The killer app for good jobs.

One weird trick for helping employers and workers get ahead.

The issue

There is a bankable way to create good jobs that improves the fortunes of workers and employers. Many employers hate it.

Explain.

During my last year at the Department of Labor, I had a conversation with a stakeholder about good jobs where they asked a question that kind of went like this:

This sounds great, but it’s also a lot of work. Is there some way that we can put all this stuff in one package that guarantees it will take off?

In other words, they were looking for the killer app of good jobs—what Netscape and Internet Explorer were to the World Wide Web, Super Mario Bros. and Pong were for video games, and Twitter was for being mad online.

The good news is that my experience and research showed that there is one.

Before getting into the answer, it’s important to know what is a good job and why they work for workers and employers. I think there are too many “good jobs” definitions and prefer simplicity: they pay and treat workers well enough to stick around.¹ Getting assurances of a good job is a good investment practice for the limited resources America puts into workforce development. (Less soon!)

Good jobs are good for employers because they save money on labor costs and produce higher quality products. They’re good for workers because they get money, benefits, and security that move them to a cozier socioeconomic nook where they don’t have to worry about, you know, housing and feeding themselves or the people they love. Given that people making money tend to spend it, good jobs aren’t half bad for the economy, either.

It’s a neat concept. It also was, and is, intimidating as hell for some stakeholders and employers.

That said, there was (and I hope is) a slice of employers and stakeholders I worked with in the last administration that wanted to go above and beyond in good jobs. They noted there are a lot of hard-to-wrangle-for factors—benefits policies, hiring, stability—that go into providing a good job.

Hence, the stakeholder asking if there was a nice tidy package for creating good jobs. And there was:

Unionization.

Two things to note:

One, no, I, a representative of the federal government, wasn’t pressuring or cajoling unsuspecting employers and stakeholders to unionize. Yes, the Biden-Harris Administration was an exceedingly pro-labor era of the federal government, but someone asked me a question and I answered it based on what I saw minding the models and evidence on good jobs.

Two, unionization creates good jobs outcomes for workers and employers because it opens conversations that workers and their managers aren’t likely to have in the day-to-day rush of keeping the operation going. Sometimes bargaining doesn’t go well, obviously, but it can lead to management and staff talking about things in the workplace that wouldn’t get oxygen otherwise.

Under the law, most American workers can be fired at any moment for any reason—or no reason at all. Strangely, that can make a worker think twice about, say, suggesting how unloading deliveries would go better if the company addressed a huge problem. If they say nothing, their boss won’t get offended. Yet, the boss also will never see the issue, meaning a potentially huge idea for cost savings never gets heard.

Put another way: unionization can drive employers and their workers to think proactively through how the workplace is run and how it can be better. Because many companies do whatever worked at the start until it doesn’t work anymore, this means the beat created by bargaining conversations can be game changing.

You see a similar effect in a more specific lane of organizing also embraced by the last administration (and hated by management groups): project labor agreements, or PLAs, which are collective bargaining agreements that cover the hiring and operation of construction projects. PLAs require making a clear plan for the project and working out labor issues in advance to avoid delays. One study comparing a small group of PLA and non-PLA projects found that the PLA projects finished with fewer issues in construction that can delay or cause budget overruns.

Obviously, American employers tend to dislike unions—to put it mildly—for raising salaries and not wanting to share in workplace decision making. As I heard in many conversations about good jobs, that dislike can get awfully… spirited amid the politics of “right-to-work” states with laws that disfavor or discourage unionization.²

I’m not going to ignore the last several generations of labor-management relations in the United States. I also won’t pretend that organizing isn’t a confrontational process, with workers often coming together because their bosses provide poor, if not dangerous, working conditions.

I will say, however, that not tapping into the benefits of unionization because of the business orthodoxy that “Union = Bad” has caused downstream harm for American businesses. For one, unions have tended to be the best at skills training—for nearly a century, it turns out. That seems especially relevant at a time when we are talking again about employer struggling with skilled jobs they just can’t seem to fill.

