was established b y custom. Because term s such as job , departm ent, and pla n t h ave m a n y synonym s and a v a r ie ty o f meanings am ong the 1,101 agreem ents w hich defined the sen iority unit,2 the classification o f units 0 can be, at best, o n ly a rough approxim ation. A b o u t a fifth o f these agreem ents referred to units such as “ d istrict,” “ w age grou p,” “ sta tion ,” w hich could be defined o n ly w ith kn ow led ge o f the operations o f the particu lar establishm ent covered b y the agreem ent. O n the w hole, h ow ever, it w ould appear th a t jo b o r dep artm en tal sen iority units, o r their equ ivalen t, w ere the m ost com m on. U n its based on jobs o r jo b fam ilies w ere specified in 17 percent o f the agreem ents; jo b and dep artm en t units in 18 percen t; and dep artm en t units in 27 percent. P la n tw id e units w ere p rovid ed fo r in o n ly 6 percent o f the agreem ents. S lig h tly m ore than 10 percent p ro vid ed fo r units v a ry in g w ith the em p loyee’s jo b , len gth o f service, or the nature o f the la y o ff situation (ta b le 19). T h e order o f la y o ff applicable to m en and w om en is som etim es adm inistered through the use o f separate sen iority lists, a practice w hich has the effect o f establishing sen iority units based on sex. G en erally, m en and w om en are first d ivid ed in to noninterchangeable occupational groups and then in to separate sen iority units w ith in a dep artm en t or the plant. T h e em p lo y e e ’s re la tiv e standing on the appropriate retention list determ ines the order o f la yo ff. A b o u t 8 percen t o f the agree m ents w ith la y o ff provisions contained clauses p ro vid in g fo r separate sen iority lists fo r each sex (table 20). en tirely to Such clauses w ere confined alm ost m anu facturing agreem ents. Th ey w ere m ost com m on in the fo o d industries, w here th e y appeared in a fou rth o f the agreem ents w ith la y o ff procedures, and in tran sportation m ent, w here 8 agreem ents w ith such equ ip clauses covered alm ost 335,000 workers. 1,00 0 20 Time worked in the seniority unit does not necessarily coincide with the basis upon which length of service for layoff purposes is computed or calcu lated. The methods of calculating length of service were not covered in this study. 27 Bum ping P ractices A lth o u gh the ty p e o f sen iority and the sen iority unit determ ines the order in w hich em ployees m a y be reached fo r la y o ff, the question as to w h eth er an em ployee is actu ally separated fro m the p a yro ll m a y depend on another fa cto r— his p rivilege o f displacing or bu m ping a ju n ior em p loyee (in term s o f len gth o f service) in another sen iority unit. F o r exam ple, a too l and die m aker w ith 5 years’ service m a y be the first to be reached fo r la y o ff in his unit, bu t he m a y be allow ed b y the agree m en t to displace a less skilled m achine to o l operator in another unit w ith 4 years’ service. T h e m achine too l operator, in turn, m a y bum p a w orker in another unit w ith 3 years’ service. T h e practice o f bum ping, w hich m a y in v o lv e a chain reaction a ffectin g a num ber o f w orkers fo r each T able one la id off, is gen era lly qu alified in the in terest o f m ain tain in g plan t efficiency. A p p ro x im a te ly h a lf o f the agreem ents w ith la y o ff procedures contained bu m ping provisions (ta b le 21). T h e practice was m ore preva len t in m an u facturing than in nonm anufacturing agree m ents (56 percen t as against 31 percen t o f the agreem ents) and was fa irly w ell distribu ted am ong m a jo r large-establishm ent industries. T h e co m p lexity o f the adm in istrative processing and the disruption caused b y bu m ping m a y ac count fo r clauses lim itin g the use o f bu m ping to in defin ite or lon g-term layoffs. A lm o st a third o f the agreem ents w ith bum ping clauses contained this specific qu alification (ta b le 21). On the oth er hand, re la tiv e ly few agreem ents specified th a t bu m ping w ou ld be practiced in both short-term and in defin ite layoffs. T h e m a jo rity o f clauses 21.— Bumping provisions in m ajor collective bargaining agreem , by type of layoff and industry, 195 — ents 4 55 Industry Number with Number with seniority provi provisions for sions affecting bumping No reference to order of layoff length of layoff Bumping permitted in— Indefinite layoffs only Indefinite and short-term layoffs Other * Work Work Work Work Work Work Agree ers Agree ers Agree ers Agree ers Agree ers Agree ers ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) All Industries....................................................................... 1,347 5,815.1 Manufacturing................................................... .................. 1,039 4,123.1 Food and kindred products____________________ 96 320.3 Tobacco manufactures................................................ 10 29.5 Textile-mill products___________ ______________ 65 118. 5 Apparel and other finished textile products............ 4.1 3 Lumber and wood products (except furniture)___ 17 39.2 Furniture and fixtures................................................. 16 29.2 Paper and allied products........................................... 53 119. 5 Printing, publishing, and allied industries............ . 14 28.1 Chemicals and allied products.......................... ......... 61 132.6 Products of petroleum and coal________________ 26 71. 7 Rubber products................................. .......... .............. 21 128.8 Leather and leather products___________________ 14 41. 7 Stone, day, and glass products_________________ 32 102.6 Primary metal industries____ _____ ____ ________ 117 662.5 Fabricated metal products_____________________ 63 169.2 Machinery (except electrical)__________________ 142 369.8 Electrical machinery_______ __________________ 102 424.0 Transportation equipment_____________________ 139 1,205. 