The Threat to Unions
G A R Y C H A I S O N
Clark University, Worcester, MA 01610
I. Introduction
We are at the early stages of a revolution in information technology that will occur in yet-to-be-imagined ways over the next few decades. At the same time, labor unions are at a crossroads in their history, and it is not yet clear whether the severe drop in mem- bership and bargaining power is irreversible or if union revival will somehow occur, These two phenomena converge as the adoption of new information technologies, pri- marily the Internet and the Web, is commonly depicted as essential for union revival. The link seems obvious. If faster and more powerful ways of communicating enable companies to compete in a quickly changing and challenging environment, shouldn't they also make unions stronger and more efficient as organizations and workplace representatives?
We read reports of the cyber-unions that integrate information technology into their operations, the cyber-organizers who spread the word about unionism to previ- ously inaccessible groups of workers, and the cyber-strikes during which unions use the Internet to mobilize workers (Lazarovici, 1999; Shostak, 1999a,b; Yager and Threlkeld, 1999). Unions are going on the Internet to "get the word out, organize the masses, and agitate the opposition" (Peter, 1997, p. 82), "overcome corporate disin- formation in organizing," "orchestrate grass roots lobbying efforts" and "coordinate far-flung union activities" (Ad Hoc Committee on Labor and the Web, 2000, p. 1).
The lnternet and the Web are presented as inherently beneficial to unions; we are warned only that they might be harmful if used incorrectly or if relied on too heavily (Shostak, 1999a,b). Overlooked in this enthusiasm, however, is the dark side of infor- mation technology - - the ways that it will inevitably and seriously threaten unions as institutions and representatives. This threat will occur as the Internet and the Web trans- forms work and lessens workers' interest in unionizing; becomes a substitute for unions as a voice mechanism; and changes the relationship between unions and their members.
II. The First Threat: The Transformation o f Work
Early information technology such as mainframe and desktop computing improved internal operations but created "islands of automation" in organizations, i,e., sections and operations with few linkages between them. Later technology connects rather than
separates and, by doing so, reduces costs and increases productivity. Information is converted into electronic form (e.g., data storage and retrieval and searchable data bases) and distributed widely and quickly, e.g., the Internet, the Web, and e-mail, and their wireless communication (U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, 1995). Such technology will transform many types of work and greatly reduce the likelihood that those who do this work will become union members.
A fundamental dilemma of the labor movement is increasing private sector union membership under conditions in which "job growth is fastest in industries where unions are weakest while job losses are greatest in industries where unions are strongest" (Greenhouse, 1999b, p. 23). An AFL-CIO analysis found that from 1984 to 1997, the 30 fastest growing sectors in the economy, e.g., child care, finance, and retail trade, added 26 million jobs, but only 5 percent of the workers in those industries joined unions. Meanwhile, in the eight industries with the greatest job losses (e.g., autos and steel) about 80 percent of the 2.1 million jobs lost belonged to unionized workers (Greenhouse, 1999b). Net union growth can occur only if membership losses in declin- ing industries are offset by organizing where there is growing employment though lit- tle union presence (Draezen, 2001a,b). This is highly unlikely because sales, clerical, technical, and professional positions are predominant in the growth industries (U.S. Department of Labor, 1999), and people in those positions will have their work radi- cally changed by information technology.l The importance of this limitation to union growth is not widely understood and appreciated,
Presently, public attention is drawn to the most dramatic instances of collective bargaining over the impact of new information technology. For example, actors' com- pensation for working on ads on the Internet had to be resolved in the nearly six-month dispute of the Screen Actors Guild and the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists with the producers of commercials (Weinraub, 2000). A key issue in the strike of the Communications Workers and the Electrical Workers against Verizon was union access to organize the expanding work force at the company's wireless division (Green- house, 2000). The difficulties that unions face in such negotiations, however, pale in comparison to those of organizing workers whose jobs are transformed by informa- tion technology.
thy, for example, that there are roughly 19 million persons who work from their homes (Wood, 200l) - - a figure exceeding the membership of all unions. 2
Union organizing also presumes distinct boundaries between workers who have legal protection to bargain and their supervisors and employers. But the Internet enables workers to have access to information and participate in decisions in a manner similar to their supervisors, e.g., scheduling production and controlling quality, and to avoid tra- ditional employment relationships by working as contracting freelancers and temporaries. Prescriptions for renewed union growth inevitably mention the need to reach an increasingly mobile and dispersed work force. One option is "range of services" union- ism that provides workers with an array of approaches to representation ranging from traditional collective bargaining to labor-management consultation (Osterman, 1999). Another is labor-market-wide organizing, in contrast to the usual company-specific organizing. The hope of labor-market-wide organizing is to attract part-time and tem- porary workers who want to be covered by collective agreements (Wever, 1998). Unions might also combine the activities of bargaining agents and professional associations, becoming both workplace representatives and providers of services and representa- tion to workers between jobs (Heckscher, 1988).
