I have zero union experience, and I'm in a field where unions are becoming much more prevalent (USA, higher education). Here is my question:
We approved a union recently (April). The administration had approved 6% raises earlier this year for after July 1. They now say that anything they approved earlier this year is not happening: Raises, promotions, tenure. They say it's “because of the union” because they can't change anything related to labor now that the union has been approved. I'm not confused about this part because my review of the law indicates that they're wrong, so it'll get worked out. Here's what I'm confused about:
Why in the world would management go hard on something like that because I see that either they are (a.) demonstrating that, yeah — you were right. We're assholes and you were right to vote for a union, (b.) we don't like what you did, and now we're going to punish you for it, so yeah — you were right. You're in an abusive relationship with your employer, and you were right to vote for a union, or (c.) we are trying to divide you by suggesting to the 30% who didn't want the union that the 70% are to blame for this situation, so yeah — you were right. We're assholes, and you were right to vote for a union.
Is there a (d.) or (e.) option that I'm missing? Tactically, I don't really understand it, especially when our values are articulated and defined, and this action is definitely not in alignment with that. I don't get it. Union experienced people or better thinkers than I, what do you think?