4 Instruments and related products______________ 29 64.8 Miscellaneous manufacturing industries_________ 29 61.5 N onmanufacturing______________ _________________ 308 1,692.0 Mining, crude petroleum, and natural gas produc tion________________________________________ 15 295.0 Transportation 2______________________________ 52 336.9 Communication______ ________________________ 68 538. 5 Utilities: Electric and gas______________________ 64 173.2 Wholesale trade_____ _________________________ 11 18.6 Retail trade__________________________________ 48 139.6 Hotels and restaurants__________ ______________ 16 102.8 Services..................................... ..................... ................ 26 74.1 Construction_________________________________ 6 9.6 Miscellaneous nonmanufacturing...____________ 2 3.8 1 Includes agreements which qualified bumping in relation to type of lay off and/or workers affected. 2 Excludes railroads and airlines. 681 2,380.2 586 2,026.0 38 205.3 3 4.9 18 31.4 7 13.9 g 11. 5 22 50.8 5 11.9 40 90. 2 14 35.9 13 27.3 6 23 4 17 54.5 67 200.9 28 65 8 94 253.4 68 230.0 98 623.5 22 53. 5 18 38.0 95 354.2 9 14.3 20 44.6 15 155. 7 39 96.2 1 2.0 6 29.6 4 10. 5 1 1.3 425 1,379.2 347 1,091.7 30 187.1 3 4.9 15 28.0 7 13.9 4 6. 2 11 18. 5 5 11.9 22 48.8 12 25. 7 9 19. 7 6 23. 4 8 30.7 43 109.4 17 51 2 56 148.5 36 108.8 38 200.6 14 35. 6 11 18! 8 78 287.5 8 12.3 17 37.6 11 124. 6 31 70.9 1 2.0 6 29.6 3 9.3 1 1.3 16 14 1 46.0 41.7 3.4 2 3.8 5.5 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 4.3 10.0 1.4 3.2 3.4 1.0 7.1 4.2 4.3 5.5 1 1 2.8 1.5 210 197 5 2 769.3 712.5 11.8 2.4 30 28 2 1 185.7 180.2 3.1 1.0 3 9 17 2 3 7 22 9 32 27 48 6 5 13 1 2 4 5 4.1 28.5 39.9 10.2 3.3 12.6 88.3 11. 5 89.1 114.2 266.6 15. 2 15.0 56.9 2.0 4.2 31.1 18.3 1 1.2 1 1.5 1 1 5 4 10 2 1.3 1.8 12.4 5.0 149.3 2. 7 2 2 1 1.2 N o t e .— Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. 28 T able — B u m ping practices in m ajor collective bargaining agreements , by type of sen iority applied in layoff , 1954-55 22. Type of seniority applied in layoff Total Bumping practices Straight seniority Workers (thousands) Agree ments Total with seniority provisions affecting order of layoff. Without provision for bumping............................................ With provision for bumping_________________________ Without limitations________________________ ___ Provided employee is capable of doing work_______ Provided he has minimum service requirement......... Provided he has specified amount of service above that of employee bumped_________ ____ ________ Provided he has prior service in unit____ _________ Provided he bumps to former job(s) only__________ Area of bumping geared to service.._____ ________ Other provisions ® _______________________________ 1,347 666 681 104 299 7 9 23 30 10 199 5,815.1 3,434.9 2,380.2 416.7 965.9 17.8 21.8 38.0 89.9 29.8 800.3 1 Includes 13 agreements specifying straight seniority for certain groups of employees and qualified seniority for others and 6 agreements not specifying which type of seniority would be applied. * 124 agreements specified various combinations of employee qualifications forbumping rights listed in the table. The remaining 75 included agreements which varied bumping practices for different jobs, restricted bumping rights contained no reference to the len gth o f la y o ff in establishing bu m ping rights. A n em ployee's rig h t to bum p w as qualified, under m ost agreem ents, b y consideration o f his a b ility or the nature o f his previous experience T 23.—Duration of short-term or tem porary layoffs specified in m ajor collective bargaining agreem , 1954~ ents 6 5. able Duration Total with layoff provisions_________ __________ With provisions covering short-term layoff______ 5 days (or 1 week) or le s s ___________ _ ___ More than 5 but less than 10 days (or 2 weeks) 10 days (or 2 weeks) _ ___________________ More than 10 days, but less than 1 month___ 1 month or more___________________ ____ Undefined_________ _____ _ ______ ______ Other1. . ______ ___ .. . ___ Agree ments 1,347 400 172 22 63 34 23 67 19 W orkers (thousands) 5,815.1 1,858.4 503.5 88.5 204.1 485.8 105.8 301.9 168.9 1 Includes agreements which limited the number of days of temporary layoffs which may be accumulated in a specified calendar period; varied the duration of the layoff period by the reason for layoff; provided for extension of the temporary layoff by mutual agreement; and agreements which defined temporary layoff as “ 1 week or more.” N o t e .—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. Qualified seniority Agree ments Agree ments 579 258 321 61 127 2 4 10 14 4 99 Workers (thousands) 2,974.1 1,917.8 1,056.3 145.9 385.8 3.3 15.4 16.1 51.4 12.7 425.8 749 400 349 40 168 5 5 13 16 6 96 Workers (thousands) 2,737.5 1,454. 5 1, 283.0 267.0 564. 7 14.5 6.4 21.9 38.5 17.1 352.9 Other 1 Agree ments Workers (thousands) 19 8 11 3 4 103.5 62.7 40.8 3.8 15.4 4 21.6 to em ployees of sp e cifie d le n g th of se rv ice , or lim ite d th e area of b u m p in g to sp e cifie d s e n io rity u n its o r o n ly to jo b s h e ld b y u n sk ille d o r sh o rt-se rvice em ployees. N o t e .