Unions will not have the field to themselves, however, if they try to organize and represent workers whose jobs have been reshaped by information technology. They can expect stiff competition from a variety of worker advocacy or workers' rights organi- zations. 3 For example, organizations for contract and consulting employees such as the Professional Association of Contract Employees (PACE) provide members with group benefits and assistance with record keeping and contracting (PACE, 2001 ). Others, like Working Today, promote the interests of freelancers, independent contractors, tempo- rary and part-time workers, and people who work from home. It offers group-rate health insurance, legal aid, financial services, and discounts on travel, computers, and office supplies (Heckscher, 1998; Working Today, 2001).4
Unions will also have to compete against identity associations that are based on ethnic, gender, racial, or sexual-identity lines or based on professional identity, or on both, e.g., minority engineers. 5 These have been formed, for example, among groups of workers at high-technology firms who felt they were bypassed in management deci- sion making but were reluctant to be represented in collective bargaining (Hyde, 1993). Union alternatives are flourishing precisely because they are not unions and can custom-tailor services and modes of representation to fit the needs of their members. Heckscher (1998, p. 14) concluded that it is among these associations "where a great deal of energy is. When people say that workers aren't organizing nowadays, one might properly reply that they a r e organizing - - they just aren't organizing u n i o n s . "
bership during the 1980s to reverse declining membership. They enrolled union sup- porters where certification elections were lost or never held because of insufficient employee support. But such stand-alone associate membership - - membership as an end-in-itself and not intended to lead to collective bargaining coverage - - was largely abandoned by the labor movement because of its focus on the individual member as a consumer of union services rather than as a beneficiary of collective representation. When associate membership is now offered, it is usually a special status for retired members or as a bridge to eventual bargaining (Chaison and Bigelow, forthcoming). 6 Even in the unlikely event that unions revive stand-alone associate membership, they will have to compete not only with other advocacy organizations but with employers as well.
III. The S e c o n d Threat: Voice Substitution 7
Unions are often characterized as organizations through which workers can express their collective voice on work-related matters (Helfgott, 2000). Dissatisfied workers can exercise an exit option by leaving the organization or a voice option (either as individuals or members of a group) by discussing and negotiating their concerns with management. 8 Unions are essentially a mechanism for the expression of collective voice; through negotiations and contract enforcement, they bring the actual and the workers' desired conditions closer (Freeman and Medoff, 1984).
Employers can engage in voice substitution, i.e., provide voice mechanisms for their workers with the intent of decreasing the workers' interest in independent, col- lective voice through union representation. 9 Unions are now well aware of the ways that employee involvement programs (e.g., quality circles, production teams, joint-strategy committees) serve as management-controlled voice mechanisms. Wary of these pro- grams, unions have sought to co-exist with them, control them, or organize where work- ers find them to be inadequate (Rundle, 1997; Taras, 1998). But unions are unprepared for the power and pervasiveness of intranets - - the ultimate in voice substitution.
Intranets are internal company websites that use basic Internet technology such as browsers and servers, l0 They provide a fast, low-cost way to distribute information throughout a company and to its employees at home. lntranets are simpler than LANs (local area networks); rather than having to be specially connected to the LAN, all workers need are computers with modems and web browsers to connect to their com- pany's intranet. Intranets are designed with "firewalls" that make them accessible only to the company's employees who have passwords. They are controlled by management, usually located in corporate communication or human resources departments, and oper- ated by the company information systems department (Stevens, 1996; Industry Canada, 1998: Hapgood, 1999; "Benefit Function," 2000; "The Truth About Leveraging," 2000).
conferencing, and forums for employees to present grievances to management for even- tual resolution by company ombudsmen. These intranets have evolved from an infor- mation source to part of the work environment (Stellin, 2001).
