Please imagine that you are a foreman in an agribusiness firm. The farm that you work for is about to make its annual performance evaluations. Throughout the year, your performance on certain tasks has been documented and will be used as a part of your performance record. You hope to get a big promotion this year to Field Operation Supervisor as a new position has opened up, and it comes with a substantial pay increase and better benefits. The owners make promotion decisions largely on the basis of the farm manager's recommendations and reports.
Two weeks before the evaluation, one of the two farm managers assigns you and the other three foremen special projects or tasks that must be completed during that time period. You get the project from the farm manager and find it to be extremely difficult. You work every afternoon and evening on the project and have to cancel several important commitments to work on it. When the project deadline arrives, you find that you are the only employee who has been unable to complete his/her task. In fact, you find out that the other foremen were given much simpler jobs and were able to finish their tasks in just a few days. You are left wondering just how much of an affect this might have on your promotional chances.
This is not an uncommon situation and there may be some big problems down the road for both the employee and the farm. Negative developments may result such as a poor work attitude, low commitment, absenteeism, workplace violence, susceptibility to unionization, occupational safety concerns, an increase in workers' compensation claims, difficulties with equal employment opportunity complaints, and possible substance abuse and/or emotional problems. But what can be done to try and lessen or avert problems in future productivity or legal difficulties resulting from the situation?
One possibility is the use of alternative dispute resolution or conflict management techniques. Interest in these techniques or procedures continues to grow in popularity with managers from every industry, and participants are generally satisfied with the results according to the Federal government's General Accounting Office (GAO) review of five employers and five federal agencies. There are several different procedures that can be used; which one is most effective depends upon the particular problem and organization involved. In the above situation, some of the procedures might include:
Negotiation -- You (the employee) and the farm manager try to reach a mutually acceptable outcome through talking about the problem. No one else is involved.
Mediation -- Another farm manager becomes involved. This other farm manager will not make a decision and has no control over what happens, but rather will suggest options to encourage settlement and try to assist you and the farm manager in reaching a mutually acceptable outcome.
Advisory Arbitration -- The owner becomes involved. He/she will try to help you and the farm manager reach an acceptable outcome. After hearing the arguments presented independently by both of you, the owner will make a non-binding or changeable judgment as to how the situation should be resolved.
Arbitration -- Again the owner becomes involved in a similar manner, but in this procedure the owner will make a binding or final judgment to resolve the situation.
Struggle -- You will use threats, direct action (sabotage or fighting) or both against the farm manager.
Avoidance -- You will avoid interaction with the farm manager, causing problems in productivity and communication, or may leave the farm.
Inaction -- You will do nothing and resentment builds and builds.
Conflict management systems can range from creating a formal grievance procedure to informal communication techniques. Some managers see employee complaints as a "bad sign" and the creation of formal dispute resolution systems as only encouraging discontent and protest. Others view complaints as an inevitable part of managing people and consider it to be intelligent personnel relations to create formal mechanisms to resolve such complaints and not leave the problems to fester. However according to past research, fifteen key factors emerge that often tell whether a conflict management system will succeed or fail:
While most organizations cannot expect to have all of the above factors existing within their workforce, generally speaking, the more of these factors are involved, the better the system will work. But why would a company want to use these procedures?
Looking back to the previously mentioned GAO's reported findings on August 12th of this year (as well as a significant amount of prior research), most organizations have data showing that alternative dispute resolution programs, especially mediation, "resolve a higher proportion of disputes, thereby helping them avoid formal processes and litigation." The data that the organizations had gathered showed that mediation, peer panels, management review boards, and arbitration "all appeared to contribute to the resolution of workplace problems, and mediation was perceived to have saved time and money."
On October 9-10, 1997, Gregory Billikopf (UCCE Stanislaus) and I will present a workshop, "Understanding Workplace Conflict and Improving Mediation Skills," in Merced, California for those interested in improving or learning mediation and third-party facilitation skills. Topics to be covered include understanding sources of conflict, improving listening skills, workplace discipline without anger, and practical negotiation and mediation skills training. Another seminar may be available early next year in the Sacramento Valley area. For more information, please call Gregory Billikopf at (209) 525-6654 or myself. Cost is $30 for registration postmarked by Sept. 27th and $35 afterwards. Fee includes resource materials, lunches, and refreshments.