— B ecause of ro u n d in g , su m s of in d iv id u a l ite m s do n o t n e ce ssa rily e q u a l to ta ls. (ta b le 22). O n ly 15 percen t o f the bu m ping p ro visions did n ot state specific lim itation s on the rig h t to bum p. Q ualified bu m ping privileges p reva iled to a slig h tly sm aller exten t am ong agree m ents w hich p ro vid ed fo r straight sen io rity than in those w hich p ro vid ed fo r qu alified sen iority in establishing the order o f la yo ff. S h o rt-T erm or T em p o ra ry L a y o ffs R eferen ces to short-term or tem p orary la yo ffs in previous sections o f this rep ort m a y be clarified b y contract definitions o f these term s. O f the 1,347 agreem ents w ith la y o ff procedures, 400 referred to short-term or tem p ora ry la yo ff. A b o u t a sixth o f these agreem ents did n ot define the terms. M o r e than three-fifths defined the period intended as 10 days (o r 2 w eeks) or less, w ith m ost a t 5 days (o r 1 w eek ) o r less. In som e agree ments, la yo ffs as lo n g as a m on th o r m ore w ere con sidered tem p ora ry or short term ed (ta b le 23). Recall P r o c e d u r e s ; W o r k - S h a r i n g T h e basic principle u nd erlying m ost recall p ro cedures is the return to w ork in in verse order o f la y o ff, i. e., the last person la id o ff is the first to be recalled. A p p lica tio n o f this principle, h ow ever, is com plicated b y p la n t requ irem en ts; produ ction m a y n ot be resum ed sim ultaneously in all units o f a plan t or in in verse order o f cu rtailm ent, n or is the return to fu ll produ ction necessarily a t the same ra te am ong units. Such situations often result in m odification o f the recall principle, usually b y w iden in g or n arrow in g the area o f jo b o p p o r tu n ity (sen io rity u n it) o r b y ascribing m ore w eigh t to a b ility and skill than these factors m a y h ave had in determ in in g the order o f la yo ff. T h is m a y be done b y m utual agreem ent w hen the exigencies arise or m a y be p ro vid ed fo r in the agreem ent. Som e agreem ents p ro vid e fo r such contingencies b y p erm ittin g d evia tio n fro m the regu lar recall procedure, as in the fo llo w in g p rovision : R ec a ll Procedu res Just as a la y o ff procedure in a co llective b ar gain ing agreem ent assures the em ployed w orker th a t the order o f la yo ff, should the occasion arise, w ill be equitable, a recall procedure assures the la id -o ff w ork er th at the order o f return to w ork w ill be based on sim ilar, if n ot identical, principles. A lth o u gh business requirem ents de term ine the tim in g and volu m e o f la y o ff and recall, re la tive len gth o f em ployee service is an im p ortan t and o b je c tiv e consideration in fixin g the order in w hich w orkers are affected. T h e recognition o f his eq u ity in the jo b is an im p orta n t righ t retained b y the la id -o ff w orker under the agreem ent, usually fo r a specified period. D u rin g recent years, this rig h t has been supplem ented b y other rights, through co llective bargainin g or uni la tera lly b y em ployers, w hich also enhance, fo r a tim e, the status and security o f the laid-off w orker. F o r exam ple, he m a y be en titled to su pplem ental unem ploym ent benefits financed b y the c o m p a n y ; he m a y be p erm itted to continue his particip ation in the co m p a n y’s health and insurance p la n ; he m a y preserve his credited service under the com p a n y’s pension plan, or m a y even q u a lify under len gth o f service or m inim um age requirem ents fo r a deferred pension (vestin g) during a la y o ff period w hich u ltim a tely becom es a perm anent separation. It is recognized that deviations from the [stipulated] order of recall may be made necessary by the sequence in which plant operations are resumed. For example, in the case where plant equipment must be put back into shape before operations can be started, the appropriate senior mechanical department employees required to do the work may be recalled, even though other employees with greater plant seniority are still laid off until such time as the de partment is operating normally. Similarly, if a particular operating department is to be started up and operating employees with the necessary qualifications and experience in that department are required, such employees may be 29 30 recalled even though employees o f other departments with greater plant seniority are still laid off. O f the 1,743 m a jo r agreem ents studied, la y o ff procedures w ere fou nd in 1,347, co verin g 5.8 m il lion w orkers. M o s t o f these agreem ents ex p lic itly set fo rth a recall procedu re; a few , h ow ever, con tained no reference to the m anner in w hich recall was to proceed. M o s t agreem ents also stipu lated the len gth o f tim e th a t la id -o ff w orkers w ou ld retain sen iority. call provision s w hich w ere n o t exp licit or w hich p ro vid ed o n ly fo r preference o v e r n ew em ployees in rehire accounted fo r 13 percen t o f the agree ments. T h e rem ainin g 1 percen t p ro vid ed fo r recall b y stra igh t sen io rity fo r som e groups and qu alified sen iority fo r others. Seniority in Recall. A s in la y o ff, qu alified senior ity , w h e reb y len gth o f service is considered w ith oth er factors such as a b ility , skill, and ph ysical fitness, was the predom in an t ty p e o f sen io rity a pplied in reca ll: 58 percen t o f the 1,347 agree T able m ents in recall and 56 percen t in la y o ff.2 O n ly 1 28 percen t o f the agreem ents specified stra igh t sen io rity (i. e., len gth o f service is the o n ly fa c to r) in recall, in contrast to 43 percen t in la yo ff. R e 24 .— (See table 24.) Q u alified sen iority w as specified m ore freq u e n tly in m an u facturing than in n onm anufacturing indus tries. Such provisions w ere fou nd in slig h tly m ore 31 For a discussion of seniority types and their prevalence in layoff pro cedures, see pages 19-22. Recall provisions in m ajor collective bargaining agreements , by in du stry , 1954-55 Laid-off employees recalled on the basis of— Number with layoff provisions Industry Straight seniority Preference over Straight seniority Qualified senior for some, quali new employees, Recall procedure fied seniority for seniority not a not explicit ity factor others 1 Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers Agree Workers ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou ments (thou sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) sands) All industries---------------- -------------------- 1,347 5,815.1 Manufacturing------------------------------------ 1,039 4,123.1 96 320.3 Food and kindred products_________ 29.5 10 Tobacco manufactures____________55 118.5 Textile-mill products _______________ Apparel and other finished textile 4.1 3 products_________________________ Lumber and wood products (except 39. 