Presently, about 90 percent of large companies have intranets (Stellin, 2001), and their power will be magnified as more workers gain access to the Internet at work, and through it, to their company's intranet. Thirty-seven percent of full-time workers and eighteen percent of part-time workers have Internet access at work ("Wired Work- ers," 2000). Internet use will spread even further as employers help their workers pur- chase computers and go online from home. Probably the most widely publicized program was Ford's offer of low-cost computers and Internet connections to its 300,000 employees. Interuet access is through a portal that also offers direct links to Ford and the United Automobile Workers websites. Computer purchase and Internet access pro- grams have also been offered by General Motors, Daimler-Chrysler, Delta Airlines, and Intel, among others ("Ford and Internet," 2000; Perlmutter, 2000).
In the near future, we can expect most employers to use their intranets to collect and resolve workers' grievances online and run discussion groups of workers, their supervisors, and human resource specialists. They will also use intranets to foster closer identification with the company and its goals, l 1 Workers will access intranets anywhere and anytime as wireless connection becomes commonplace. Confronted with the ubiq- uitous employer intranet, unions will likely respond in kind by increasing their own presence on the Internet. As they do, they will unwittingly create the third threat of information technology.
IV. The Third Threat: A New Relationship between Unions
and Their Members
Early union applications of information technology dealt mostly with administrative matters, e.g., communicating with members, simplifying office work, and producing newsletters, and collective bargaining, e.g., economic analysis and monitoring griev- ance activity. Union officers were contemplating a future of office networking and elec- tronic mail linked to database and word-processing systems (Templer and Solomon, 1988). Later, they came to appreciate the power of the Internet (Fiorito, Jarley, and Delaney, 2000).
information and a chat room. Union factions and caucuses have their own pages, e.g., the Teamsters for Democratic Action at www.igc.org/tdu (Greenhouse, 1999a).
Unions enthusiastically develop web pages, seeing them as a quick and inexpen- sive way to strengthen organizing, labor education, membership mobilization during strikes, public relations, and political action - - e.g., voter registration, issue advocacy, and candidate endorsement (Ad Hoc Committee on Labor and the Web, 2000; Fiorito, Jarley, and Delaney, 2000; Fiorito et al., 2000). A few academic observers have warned of the limitations of information technology. Shostak (1999b, p. 131) cautioned:
It is a complex, demanding and often exasperating tool, only as reliable and effec- tive as the humans in charge. Also, it is no solo star. It works best when it is part of a mix that includes militancy, labor law reform, and political action. It works best when aiding such "high touch" efforts as one-on-one organizing, "shoe leather" vote getting, and "buttonhole" lobbying for labor law reform. It works best when kept as an accessory and an aid, rather than allowed to become a confining and superordi- nate system.
Fiorito, Jarley, and Delaney (2000, p. 471) go a step further by suggesting that information technology might pose a Faustian bargain for unions - - "the possibility that unions will 'lose their souls' as collective worker representation instruments by changing themselves into something else." But, they conclude that "at present, at least, that danger seems small" (p. 471), and a greater danger would be that unions do noth- ing to reverse their decline.
Such cautionary statements may not go far enough; the unions' unrestrained adop- tion of information technology can lead to a dependency that greatly reduces the chances of union revival. Proposals to revitalize the labor movement have a common theme: Unions must transform themselves into a social movement which struggles for social change by ameliorating the imbalance of power between worker and man- agement and by securing greater rights for all workers, not just union members. To do this, unions should be controlled at the local level; otherwise they are simply "top- down" bureaucratic organizations that provide representation services in exchange for membership dues. By broadening their mission and increasing membership control, unions can credibly argue that the right to union representation should be promoted and protected by the state as nothing less than a fundamental civil right (Johnston, 1998; Mantsios, 1998; Nissen, 1999). Expressing such themes, Moberg (1999, p. 23) wrote: "Unions can't survive as institutions without dues-paying members, but unions will never flourish if they are seen as working only for their members - - or, worst of all, only for their leaders." They must avoid "insurance unionism," that is offering only pay and job security without encouraging membership participation and without using their economic and political power to "make workers' rights the human rights and social jus- tice issue of the decades ahead" (Moberg, 1999, p. 32).
their web pages what they would otherwise do through personal contact with mem- bers. Union resources and effort can be shifted away from activities requiring per- sonal contact such as meetings, rallies, and social activities and toward the faster and less expensive promotion of an Internet presence. The union web page can become the primary means to communicate with members. Organizing can simply mean devel- oping a website to attract potential members, connect them with online organizers, and collect digital signatures on union authorization cards.
