Quarantining Verizon's Union Workers

For the moment, let's forget the important recent debate over whether easing the joining of labor unions is a net good or a net bad for both American workers and American business. Let's instead look at how a Fortune 50 like Verizon might attempt to rid itself of an unwelcomed business reality: many of its workers currently belong to a union, either the Communication Workers of America or the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. Verizon is a sophisticated, modern telecom behemoth. It isn't likely to resort to blunt-instrument union-avoidance techniques like summarily firing workers who are pro-collective representation.

So what's Verizon to do? Verizon Inc. CEO Ivan Seidenberg is attempting to restructure the telecommunications industry, or at least where Verizon fits into that industry. Verizon's approach to the future is to grow the business while lessening the impact of unionization. How? By quarantining already the unionized technicians, sales people, and service reps of core Verizon from the rest of the growing employee population by building cordon sanitaires around their unit. The end result: unionized Verizon lacks the density that ideas need to spread effectively.

As it stands now, unionization at core Verizon is concentrated to workers who handle POTS -- that's Plain Old Telephone Service. The Seidenberg approach is to not let that high rate of unionization in core Verizon infect the rest of the company as it grows or acquires new units. Verizon has long tried to keep the unions out of Verizon Wireless. Now it's attempting to do the same with other units as they are added to the amalgamation. Case in point is Verizon Business, aka VZB. VZB used to be part of MCI until last year or so, and is now operated as a separate, non-unionized business unit under the umbrella of Verizon Inc. Verizon is moving more and more services and clients and accounts to VZB -- so rather than getting rid of existing union jobs exactly, they're just growing the areas where non-union jobs currently thrive.

As part of my work with the AFL-CIO I've been meeting with the CWA, who along with the IBEW are running a joint campaign to organize about 400 VZB techs in the northeast. About 150 are right here in New York City. The VZB techs have signed cards saying that they want to join the union. Those cards were verified by John Kerry, Stephen Lynch, John Tierney, and others (watch the video). Verizon won't recognize them. Senators Clinton, Kerry, Edwards, and Schumer, and Reps. Slaughter, Weiner, and Nadler and others have pushed the company to recognize the employees' choice. Of course, were the Employee Free Choice Act to pass the Senate and become law, that card check would be enough to form a union here.

A big part of this picture is that Verizon is aiming to compete with the cable companies, particularly via FiOS, Verizon's fiber-optic cable service to the home. FiOS means super-speedy broadband Internet. (Like up to 50 Mbps under ideal conditions. At that speed I could fully download the next movie in my Netflix queue, which happens right at the minute to be "Harlan County, USA," in about 5 minutes.)

But FiOS also means that Verizon can compete with the cable cos in delivering custom digital television content. Not to draw too much into this discussion, but the buildout of resource-intense last 100-yards technologies like FiOS is one of the things that telecoms cite when they argue against net neutrality. Neutrality (they argue) threatens their ability to control their own revenue streams, and the buildout of FiOS is 'spensive, something like $18 billion.

So Verizon wants to compete with the cable folks. But whereas the rate of unionization in the phone-line-in-the-ground business is around 90%, it's at just about 4% in the cable industry. By comparison, it's at something like 35% in the wireless industry, where Verizon also competes. But even in wireless there are other models. Cingular (now AT&T Wireless) has adopted a stance of neutrality when its workers want to join a union, and something more than half of its workers are unionized. Verizon's different approach means that Verizon Wireless and Verizon wireline are kept deliberately separate, including distinct websites at verizon.com and verizonwireless.com. Verizon customer service reps for the wireless service can't answer a question about wireline services. Instead, they'll transfer you to a unionized rep. Quarantined, see?

As I learn about labor, it seems to me that the whole field of union-avoidance is self-educating, in a way. Best practices get studied and copied. If Verizon is successful in quarantining its union workers as it diversifies and grows, then I'm thinking we'll see these techniques learned from and replicated by other employers in the same boat.



Display:


Re: Quarantining Verizon's Union Workers (none / 0)

The Communications Workers of America is at fault for this situation, since they refuse to fight or cooperate with the progressive movement against the people screwing them.  This is Art Brodsky's recount of a hearing in Maryland, where CWA sucked up to Verizon against their own interests.