2 17 furniture) ___ ______________ 16 Furniture and fixtures _ ________ 29.2 119. 5 Paper and allied products 53 Printing, publishing, and allied indus 14 28.1 tries. ___________________________ 132. 6 Chemicals and allied products___ _ . 61 71. 7 26 Products of petroleum and coal ____ Rubber products______________ 21 128.8 14 41.7 Leather and leather products____ _ 32 102.6 Stone, clay, and glass products______ 662.5 Primary metal industries........ ........... 117 63 169. 2 ___ Fabricated metal products 142 369.8 Machinery (except electrical)______ _ 102 Electrical machinery___ __ _____ 424.0 139 1, 205. 4 Transportation equipment.. ___ .. Instruments and related products._ 29 64.8 Miscellaneous manufacturing indus 61.5 29 tries____________________________ Nonmanufacturing_____________________ 308 1, 692.0 Mining, crude petroleum, and natural 295.0 15 gas production______ _ . _ _ ____ 52 336.9 Transportation 3__ ___ ___ 538.5 Communications__ _________ _____ 68 64 173.2 Utilities: Electric and gas 11 18. 6 Wholesale trade 48 139.6 Retail trade ___ _____ 16 102.8 Hotels and restaurants__________ __ 74.1 26 Services. ___________ _______ ____ 6 9. 6 Construction . ____ 2 Miscellaneous nonmanufacturing____ 3.8 373 298 30 6 25 2 4 4 16 9 14 4 8 6 6 22 16 33 32 50 6 5 75 3 23 10 13 4 6 5 9 2 1, 665.1 1,255.0 66.8 17.8 65.8 3.1 9.0 6.8 28.6 14.8 24.0 8.8 34.3 15.7 21.7 70.2 28.3 121.9 79.5 615.2 10.1 12.4 410.1 3.1 238.0 73. 6 28.3 8.5 18.1 16.8 19.8 3.9 1 7 of these agreements combined straight seniority in recall for certain occu pational groups or departments with qualified seniority for others; 4 used straight seniority if the employee was recalled to his regular job classification and qualified seniority if recalled to a new job classification; the remaining agreement used straight seniority for employees with 7 years’ service and qualified seniority for those with less service. 786 642 55 2 27 3,136.5 2,517.2 232.9 4.7 46.1 8 10 32 17.1 17. 9 80. 9 40 17 9 6 23 90 40 100 56 85 20 22 144 8 11 47 34 6 22 5 8 1 2 97. 6 36.3 19.5 15.1 62.4 583.5 114. 7 232.7 286.7 572.8 49.4 46.9 619. 2 19.4 24.4 375.3 70. 5 8. 6 57.4 44.3 14.4 1.2 3.8 12 10 296.1 27.6 1 1.0 1 3.1 2 1 1 2 1 1 4.7 1.5 3.5 3.3 9.4 1.2 2 2 268.5 268.5 43 28 2 1 155.0 93.9 4.8 4.5 2 5. 5 1 4 1 1 1 2 10 1 1 1 15 1.8 4.9 3.2 9.5 1.1 2.7 50.4 2.1 2.4 1.0 61.0 1 1 6 3 4 2.8 3.0 11.9 13.8 29.5 133 61 9 1 2 1 3 1 5 4 3 4 4 1 3 2 6 6 2 2 1 1 72 2 17 10 11 1 17 2 9 3 562.5 229.4 15.8 2.5 5.6 1.0 7.6 1.4 10.0 11.5 6.1 23.4 75.0 1.4 18.6 3.0 24.8 9.0 4.1 5.9 1.7 1.2 333.2 4.0 71.7 86.5 62.4 1.5 50.3 12.3 40.0 4.5 * Excludes railroads and airlines. N o t e .— B ecause o f ro u n d in g , sum s of in d iv id u a l ite m s do n o t n e ce ssa rily e q u a l to ta ls. 31 than 60 percent o f bo th la y o ff and recall provisions in m anu facturing agreem ents. In nonm anufac turing, the proportion was 47 percent in recall and 37 percen t in la yo ff. R e c a ll based on qu alified sen io rity was p rovid ed in o ver 70 percent o f the agreem ents in the stone, clay, and glass; p rim a ry m etals; and m ach in ery (excep t electrical) indus tries. O f the 786 agreem ents p ro vid in g fo r qualified sen io rity in recall, len gth o f service was the p ri m a ry fa cto r in 56 percent and a secondary fa cto r in 30 percent o f the agreem ents, as in dicated in the fo llo w in g tabu lation: Agreements T o ta l_____________________________ Seniority governs, provided senior em ployee is com petent to do available w ork_______________ Seniority secondary, i. e., governs only if ability equal to com peting em ployee_____________ Consideration given seniority not clear_________________________ Consideration given seniority varies by length of service or type of occupation________________ Workers (thousands) 786 3, 136. 5 443 1, 656. 9 237 1, 023. 3 98 425. 1 8 31. 2 W h ere sen iority was the p rim a ry factor, experience on sim ilar or related w ork, either w ith the em p lo yer or w ith oth er firm s, was o ften accepted as dem onstration o f a b ility. In som e instances, the em ployee was to be g iv en a short tria l period to p ro ve his a b ility. U n d er clauses w here sen iority was secondary, the first test was th a t o f a b ility or fitness. A s betw een tw o com petin g em ployees, if a b ility was equal or r e la tiv e ly equal, len gth o f service was the determ in ing factor. S tra igh t sen iority go vern ed the order o f recall in 373 agreem ents, accounting fo r 28 percent o f m an u facturing and 24 percent o f n onm anufactur in g agreem ents, in contrast to 37 percent and 62 percent, resp ectively, in la yo ff. In each industry^ except lum ber, the num ber o f agreem ents p ro v id in g fo r straigh t sen iority in recall was lo w er than in la y o ff; the difference was m ost m arked in the com m unications industry, w ith 15 percen t p ro vid in g fo r straight sen iority in recall and 90 per cen t in la yo ff. A com bination o f b oth straight and qualified sen io rity was applied in recall under the term s o f 12 agreem ents. T h e factors determ in ing the ty p e 22 For a discussion of seniority units, see tables 18,19, and 20 (pp. 25-26). o f sen iority applicable w ere the occupational groups or departm ents in seven in stan ces; and the em p loy ee’s len gth o f service in another. In fou r such agreem ents, including the n ational anthracite and bitum inous coal contracts, straigh t sen iority govern ed recall to the em p loy ee’s fo rm er jo b , and qu alified sen iority go vern ed recall to a new jo b classification. Relation Between Layoff and Recall Procedures. In 964 agreem ents, coverin g 68 percen t o f