Back to: "In this issue"
In his mailbox the farm supervisor found a note made up of words cut from newspapers. "I know what you did. You will not get away with it." The harvest season was winding down and layoffs of some of the personnel were about to begin. Questions asked of the farm's 24 employees and staff members revealed nothing. Nobody claimed it had been a joke, nobody could explain it, and nobody else had easy access to the mailbox. The supervisor was inclined to dismiss the incident as a gag but had remembered a couple of events in the past month that hadn't seemed important at the time. These included a brief pushing and shoving incident over the use of a tractor and open hostility expressed during a safety committee meeting among several employees. No one had been physically injured, but what if anything could be done to ensure that no one would get hurt?
According to a 1996 Pinkerton Security issues survey, workplace violence heads the list of security-related concerns for the third year in a row. Workplace violence has many causes, including job layoffs, disciplinary actions, pay cuts, promotional decisions, or a job firing, all of which may serve as a trigger to a violent reaction from a distressed or disgruntled employee. Who's involved? You don't have to work in the local post-office to be concerned. However, violence-prone employees are most likely to turn on co-workers. According to the survey and other prior research, incidents of violence most frequently involve the following individuals:
| Employee to employee | |
| Employee to supervisor | |
| Outside stranger | |
| Boy-girl friend to employee | |
| Spouse | |
| Past employee to supervisor |
What are the early warning signs? Most of them make common sense but are worth stating. Some of these include:
Many researchers and safety specialists recommend that companies take the following steps to prevent workplace violence:
1) Develop a Policy against Violence. The policy must define violence, provide examples and consequences of it, and be supported by management. The best policy is one that incorporates a zero tolerance level of violence and includes procedures for reporting and investigating alleged violations. This approach permits early intervention and diminishes the potential for an escalation of the situation. New hires should be required to read or have the policy read to them. The policy must be well communicated to all employees. Provided below is such an example.
2) Use Job-related Pre-employment Screening. These practices may help to reduce the likelihood of hiring troubled individuals through the use of reference checks, background checks, and possibly utilizing honesty/integrity questions.
3) Use Conflict Management Systems. Create and use effective procedures for handling employee complaints and grievances as mentioned earlier in this newsletter.
4) Establish a Safety Plan and Committee. Create a safety plan, training employees to recognize potentially violent situations, and when and when not to intervene in order to help defuse low-level incidents of violence. Employee commitment and involvement must be obtained to reduce the risk of violence in the workplace and the many costs associated with it.
Below is an example of a simple workplace violence policy:
___________________________________________ is committed to creating and maintaining a working and learning environment for all employees which is free from violence.
Civility, understanding, and mutual respect toward all persons is necessary for a successful work environment, to the existence of a safe and healthy workplace, and to the needs of the many consumers who support it. Threats of violence or acts of violence impact not only the individuals concerned, but also the mission of the company to provide a quality and cost-effective product. The company prohibits violent acts or threats of violence, and any employee who commits a violent act or threatens to commit a violent act is subject to disciplinary action and/or civil or criminal prosecution as appropriate.
___________________________________________ has zero tolerance for violence against any member of the workforce, other persons in the workplace, or property. Any person who makes substantial threats, exhibits threatening behavior, or engages in violent acts on company property shall be subject to removal from the premises as quickly as safety permits, pending the outcome of an investigation. All individuals who apply for or obtain a protective or restraining order which lists the company's location(s) as being protected areas, must provide the company with a copy of the petition and declarations used to seek the order, a copy of any temporary protective or restraining order which is granted, and a copy of any protective or restraining order which is made permanent.
For the purpose of this policy, violence and threats of violence include, but are not limited to:
Or
Established personnel and public safety procedures will serve as the mechanism for resolving situations of violence or threats of violence. Each allegation of violence or threat of violence will be taken seriously. Individuals are responsible to report acts of violence, threats of violence, or any other behavior which by intent, act or outcome harms another person or property, to their supervisor.
