For this assessment, consider the following scenario. CapraTek has several global HRM professionals on an extended assignment to Korea. The workforce in the Korean operation is relatively stable and has been non-union. Recently, a small group of employees has been moving in the direction of bringing a union to the operation. This group is looking to join a national trade union. That national union believes that if they could get into the organization through a small group or bargaining unit, then they could spread throughout the firm.

In consulting with your U.S. employees in Korea, they shared that they simply did not know what would happen. In the past, this union had been able to improve the compensation and working conditions of some occupations, but not all. Also, the organization process had at times become contentious and disruptive. Soon after the labor ministry approved the pipefitter union group, the union went into two more departments. They sought to organize the electricians and the assemblers. The assemblers represent about 80 employees, while the electricians are a small number like the pipefitters.

As union organizing activities began, the assemblers broke into two groups; one was sure that they wanted to become part of the union, while the other more seasoned portion of the group was not sure. The electricians did not want to say anything. They were unwilling to discuss activities with anyone in the firm but each other. This group of employees represented long-term employees who were well-compensated and often had a business on the side. They made an announcement through a letter to both the union organizer and the HRM that they had no interest in becoming part of the union. The assemblers went on for about two weeks and then the movement lost momentum as summer came and many people went on vacation. The assemblers notified the union and HRM that at this time they were unwilling to take a vote. During all of these activities you, as the senior HRM professional present, advised all management personnel on the labor code requirements with respect to organizational actions during organizing activities. All management personnel behaved professionally. There were no violations of the labor code in terms of organizing activates by management personnel.

This assessment is not about what you as an HRM professional in a global setting should do when faced with a situation of this type. It is about what you learned from this small story of labor relations in the international workplace. We know what happened with the pipefitters. The assemblers seemed to be fast to respond and slow to act, finally choosing not to act at all. Present your views of what occurred in this situation with the following points in mind:

• In what ways was the union effective or ineffective in its organizing efforts? What are your reasons for your position?
• What lessons in union activities has CapraTek HR in Korea learned from this experience?
• What lessons has CapraTek corporate learned about dealing with international union organizing efforts? While union laws differ greatly from country to country, look at the general issues that might be applied to similar situations.
• What cultural factors might have played a role in this situation? Which factors were the most significant? How did culture influence this situation's outcome?

Instructions

Include the following in this assessment:

• Evaluate the impact of culture on labor unionization.
  • What cultural differences did you find in your research on Korean culture? What role did culture play and how did it influence the outcome? What comparisons or differences can you make to U.S. culture?
• Analyze this scenario to support your position on the effectiveness of the labor union's organizing attempt.
  • How much of this effectiveness is driven by the national culture?
• Analyze how workforce roles influence the attempt to organize labor unions.
  • What comparisons can you make to similar roles in the U.S., or what differences exist?