the w orkers under la y o ff procedures, the order o f re call was determ ined b y the same m eth od a p p li cable to la yo ff, i. e., ty p e o f seniority, w eigh t given to a b ility, skill, or oth er factors, and com position o f the sen iority unit (ta b le 25) .2 Such procedures 2 w ou ld n orm a lly result in recall in inverse order o f la yo ff, i f production w ere resumed in the same order as it was curtailed. In a num ber o f these agreem ents, w orkers w ere given a w ider jo b area fo r reem ploym en t b y a proviso gran tin g preference in rehire to la id -off em ployees before n ew w orkers could be hired. Thus, em ployees w ith recall rights in a u nit w here operations had n ot y e t resumed w ou ld h ave preference in em ploym en t in oth er units o f the com pan y w hich were expanding. In another group o f 133 agreem ents, the recall procedure was n ot explicit. H o w e ver, it is probable th a t the intent, in m a n y o f these agree ments, was to fo llo w the same principles in recall as in la yo ff. T h is group also included 6 m aster agreem ents w hich p rovid ed fo r n egotiation o f la y o ff and recall provisions a t the local level. In the rem aining 250 agreem ents, recall p ro cedure differed from th a t used in la yo ff. T h e m a jo r ty p e o f difference, found in 140 agreem ents, was in the use o f qualified sen iority fo r recall as against straigh t sen iority fo r la yo ff. In general, such procedure m odifications are designed to fa cilita te recall o f workers to jobs th a t th e y can perform , w ith o u t the cost o f extensive retraining, i f their regu lar w ork is n ot available. Som e o f these clauses w ere found in agreem ents w hich con tained specific provision fo r broadening the sen iority unit or gran ted la id -off em ployees p refer ence in reem p loym en t o ver n ew hires in other units. I t is probable th a t w here clauses sp ecify in g qu alified sen iority occurred in the absence o f provisions fo r broadening the sen iority unit, th ey w ere designed to im p lem en t in form al arrange m ents to this effect. In a re la tiv e ly sm all propor- 32 tion o f the 140 agreem ents, the em p loy ee’s p h ysi cal fitness a t the tim e o f recall w as the o n ly fa cto r q u a lify in g len gth o f service. U su a lly such clauses m erely requ ired th a t the em ployee be p h ysically fit or p h ysically able to do the jo b . Less fre qu en tly, the agreem ent specified th a t the em ployee w as requ ired to pass a ph ysical exam ination before reem ploym en t. O n ly 33 agreem ents w hich p rovid ed fo r qu alified sen iority in la y o ff based recall on straight sen iority. R ec a ll provisions in 43 agreem ents, con trary to the procedure fo r la yo ff, did n ot specify sen iority as a factor, bu t p rotected la id -o ff em ployees in other w ays, eith er b y banning n ew hires u ntil all la id -o ff em ployees w ere recalled, or b y p ro vid in g fo r p refer ence in reem p lo ym en t o v e r new workers. O th er areas o f difference in la y o ff and recall procedures, fou nd in 34 agreem ents, in v o lv e d (1) the w eigh t giv en len gth o f service, w hich was secondary to a b ility in la y o ff b u t p rim a ry in recall; (2) the sen iority unit applicable, w hich w as w id er fo r recall than la y o ff; or (3) the use o f straight sen iority fo r some groups and qu alified fo r others T 25 .— Relation between layoff and recall procedures in m ajor collective bargaining agreements , 1954-55 able Layoff and recall procedures Agree Workers ments (thou sands) Total with both layoff and recall provisions___________ 1,347 Total with straight seniority in layoff_________________ 579 Recall procedure: Same as in layoff—straight seniority______________ 336 Differs from layoff procedure.......................................... 169 Qualified seniority_____________________ ___ 140 Straight seniority for some groups; qualified for others_________________________________ _ 5 Seniority not a factor, but preference given in rehire_______________ ______ _ __ _ 24 Not explicit___ ___ __ __ __ 74 Total with qualified seniority in layoff................... ........... 749 Recall procedure: Same as in layoff—qualified seniority_____________ 621 Differs from layoff procedure____________________ 76 Qualified seniority, but procedure differs 1_____ 24 Straight seniority____________________________ 33 Seniority not a factor, but preference given in rehire____________________________________ 19 Not explicit--............................................... ..................... 52 Total with straight seniority for some groups and quali fied seniority for others in layoff_______ ____________ 13 Recall procedure: Same as in layoff—combination of straight and qualified seniority____________________ _____ ___ 7 5 Differs from layoff procedure_____________________ 4 Straight seniority____ _____ 1 Qualified seniority_______________ _ __ -_ __ 1 Not explicit______ _____ _______________ _______ Total with type of seniority in layoff and recall not specified (master agreements)............................................ 6 5,815.1 2,974.1 1, 587.5 1,024.1 635.6 280.3 108. 2 362.5 2, 737. 5 2,329.3 278.9 160.6 71.5 46.8 129.3 43.6 25.4 7.3 6. 0 1.3 10.9 59.9 1 Most of these clauses differed in that (1) in layoff the weight given length of service was secondary to ability, but in recall it was the major factor if the employee was capable of doing the work; or (2) the seniority unit applicable in layoff was narrower than in recall. N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. T 26 .— Preference to laid-off employees in rehiring , provided by m ajor collective bargaining agreements , 1954-55 able Types of preference given laid-off employees in rehire Agree Workers ment (thou sands) Total with layoff provisions.................................................. 1,347 With provisions for preference in rehire....... ....................... 