If unions become dependent on the Internet to communicate with members and provide services, the typical member would be attracted only to supportive participa- tion - - relatively passive activities that require little time and effort, for example read- ing the union's web page and discussing union issues with co-workers. Websites do not produce members' occasional participation, i.e., activities that occur intermittently but nonetheless entail substantial effort, such as making speeches at union meetings and taking part in bargaining. This participation leads to higher level activities such as running for or volunteering for union office (Chaison et al., 2001).
Furthermore, if unions distance themselves from their members by relying on the web, members will react by evaluating their union in terms of an exchange rela- tionship. From a purely pragmatic perspective, a member will ask: Am I getting value from my dues, or could I do better without a union, with another union, or with an advocacy organization that serves as an alternative to the union? Their evaluations will not be made on the basis of whether the union promotes societal welfare and sup- porting it is the right thing to do (Chaison and Bigelow, forthcoming). Under these con- ditions, the possibility of reviving unions as a social movement with a broad agenda will be highly unlikely.
V. C o n c l u s i o n s
Although seldom recognized in the flurry of enthusiastic support, information tech- nology has a dark side for unions. The Internet and the Web, with its power and con- venience magnified by wireless communication, will reduce the relevancy of the traditional workplace-centered appeals of organizing unions. With greater physical dis- tance and less psychological attachment to their employer and workplace, professional, clerical, technical, and sales workers will believe that collective bargaining does not fit their situations. Organizing these workers will require that unions not only have to broaden their mode of representation, perhaps even reviving associate membership, but also compete against advocacy and identity organizations. To make matters even worse, when unions try to organize any group of workers regardless of whether or not their jobs have been transformed by information technology, and when unions try to main- tain their influence in already organized workplaces, they will have to compete against employer-controlled intranets.
h e r e : I f t h e y a t t e m p t to r e s p o n d to i n t r a n e t s w i t h t h e i r o w n e l a b o r a t e w e b p a g e s , t h e y r i s k r e d u c i n g t h e i r c h a n c e s o f r e v i v a l as a s o c i a l m o v e m e n t a n d b e c o m e little m o r e t h a n o n l i n e p r o v i d e r s o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s e r v i c e s .
A d m i t t e d l y , a n y a p p r a i s a l o f t h e f u t u r e i m p a c t o f i n f o r m a t i o n t e c h n o l o g y m u s t b e s p e c u l a t i v e . B u t t h e r e is a l r e a d y e n o u g h e v i d e n c e b a s e d o n t h e p r e s e n t t e c h n o l o g y to s e e t h e c o n t o u r s o f t h e t h r e a t to u n i o n s . W o r k e r s w h o s e j o b s h a v e b e e n r e s h a p e d b y t h e I n t e r n e t (e.g., s a l e s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , p r o f e s s i o n a l s w o r k i n g o n a c o n t r a c t u a l b a s i s , h o m e w o r k e r s ) are n o t a p p r o a c h i n g u n i o n s in l a r g e n u m b e r s a n d u n i o n s are n o t s u c - c e s s f u l l y r e c r u i t i n g t h e m . T h e e m p l o y e r s ' u s e o f i n t r a n e t s is a l r e a d y w i d e s p r e a d a n d it h a s a m o n g its e x p l i c i t o b j e c t i v e s e n h a n c e d c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n w o r k e r s a n d h u m a n r e s o u r c e d e p a r t m e n t s a n d f o s t e r i n g a c l o s e r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e c o m p a n y . A n d u n i o n o f f i c e r s a n d s t a f f are a v i d w e b e n t h u s i a s t s w i t h l i t t l e i f a n y a p p r e c i a t i o n o f its p o t e n t i a l l y n e g a t i v e e f f e c t s o n t h e r e l a t i o n s w i t h m e m b e r s a n d r e v i v a l . A l l s i g n s p o i n t to s e r i o u s , p e r h a p s u n s o l v a b l e , p r o b l e m s f o r u n i o n s .
N O T E S
IA similar transformation will occur among clerical, profession, and technical positions in the public sec- tor where employment and union membership have been growing.
2The growth of telecommuting is described by Gardyn (2000) and Voigbt (2(X) 1 ). It is estimated that about 20 percent of all workers will working at home by 2005 (Gardyn, 2000).
3Unions may also create or affiliate with advocacy organizations. For example, the Communications Work- ers of America has an affiliate, the Washington Alliance of Technology Workers (WashTech) that seeks to organize workers at Microsoft (Lazarovici, 1999).
