[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 14 (Thursday, February 6, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E187]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   INTRODUCTION OF THE TEAMWORK FOR EMPLOYEES AND MANAGERS (TEAM) ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. HARRIS W. FAWELL

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, February 6, 1997

  Mr. FAWELL. Mr. Speaker, today, I am joining with a bipartisan group 
of my colleagues to introduce the Teamwork for Employees and Managers 
[TEAM] Act. The legislation is designed to remove roadblocks in current 
law to workplace cooperation and increased employee involvement, while 
not undermining the ability of workers to choose union representation. 
My colleagues and I have come to the inescapable conclusion that today 
global competition demands that American workers and their employers 
work together. The Federal Government should not stand in the way of 
employees playing a meaningful role in addressing workplace issues. As 
we join to introduce the TEAM Act, it is our fervent hope that Members 
on both sides of the aisle will begin a dialog to develop a proposal 
that will provide the flexibility for employers and employees in 
nonunion workplaces to resolve workplace issues together, while 
continuing to protect and secure the rights of workers to choose union 
representation.
  As the Congress considered the TEAM Act in the 104th Congress, it 
became clear to me that labor-management cooperation and employee 
involvement techniques are a means of structurally organizing a 
workplace that can empower employees with a broad sweep of decision-
making authority both about production and worklife issues. I was 
struck by the testimony received by the Subcommittee on Employer-
Employee Relations, which I chair, from employees of both Texas 
Instruments and FMC Corp. where they expressed how important employee 
involvement was to their job satisfaction. The clearest message I took 
from their testimony was that a return to the old way of doing 
business--in the words of one TI employee, a return to ``just work, 
don't think''--was unfathomable. My concern is that our labor law has 
not evolved with the changes in the workplace and, unfortunately, it is 
presenting just such a roadblock to employee involvement.
  As I look at the modern workplace, I see a system of labor law that 
recognizes two extreme versions of workplace organization. The first is 
the top-down management of yesteryear--``just work, don't think''--
where the employer holds all the cards and closely guards decision-
making authority. We all recognize that in today's workplaces, where 
job responsibilities are overlapping and interconnecting, a 
continuation of this form of management will place U.S. business at a 
competitive disadvantage. The other form of workplace organization that 
our labor law contemplates is the independently selected union as the 
exclusive bargaining representative of employees. My sense is that the 
TEAM Act deals with a hybrid form of workplace organization that may 
not have been considered when our labor law was written many decades 
ago. Employee involvement is bottom-up management which recognizes that 
the interests of labor and management are less often mutually exclusive 
than the reverse.
  The TEAM Act attempts to clarify that employers and employees in 
nonunion workplaces may establish structures to address matters of 
mutual interest. I believe that the safe harbor created in the bill for 
employee involvement and cooperative labor-management efforts 
recognizes that these are forms of workplace organization that can 
serve as well both employers and employees, while specifically 
acknowledging that these structures should not, and cannot, interfere 
with the right of employees to select a representative of their own 
choosing who will serve as their exclusive bargaining representative.
  Admittedly, in the last Congress, we were not successful in 
convincing the President that this was the case, and, unfortunately, to 
the detriment of both employees and employers, the bill was vetoed. 
Again, though, I reiterate our commitment to the enactment of 
legislation that will provide employers and employees in nonunion 
workplaces with the flexibility to resolve workplace issue together, 
while protecting the right of all workers to representation by a union 
should that be their choice. My colleagues and I will work with all 
Members who have an interest in achieving this goal.
  I realize that it has become a cliche, but both managers and 
employees have convinced me that employee involvement is a win-win 
proposition. Investing employees with decision-making authority with 
regard to the most integral aspects of a plant's operations gives them 
ownership and a sense of control over their worklife. Employee 
involvement also drives management toward the recognition that is human 
resources are its most valuable asset as the input of employees with 
regard to the production process has positive impacts on the bottom 
line. The TEAM Act is good for workers, good for businesses, and good 
for the American economy. I urge your support.

                          ____________________