440 No new hires until laid-off employees recalled______ 264 Preference in rehire over new employees___________ 142 Some preference in rehire in other plants of com pany i_____________________ ____ ______ _______ 11 Other2........................................................................... 23 5,815.1 1,782.5 783.4 521.1 416.4 61.6 1 4 agreements limited preference to employment in new plants only and in 2 instances, preference was applicable only during the first 6 months of operation of the new plant. The remaining 7 agreements granted preference in other plants of the company, but in 3 instances, this was limited to employ ees laid off because of plant closing. 2 Includes agreements which banned new hires for certain departments only, or where employees with a specified amount of seniority were involved; banned new hires “insofar as practical,” or waived the ban where special skill or training was required for new work; or permitted new hires in emergencies until laid-off employees returned to work. Also includes agree ments which granted preference to laid-off employees if work of a different nature developed; or granted preference to employees who had lost their seniority combined with a ban on new hires where seniority employees were involved. N o t e .— Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. in eith er la y o ff or recall, w here eith er straight or qualified sen iority w as specified in the reverse situation. Preference in Reemployment. In addition to the 43 agreem ents w hich did n ot specify sen iority as a factor, bu t gran ted preference in reem ploym en t, 397 agreem ents w ith p rovision fo r sen iority in recall ga ve fu rth er p rotection to la id -o ff w orkers b y requ iring preference in reem p loym en t (ta b le 26). A s stated earlier, this procedure m a y p ro vid e the la id -off em ployee a w id er area o f jo b o p p o rtu n ity fo r recall than was applicable in la yo ff. T h ree-fifth s o f the 440 preference clauses banned n ew hires u ntil la id -o ff em ployees w ere recalled. T h e bu lk o f the rem ainin g clauses p ro vid ed fo r preference o v e r new w orkers in rehire. V a ria tion s in a lim ited num ber o f clauses included preference to em ployees w ho had lost their sen iority com bined w ith a ban on n ew hires w here sen iority em ployees w ere still la id o ff; ban on new hires fo r certain departm ents only, or w here em ployees w ith a specified am ount o f sen iority w ere in vo lv ed , or “ insofar as p ra ctica l” ; or preference to la id -o ff em ployees if w ork o f a d ifferen t nature d evelop ed. A few agreem ents w a ived the ban on n ew hires in em ergency situations; persons so em p loyed w ould, h ow ever, h ave tem p orary status pen din g the recall o f la id -o ff workers. E xtension o f the area o f reem p loym en t p refer ence to oth er plants o f the same com pan y was 33 provided for in 11 agreements. In 4, preference was limited to new plants only; and in 2 of these, in the automotive industry, preference was ap plicable only during the first 6 months of opera tion.2 In 3 agreements, preference was limited to 3 employees laid off because of plant closing. Prefer ence in employment in other plants was not limited in the remaining 4 agreements. Retention of Seniority. The employee's retention of his seniority status during extended layoffs is a generally accepted practice. Provisions covering seniority retention were found in 975 agreements, covering 75 percent of the workers under agree ments with layoff clauses (table 27). N early all of these agreements specified a maximum period of retention; only 49 provided that seniority continue indefinitely during layoffs. Sometimes management and unions hold di vergent views on the length of time that seniority should be retained. Unions tend to argue that a short retention period unjustly penalizes the laidoff worker by forfeiture of the rights he has earned by his years of service. Since seniority is a central factor in determining not only eligibility for recall, but also promotions, vacation benefits, pension eligibility, and other benefits during reemploy ment, the period of retention is of considerable concern to workers in a layoff situation. Prom a management viewpoint, the retention of employees on a recall list provides a pool of experienced work ers to draw on when needed; high seniority em ployees, even though employed elsewhere, often prefer to return to their jobs when recalled in order to preserve the benefits acquired through length of service. However, some employers object to long-term retention on the grounds that laid-off employees working in other occupations for an extended period m ay have lost their skill and speed. Another objection is that, after lengthy layoffs, there is a stronger possibility of the employee's rejection of the job offer, with consequent delay before new employees could be hired. 33 The Executive Board of the United Automobile Workers on September 20, 1956, instructed “all regional directors and department directors to ap proach employers within their jurisdictions with a view to negotiating supplemental agreements which will include: “ (a) New provisions on the broadening and strengthening of existing contract provisions, requiring corporations, when hiring in any plant, to give preference in order of seniority to workers laid off from their other plants; and “ (b) Provisions to require employers, when hiring, to give preference to laid-off workers in the same area and industry, taking into consideration the seniority of such workers with their former employers.” A uniform period of seniority retention appli cable to all employees regardless of differences in length of service was provided b y more than half of the agreements with retention clauses. Retention periods of from 1 to 2 years, inclusive, were specified in 460 agreements, covering nearly half of the workers under agreements with reten tion clauses. One-year periods were most pre dominant, but agreements providing 2-year periods covered nearly twice as many workers. Seniority was retained for less than 1 year in only 67 agree ments, and for more than 2 years in 83. The period of retention was related to the em ployee's length of service under 283 agreements. In 126, the period was equal to the employee's length of service. However, this was limited to a maximum number of years, varying from 1 to 7 in 72 agreements, and to 3 years in addition to length of service in 1 agreement. Relatively short-service employees were granted additional protection in 20 of the 126 agreements by providT 27.