4Wheeler (2000) describes workers' rights organizations, as weil as other types of organizations for worker representation and protection, in terms of goals, solidarity, perspective, costs, employer opposition, and gov- ernment support.
5For example, see Haeussler (2000) for a discussion of identity organizations among Hispanic workers at AT&T, Apple Computer, General Electric, Nike, and Xerox.
6For example, the Communications Workers of America offers associate membership to employees of high- tech companies such as Microsoft and Cisco. The option includes benefit plans and skills training. The goal is the eventual organization of contract and temporary employees for collective bargaining (Flanigan, 2OOO).
7This term for the role of the intranet was suggested by Joe Sarkis.
SWorkers can also exercise the exit option by being absent, partially withdrawing their labor, reducing their work effort, or sabotage (Helfgott, 2000).
9For a study of the range of collective voice mechanisms in union and nonunion workplaces, see Benson (2000). The workplaces are in Australia but similar voice mechanisms are found in the U. S.
J~ contrast, e x t r a n e t s use the same technology to link companies to customers, suppliers, and shareholders. J JFor example, when information managers of large companies were asked in a survey what was the biggest impact of the intranet on their company, one third responded "an increased sense of community," roughly the same proportion that mentioned increased productivity (Kotwica, 1998).
R E F E R E N C E S
Ad Hoc Committee on Labor and the Web. "Why the lnternet Matters to Organized Labor." December 11, 2000. <www.mindopen.com/laborweb>.
"Benefit Functions Top All Others on Company Intranet." Managing HR Information Systems (June 5, 2000): 2.
Benson, John. "Employee Voice in Union and Nonunion Australian Workplaces." British Journal oflndus-
trial Relations 38 (September 2000): 453-599
Chaison, Gary and Barbara Bigelow. Unions and Legitimacy. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, forth-
coming 9
Chaison, Gary N., Magnus Sverke, and Anders Sj6berg. "How Union Mergers Affect Membership Partici-
pation." Journal of Labor Research 22 (Spring 2001): 355-729
Dreazen, Yochi J. "Percentage of U.S. Workers in a Union Sank to a Record Low of 13.5% Last Year." Wall
Street Journal, January 19, 2001a.
. "Slower Growth Threatens Labor Unions 9 Wall Street Journal, January 16, 200lb.
Flanigan, James. "Variety Spices Work As Internet Drives Change." Los Angeles Times, September 3, 2000.
Freeman, Richard B. and James L. Medoff. What Do Unions Do? New York: Basic Books, 1984.
Fiorito, Jack, Paul Jarley, and John Thomas Delaney. "The Adaptation of Information Technology by U.S.
National Unions." Relations lndustrielles/lndustrial Relations 55 (Summer 2000): 451-76.
and Robert W. Kolodinsky. "Unions and Information Technology: From Luddites to
Cyberunions." Labor Studies Journal 24 (Winter 2000): 3-34.
"Ford and the Internet." Buffalo Evening News, February 8, 2000.
Gardyn, Rebecca. "The New American Worker: Who's the Boss?" American Demographics 22 (September
2000): 52-56, 58.
Greenhouse, Steven. "AFL-CIO Members to Get Online Access and Discounts." New York Times, October
11 1999a.
9 "Union Leaders See Grim News in Labor Study." New York Times, October 13, 1999b.
9 "Phone Workers Fight for Place in Wireless Era." New York Times, July 31, 2000.
Haeussler, Aimee R. "A Common Purpose." September 12, 2000, <http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/com- munity/hispanic_orgs.asp>.
Hapgood, Fred. "The Next Generation9 CIO Web Business Magazine March 1, 1999. <http://www.cio.com/>.
Heckscher, Charles. "Taking Transformation Seriously9 Paper presented at the Cornell University Confer- ence on the Revival of the Labor Movement 9 October 16, 1998.
9 The New Unionism. New York: Basic Books, 1988.
Helfgott, Roy B. "The Effectiveness of Diversity Networks in Providing Collective Voice for Employees."
In B.E. Kaufman and D.G. Taras, eds. Nonunion Employee Representation: History, Contemporary
Practice, and Policy. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe, 2000. pp. 348-629
Hyde, Alan. "Employee Caucus: A Key Institution in the Emerging System of Employment Law." Chicago-
Kent Law Review 69 (1993): 149-939
Industry Canada 9 "Intranets" December 12, 1998, <http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/>.