Back to: "In this issue"
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act was signed into federal law in August of last year. The act was designed to significantly reduce the welfare rosters by mandating that 25% of all households must be involved in work activities for twenty (20) hours a week in 1997 and increasing to 50% and thirty (30) hours a week by the year 2002. On the political front, both Congressional Democrats and Republicans alike are touting business involvement as critical to the success of welfare reform. But, unless jobs are available and employers are willing to hire welfare recipients, governments will be unable to shift people off the welfare rolls and into steady employment. According to the Butte County Community Action Agency, which is overseeing local welfare reform, Butte County will need to create 3,000 new jobs by next year and 4,500 by the year 2000. Sacramento County, with a relatively low unemployment rate of around 5.3% (national average is around 4.9%), will need to find nearly 19,000 jobs and provide childcare for 22,000 children by the year 2000, with a loss in federal funding estimated at over 6.5 million dollars. Additionally, there are several issues that the government will have to address before the role of business in welfare can be fully developed:
Small Business Involvement -- is critical to reducing the role of welfare in the U.S., as two out of every three new jobs are created by them. In the Sacramento Valley, small business, including ag employers, maintain over three out of every four private industry workers on their payrolls and so their involvement is even more critical if the process is to be a success in the historically high (double-digit) unemployment areas of northern California. Small businesses do not have the resources that larger corporations do, and more research needs to be done to determine what will make it possible for them to fully participate in the welfare-to-work transition if they choose to do so.
Tax Incentives -- have been proposed to promote welfare-to-work programs. Under the Work Opportunity Tax Credit, which will continue until June 30, 1998, employers who hire welfare recipients could receive a tax credit of up to $2,100. Under a section of the new federal tax package, the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, which was signed into law on August 5 and included over $92 billion dollars in tax relief over a five-year span, employers will be able to claim a credit equal to 35% of the first $10,000 of compensation in the first year of employment and 50% of the first $10,000 of compensation in the second year for qualified employees who begin work either in 1998 or the first four months of 1999. The credit can be claimed on cash wages plus benefits such as health care plans. An extra $3 billion also would be made available to help states with job training, placement programs, and transportation networks. However, tax incentives have had only limited success in the past as the paperwork often proves too cumbersome or employers decide the incentive is not big enough to hire someone they might not have employed without it. Any tax proposal should also be scrutinized to make sure it would promote the creation of new jobs, not just displace workers who do not fit into the targeted group from existing jobs.
Best Practices Benchmarking -- A comprehensive directory of practices needs to be created that provides an analysis of what has worked and what has not for ag employers of all sizes. Once identified, practices can be adapted to the employers' particular commodities and regions. The jury is still out, of course, and will be for some time on whether such programs will be effective and helpful for both employers and new employees. However, with the recent signing of the state budget agreement last month, California's northern counties will need to be pro-active and, if possible, quickly discover and promote successful welfare-to-work models.
Back to: "In this issue"
Heat stress -- Know the differences in symptoms between heat stress and pesticide poisoning. Individuals with heat stress will show early signs of mild dizziness, fatigue, decreased concentration, impaired judgment, and most importantly will have a dry mouth and mucous membranes as opposed to a moist mouth as generally occurs with poisoning.
According to the Department of Labor, whose funding will be reviewed this week by Congress, the Federal Minimum Wage has gone up on September 1, 1997, to $5.15/hour. The next scheduled increase in the state of California will occur in March 1998 and will go up to $5.75/hour.
Labor Management Laws in California Agriculture, Second Edition, 1995. Publication 21404.
Written by Howard R. Rosenberg, Ph.D, Valerie J. Horwitz, J.D., and Daniel L. Egan, J.D. Here is a compact, integrated guide to U.S. and California regulations as they relate to labor management in agriculture. This book informs managers and employees about laws that directly apply to them, and helps lawmakers, public agency staff, and interested observers better understand the nature of existing legal influences in farm business operations. The book may be ordered at a price of $20 through the University of California DANR Communication Services and Publications at 800-994-8849 (within California) or 510-642-2431.
Back to: "In this issue"