—Seniority retention period for laid-off em ployees under m ajor collective bargaining agreem ents, 1954-55 able Period of seniority retentions Agree Workers ments (thou sands) Total with layoff provisions. ............. .................................. 1,347 No reference to retention of seniority after layoff____ 372 With provisions for retention of seniority after layoff. 975 Period of retention: Less than 1 year........................................................... . 67 1 year___________________________________ ______ 197 More than 1, but less than 2 years____ _____ ______ 102 2 years______ ____ _____________________________ 161 More than 2 years... ___________________________ 83 Equal to employee’s length of service_____________ 33 Equal to employee’s length of service up to a maxi mum number of years L .._____ _______________ 73 Related in some other ratio to employee’s length of service_____________ ________________________ 157 For specified period; then continued for additional 21 period, provided employee requests extension____ Equal to length of service or specified period, which ever is greater 2____ __________ ____ ___________ 20 Continues indefinitely___ _____________________ _ 18 Continues indefinitely, provided employee takes prescribed action 3_____________________________ 31 Other *___________________________ _____ _____ ____ 12 5,815.1 1, 469. 2 4,345. 9 182.8 716.8 294.2 1,145.3 261.6 365.8 356.1 435.5 110.1 242.1 76.7 108.8 50.1 » Maximum periods specified were: 5 years in 25 agreements, 3 years in 12, 2 years in 16,1 year in 13, and from 1J$ to 7 years in 6 agreements. The re maining agreement provided for retention equal to length of service, plus 3 additional years. a Seniority was retained for a minimum period of 1 year under 13 of these agreements; for minimum periods of 2, or 3 years in the remaining 7. 3 In practically all instances, the actions prescribed consisted of periodic notification by the employee of his desire to remain on the recall list—most frequently at semiannual or annual intervals. * Includes agreements with no limitation on duration of seniority retention for skilled classifications, or for employees with a specified amount of service (5 and 15 years); agreements with a longer retention period for certain skilled classifications; or a shorter period if the employee refused work other than in his regular occupation. Under 1 agreement, the provision was not applicable if 20 percent of the employees were laid off for over a year; one prohibited loss of seniority due to layoff during the 5-year term of the agreement; another agreement limited retention of seniority beyond the termination date of the agreement or any renewal or amendment. N o t e .— Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily equal totals. 34 ing for retention of seniority for minimum periods of 1 to 3 years if these were greater than the employee’s length of service. Retention for a period equal to the employee’s length of service was not limited in the remaining 33 agreements in this group. In 157 of the 283 agreements, the period of retention was related to length of service in some other ratio, such as one-half the length of service; 1 month for each year of service; or periods of 2 years for less than 2 years’ service and 5 years for 2 years or more. Some of the agreements in this group also set an upper limit on the length of time that seniority could be retained b y a laid-off worker. Another group of 21 agreements specified an initial period of retention, after which seniority could be further retained if the employee took prescribed action— usually notification at stated intervals of his desire to remain on the recall list. Other variations, found in 12 agreements, in cluded provisions with no limitation on duration of seniority retention for skilled classifications, or for employees with a specified amount of service; provisions for a longer retention period for certain skilled classifications; or for a shorter period if the employee refused work other than his regular occupation. Th e degree of freedom accorded workers on layoff to accept or reject proffered work varied. In some agreements, rejection of proffered work did not affect the employee’s recall status; in others, such action limited his recall rights to his former occupation or job, limited the period dur ing which his seniority was retained, or resulted in loss of seniority rights. Similar penalties were invoked under some agreements if the employee failed to report for work or to reply to the recall notice within a specified time. Exceptions were sometimes permitted if the employee could not report because of illness or for other valid reasons. The method of recalling workers was specified in a number of agreements. Such provisions re quired that notice be given b y mail, registered mail, telegram, telephone, or some other specified device. Notification to the union was sometimes required at the time recall notices were sent out. Other agreements left the method of recall to the employer’s discretion. N o attempt was made in this study to determine the prevalence of these phases of recall provisions. Work-Sharing Layo ff and recall procedures based on