Johnston, Paul. "Social Movement Unionism: Labor as Citizenship Movement." Paper presented at the Cornell University Conference on the Revival of the American Labor Movement. October 16, 1998.
Kotwica, Kathleen. "Survey: lnternet Implementation and Management9 January 1998, <http://www.cio.com/>.
Mantsios, Gregory. A New Labor Movement for the New Century. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1998.
Moberg, David. "The U.S. Labor Movement Faces the Twenty-First Century." In Bruce Nissen, ed. Which
Direction for Organized Labor? Essays on Organizing, Outreach and Internal Transformations. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1999. pp. 21-33.
Nissen, Bruce. Which Direction for Organized Labor? Essays on Organizing, Outreach and Internal Trans-
formation. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1999.
Osterman, Paul. Securing Prosperity." The American Labor Market." How It Has Changed and What to Do
About It. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1999.
Perlmutter, Rod. "Ford Computer Deal Signifies Union Trend." February 2, 2000, <http://www.mediacen- tral.com/:~.
Peter, Kristyne. "Labor on the lnternet." Working USA 8 (May-June 1997): 82-87.
PACE (Professional Association of Contract Employees), <http://www.pacepros.org/>.
"Pros and Cons of Providing Employees With Home RC.s to Extend HRIS." Managing HR Information Sys-
tems (June 2000): 1.
Reich, Robert B. "Working, But Not 'Employed'." New York Times, January 9, 2001.
Rundle, James. "Winning Hearts and Minds in the Era of Employee-Involvement Programs." In K. Bron-
fenbrenner, S. Friedman, R.W. Hurd, R.A. Oswald, and R.L. Seeber, eds. Organizing to Win: New
Research on Union Strategies. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornel l University Press, 1997, pp. 213-31.
Shostak Arthur B. CyberUnion: Empowering Labor Through Computer Technology. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E.
Sharpe, 1999a.
_ _ . "Organized Labor's Best Bet? CyberUnions!" Working Today 3 (November-December 1999b):
120-33.
Stellin, Susan. 'qntranets Nurture Companies from the Inside." New York Times, January 29, 2001.
Stevens, Larry. "The Internet: Your Newest Training Tool." Personnel Journal 75 (July 1996): 6-7.
Stone, Katherine. "The Legacy of Industrial Pluralism: The Tension between Individual Employment Rights
and the New Deal Collective Bargaining System." University of Chicago Law Review 59 ( 1992): 575-
674.
Taras, Daphne Gottleib. "Nonunion Representation: Complement or Threat to Unions?" In Paula Voos, ed.
Proceedings of the Fiftieth Annual Meeting of the Industrial Relations Research Association, Vol. 1. Madison, Wisc.: IRRA, 1998, pp. 281-90.
Templar, Andrew and Norman Solomon. "Unions and Technology: A Survey of Union Use of Information
Technology." Relations Industrielles/lndustrial Relations 43 (Spring 1988): 378-93.
Townsend, Anthony M., Samuel M. Demarie, and Anthony R. Hendrickson. "Information Technology,
Unions, and the New Organization: Challenges and Opportunities for Union Survival." Journal of Labor
Research 22 (Spring 2001): 275-86.
"The Truth About Leveraging HR Information Services." HRfocus (June 8, 2000): I I.
U. S. Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. The Technological Reshaping of Metropolitan America.
Report OTA-ETI-643. Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1995.
U. S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. "BLS Releases New 1998-2008 Employment Pro- jections." Press release USDL 99-339, November 20, 1999.
Voigt, Kevin. "For 'Extreme Telecommuters,' Remote Work Means Really Remote." Wall Street Journal
January 31, 2001.
Wever, Kirsten S. "International Labor Revitalization: Enlarging the Playing Field." Industrial Relations
37 (July 1998): 399-407.
Wheeler, Hoyt N. "The Future of the Labor Movement in the USA." Paper presented at the Twelfth World Congress of the Internation Industrial Relations Association, Tokyo, Japan, May 30, 2000.
"Wired Workers: Who They Are, What They're Doing." Pew Internet Life Report (press release) September
3, 2000, <http://pewinternet.org/>.
Wood, Winston. "Work Week." Wall Street Journal, February 6, 2001.
Working Today, <http://www.workingtoday.org/>.
Yager, Daniel V. And Thomas S. Threlkeld. "Workplace Cyberspace - - Going Where No Board Has Gone