Once upon a time, CWA was an independent, strong voice for consumer interests. That era ended in 1995 during the deliberations over the Telecom Act. The union at that point became, from the public policy standpoint, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bell companies, a role they maintain to this day. In their Maryland testimony, Ron Collins, administrative assistant to the vice president of CWA District 2, put it right out there. The union opposed the bill because it would put company investment at risk, and thus put jobs at risk. He was also careful to note what a wonderful employer Verizon was because it provides health care to its workers. According to CWA's written statement: "Bills such as HB 1069 would cause the loss of good jobs with health care and other benefits in the state of Maryland."

Michael Dean, the president of the Maryland CWA state council, piled on by saying that Verizon provides "good paying jobs" laying fiber and he, too, didn't want to put those jobs at risk. (Of course, CWA's witnesses somehow didn't get around to testifying that they endorsed the part of the bill calling for reporting of broadband deployment.)

CWA is happy to lie about net neutrality and will do anything to please its corporate employers.  And of course, Verizon's Seidenberg turns around and stabs them in the back.  I really think they ought to reconsider their stance here.

I will also point out that Verizon's legacy of horrible service (and no, FIOS does not always get you 50M, it sometimes gets you as little as 5), which could be blamed on management, is in fact turning back against the union.  

I bristle at self-inflicted wounds by the progressive movement and labor.  And this is one of them.


by Matt Stoller on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 09:36:26 PM EST

Re: Quarantining Verizon's Union Workers (none / 0)

Interesting Matt, and I don't know enough about CWA yet to figure out where they are on policy grounds. But for what it's worth, note the strongly worded response to Art's post by one Laura Unger, this gist of which is "you underestimate the CWA and you insult its members." But whatever, there's something important going on here beyond what one thinks of this national union or that one, or whether FiOS gets you 5 Mbps or 50. At the end of the day, the 400 VZB techs in the northeast have asked for a union and not gotten one. As Verizon grows, union density drops. I for one think it's useful to suss out why that's the case.
by Nancy Scola on Sat Apr 07, 2007 at 09:20:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Quarantining Verizon's Union Workers (none / 0)

Right, and the reason it's happening is because CWA has allied itself with the people screwing them over instead of the progressive movement.

I do know what CWA is doing on policy grounds.  It's tragic.


by Matt Stoller on Sat Apr 07, 2007 at 11:56:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Quarantining Verizon's Union Workers (none / 0)

Suggestions? How can the CWA ally themselves with the progressive movement and not Verizon? Let's find solutions instead of pointing fingers. I am a member of the cwa and employee of verizon. I don't see what you speak of from our local. But i have been urging our unit president to check out this and other sites. Help show me and them the way.


by Erik on Sat Apr 07, 2007 at 05:50:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

the difference is obvious (none / 0)

for the consumer.  I had a problem recently and talked to verizon support.  The phone people are Americans, highly knowledgable, and helpful.  the DSL people are in another country, reading a script, and totally useless.  


New Jersey politics and news
by John DE on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 10:40:04 PM EST

Very informative post (none / 0)

It's great to see union coverage that digs into the details on why increasing union membership is so difficult.

One small question on the post. I think you may have a typo... did you mean BILLION instead of MILLION?

Neutrality (they argue) threatens their ability to control their own revenue streams, and the buildout of FiOS is 'spensive, something like $18 million.


Visit West Virginia Blue
by WVaBlue on Sat Apr 07, 2007 at 10:16:57 AM EST

You're absolutely right (3.00 / 1)

It's 18 billion, with a b. I'll change it now.
by Nancy Scola on Sat Apr 07, 2007 at 10:40:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Quarantining Verizon's Union Workers (none / 0)

I agree with, and sympathize with, the union view here, but it makes me nuts when you overstate your case. Verizon and Verizon Wireless are two separate corporate entities because they have different ownership, not solely to quarantine a union. Vodafone owns 45% of Verizon Wireless.

That said, there is no excuse for Verizon refusing to recognized a legitimate request for a union.


by CWedit on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 02:35:31 PM EST

Re: Quarantining Verizon's Union Workers (none / 0)

The card authorization for union representation is not the law.  Just a wish of the unions at this point.  What does the union offer that a good employer doesn't?  2 or 3 percent pay raises.  I get that on my own without paying dues.  Is the union offering to tie my total compensation package to Ivan's or to the union president's?  I look at the auto industry and see so much going to people who are no longer producing for the company.  I would like to see some of those retirees go back to the plant and tell the current employees they need to work longer and more productively so the company get give the retiree more.  But then again I also think Social Security is like going to you neighbor's house the 1st of the month and making them give you money.  It's not the government give the money its your neighbor.  


by t on Tue Apr 10, 2007 at 11:48:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.