seniority favor workers in proportion to their length of service. I f layoffs materialize, workers with relatively low seniority m ay expect to be laid off early and recalled late; the high seniority workers m ay expect the reverse or that they might not be affected at all. In contrast, a work-sharing procedure implies an equal division of available work among qualified employees, regardless of differences in length of service. Slackening of work would thus affect all employees in the sharing unit in about the same way. On the whole, the principle of work-sharing appears to be attractive to m any companies and unions up to a certain point. F or example, management might favor a reduction of scheduled weekly hours for all employees, prior to resorting to layoffs, so as to keep intact the work force and individual work groups, but would not want to carry this procedure beyond the point where plant efficiency is impaired. Unions, on the other hand, might favor the principle of equal treatment for all union members in the establishment, but not to the point where no one earns a living wage. The availability of unemployment compensation and the expansion of the economy over the past two decades have undoubtedly had a profound influence on current attitudes toward work-shar ing, tending to restrict its use. Supplementary unemployment benefit plans m ay also, in time, modify some procedures. T w o basic types of work-sharing appear in agreements: (1) temporary reduction of scheduled weekly hours for all workers in a plant or unit in order to forestall and minimize layoffs, and (2) equal division of work to take the place of layoffs. Approxim ately 20 percent of the 1,743 m ajor agreements studied required the employer to reduce hours before regular employees were laid off.2 4 Only 4 percent provided for work-sharing in lieu of layoff, either for as long as work is available or layoff can reasonably be avoided. The following discussion deals with this 4 percent of the agreements which apply the principle of equal division of work. Seventy-four m ately 525,000 agreements, workers, fc* See tables 5 and 6 (pp. 8-9). covering provided approxi for WOrk- 35 sharing in lieu of layoff. Such arrangements were scattered through 10 industries, nearly all m anu facturing.2 However, 47 of the 74 agreements 5 were in apparel manufacturing, accounting for all but 5 of the m ajor agreements in that industry group. The food, textile, printing, and leather industries accounted for 18 of the remaining 27 agreements. Alm ost all of the work-sharing plans, covering 98 percent of the workers under such arrange ments, were in agreements negotiated b y multi employer groups.2 Bargaining through employer 6 associations is the general practice in the apparel industry, and is fairly common in most of the other industries with work-sharing plans. Arrangements for equal division of work involve a determination of who will share the work and the area within which work-sharing will take place. The work-sharing unit m ay vary according to type of establishment and the complexities of the processes involved. Thus the unit m ay include all or only portions of the labor force covered b y the agreement. I f skills are not readily interchangeable, work-sharing m ay be done on an occupational or craft basis, rather than b y department or plant. Departm ental units m ay be specified if skills are interchangeable within departments or the nature of the business is such that curtailment of production does not affect all departments in the plant. Fifty-four of the 74 work-sharing agreements specified the work-sharing unit. In almost half of these, work was to be shared on the basis of occupation, craft, or classification; in slightly more than a fourth, b y plant; and in the re maining agreements, by department.2 7 In order to increase the work opportunities for regular employees, layoffs of temporary, probational, or short-service employees m ay be made before work-sharing begins.2 However, 61 of the 8 74 agreements provided for equal division of work among all employees in the plant or work-sharing unit. I t is likely that, in actual practice, w ork sharing was limited to regular employees. The remaining 13 agreements specifically provided for sharing work among regular employees. T em porary, probational, “ peak force,” and, in 2 instances, employees with less than 6 months’ service were to be laid off. Further consideration was given length of service in 2 of these agree ments : One, in the apparel industry, provided for equal division of work as far as practical among employees who had worked for the employer for 2 consecutive seasons; the other provided for preference in work-sharing, if possible, to employees with the longest service. A few agreements, also in the apparel industry, excluded certain occupa tions (e. g., workers on sample garments) from the work-sharing plan. Such workers were subject to layoff and recall b y seniority. 2» See table 1 (p. 2). 26 See table 2 (p. 3). 27 In the apparel industry, it should be noted, a department or plant unit may roughly coincide with what might be called an occupational or classifica tion unit in a more diversified industry or one comprising larger establish ments. 28 See tables 3 and 4 for other devices for increasing work opportunities for regular employees (pp. 4-6). The small number of work-sharing arrange ments in major agreements and the concentration of such arrangements in apparel industries would seem to undermine any generalization, based on agreement analysis, relating the practice of work-sharing to the relatively high prevalence of provisions regulating subcontracting, overtime, shift operations, and employment practices, as shown on pages 3-9. In other words, both aspects may be independent characteristics of labor-management relationships in the apparel industries. U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFIC E: 1957