Bittersweet Partnerships

ack when the name of the game was making government function better, the Clinton Administration's reinvention vision included a potentially daring innovation called labor-management partnerships. Two years into their still tentative existence, partnerships may become a casualty of agencies' struggle to survive. On the other hand, partnerships could bring formerly warring parties in the executive branch together to confront a far less generous vision of government entertained by the powers on Capitol Hill.

Partnerships evolved as a remedy for a federal labor relations process covering 1.3 million employees that was expensive, adversarial and mutually unsatisfying, according to the National Performance Review. The program uses a collaborative problem-solving approach to workplace issues. The idea originated from the private sector's successful reconfiguration to squeeze out foreign competition with a highly motivated and trained workforce. President Clinton's 1993 Executive Order 12871 directed agencies to build labor-management partnerships by encouraging union and management representatives to participate in councils and committees as full partners. Partnership council representatives negotiate over a wider range of issues, such as numbers, types and grades of employees assigned to an organization.

A New Understanding

"Labor-management partnerships have opened up positive lines of communication and new ways of solving problems in a way never experienced in the federal sector," says Colleen Woodard, who recently retired as director of human resources at the Commerce Department's Patent and Trademark Office. "Even with all the problems partnership proponents are encountering, the benefits are still very visible."

A survey of more than half of the labor-relations specialists in major Washington-area federal agencies shows they are highly involved in launching partnerships. The community of such specialists, who are typically at about the GS-14 rank, is relatively small; 29 people responded to the survey. All reported they interact regularly with union officials, and 86 percent said they were personally involved in implementing the executive order. Almost 90 percent said their agencies were developing partnerships, and 68 percent credit management with providing assistance in getting partnership councils started. This is encouraging, considering that 58 percent also said management rights are aggressively defended at their agencies.

Nearly 90 percent of respondents to the survey said that union representatives are involved in a broader range of activities than they were prior to partnership efforts. More than 50 percent reported that partnership councils are addressing important issues at their agencies. And negotiations are covering a wider variety of issues, according to 64 percent of respondents. The labor relations professionals find their agencies particularly responsive to the requirement that they provide partnership training to appropriate employees, including union representatives.

Mixed Reviews

Most respondents generally favored partnerships. And more than half felt management welcomed partnership arrangements. But the respondents' views of the changes brought by the new approach were more mixed.

More than 60 percent of respondents said that unions and management had not worked as a team in the traditional labor-relations environment. But 58 percent said they felt comfortable with the traditional relationships.

Nearly 70 percent of those surveyed said they did not believe the old labor-management paradigm created more friction between labor and management than under partnerships. But respondents split almost 50-50 on the question of whether their agencies' cultures did or did not support cooperative relationships prior to partnerships.

More than 80 percent of respondents said they had not experienced a decrease in third-party litigation since partnerships were established. But since more than 60 percent of respondents said their agencies are now using some form of alternative dispute resolution, third-party litigation may slowly decrease. With more than 40 percent of respondents reporting that disputes are being resolved more quickly and informally, it behooves agencies not to ignore the potential benefits of using alternative dispute resolution techniques.

Although only 34 percent of respondents agree that working relationships are more congenial under partnerships, a whopping 82 percent said that partnerships have not had a negative effect on union-management relationships. In fact, more than 80 percent report labor-management representatives are committed to improving relationships.

In some respects, partnerships appear to be quite successful, with 72 percent of respondents saying their agency's culture now supports positive relationships, and 72 percent asserting that management is more receptive to employees' ideas. But at the same time, more than 86 percent of respondents do not believe unions trust management to share information-a key indicator of an open and cooperative relationship.

While fully 93 percent of respondents believe that cooperative relationships are more productive, a smaller percentage-82 percent-are optimistic about the future of partnerships in their own agencies.

Cultural Change

Respondents generally gave high marks to their agencies' partnership efforts, with some concern expressed over the lack of consequences for agencies who ignore the executive order. Improvement of communication between management and unions was cited as a major benefit, especially informal, interest-based discussions. Emphasis on early communication prior to making decisions also is seen as a highly positive effect of partnerships.

Overall, relationships are perceived as improving, with the degree of improvement usually dependent upon the nature of relationships prior to partnerships. Labor relations professionals were unanimous in their perception that partnerships will have a positive effect on the quantity, quality and time involved in collective bargaining and third-party litigation.

When asked in follow-up interviews whether they would like to see partnerships mandated by statute, some respondents cited "lack of enforceability" as a problem. That, they said, might lead some agencies simply not to implement partnerships. Others said partnerships are ingrained behavioral styles that cannot be legislated.

Under the executive order, agencies are required to negotiate over permissive areas of bargaining. Most respondents reserved judgment on that requirement due to lack of personal experience. Some predicted relationships would deteriorate if unions attempt to negotiate issues with far-reaching consequences. Management's reluctance to release information to unions, and the underlying premise that management still shoulders the responsibility for a mission's success or failure, contribute to respondents' concerns.

Employees were overwhelmingly positive about the success of partnerships over an extended period. However, respondents acknowledged that adopting partnerships is a deep cultural change for many agencies-one that may progress slowly depending on the degree of friction, past and present, between parties. Successful partnerships, employees said, become entrenched more effectively and quickly depending on the commitment and sincerity of the parties working together.

Saving Time and Money

Although atmospheric conditions in Washington may not seem conducive to anything that smacks of empowering bureaucrats, especially those represented by labor organizations, the national picture may be more favorable. At the National Partnership Council's October 1995 meeting, the Secretary of Labor's Task Force on Excellence in State and Local Government gave an advance briefing on its study of partnerships. The task force found improvements in service, costs, quality of work life and labor-management relations. The average time to settle disputes in some jurisdictions was reduced from two years to one month, while grievances fell between 40 percent and 100 percent. Other improvements included fairer, more effective disciplinary options; simpler, more flexible negotiated agreements; and increased use of gainsharing. Top leadership commitment was identified as the key ingredient for the success of any partnership arrangement.

The long history of adversarial or imbalanced labor-management relationships suggests steps be taken to build bridges between the two. By jointly assessing and correcting problems, unions and management can break down the barriers unique to each agency's culture. For example, alternative dispute resolution can be used informally in the most basic interactions between organizational players before an issue evolves into a dispute.

Training should be used to integrate partnership concepts into routine exchanges between unions and management and to expand communications. Sharing information before policy decisions are made should be encouraged, with labor talks focused on psychological and cultural barriers hindering openness. In addition, agencies and unions should fully participate in the ongoing exploration of controversial labor-management issues, such as mandating partnerships and expanded bargaining.