Yet, even leaders at Costco, a good employer known for its embrace of its staff as part of its business model, told their managers this when one of its stores unionized:

Costco’s former CEO Craig Jelinek and current CEO Ron Vachris tag teamed on a memo sent to employees in late December in which they said they were “not disappointed in our employees; we’re disappointed in ourselves as managers and leaders.”

“The fact that a majority of Norfolk employees felt that they wanted or needed a union constitutes a failure on our part,” they wrote in a memo dated Dec. 29, and sent to all US employees.

So?

If one of the most bankable ways for employers and workers to benefit from good jobs is something many employers fear and hate and work against, it isn’t good.

What do we do about it?

Well, the past 150 years of management-labor relations in the United States can’t be rolled back. (I made some calls to check.)

In lieu of that, what I will say is this: if you’re an employer, the benefits you can gain through unionization make a compelling argument for taking steps like voluntary recognition. At the end of the day, the workplace works best if you treat workers like the partners they already are in your operation. Unionization makes that official.

Hello, valued customer.

Greetings from D.C., where I’m heading into the second day of the National Skills Coalition’s Skills Summit, the first day of which was fabulous. Will I make the questionable choice to dress as portable, stackable, and recognized credential? You’ll have to find me to see!

In the meantime, Substack sent me this over the weekend.

It’s a blast writing this newsletter every week. Publishing’s economic model hasn't gotten more forgiving than the last time I was writing for my supper, but I’m happy with JOBS THAT WORK’s start and I appreciate your investment in my work.

Card subject to change.

LATER THIS WEEK: I’ll have a couple videos on Job Corps, the Administration’s work to build a case for eliminating it, and some of the context missing in those efforts.

FRIDAY: Pending this week’s workforce funding calamities, the first of my predictions of what I think the Trump Administration will do to each workforce program it is putting under the microscope.

NEXT TUESDAY: The Trump Administration thinks you’re working the wrong job.

1. While I prefer my trimmer definition of good jobs, it’s important context to know which one I used at the Department of Labor. In 2022, the Departments of Labor and Commerce published the Good Jobs Principles, and I spent two years using these as a North Star for getting better outcomes from DOL’s workforce programs.

Here is what they included. Hitting all of these could be intimidating for employers, hence the stakeholder question I discuss in the main text.

Recruitment and Hiring: Qualified applicants are actively recruited – especially those from underserved communities. Applicants are free from discrimination, including unequal treatment or application of selection criteria that are unrelated to job performance. Applicants are evaluated with relevant skills-based requirements. Unnecessary educational, credentials and experience requirements are minimized.

Benefits: Full-time and part-time workers are provided family-sustaining benefits that promote economic security and mobility. These include health insurance, a retirement plan, workers’ compensation benefits, work-family benefits such as paid leave and caregiving supports, and others that may arise from engagement with workers. Workers are empowered and encouraged to use these benefits.

Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA): All workers have equal opportunity. Workers are respected, empowered, and treated fairly. DEIA is a core value and practiced norm in the workplace. Individuals from underserved communities do not face systemic barriers in the workplace. Underserved communities are persons adversely affected by persistent poverty, discrimination, or inequality, including Black, Indigenous, people of color; LGBTQ+ individuals; women; immigrants; veterans; military spouses; individuals with disabilities; individuals in rural communities; individuals without a college degree; individuals with or recovering from substance use disorder; and justice-involved individuals.

Empowerment and Representation: Workers can form and join unions. Workers can engage in protected, concerted activity without fear of retaliation. Workers contribute to decisions about their work, how it is performed, and organizational direction.

Job Security and Working Conditions: Workers have a safe, healthy, and accessible workplace, built on input from workers and their representatives. Workers have job security without arbitrary or discriminatory discipline or dismissal. They have adequate hours and predictable schedules. The use of electronic monitoring, data, and algorithms is transparent, equitable, and carefully deployed with input from workers. Workers are free from harassment, discrimination, and retaliation at work. Workers are properly classified under applicable laws. Temporary or contractor labor solutions are minimized.

Organizational Culture: All workers belong, are valued, contribute meaningfully to the organization, and are engaged and respected especially by leadership.

Pay: All workers are paid a stable and predictable living wage before overtime, tips, and commissions. Workers’ pay is fair, transparent, and equitable. Workers’ wages increase with increased skills and experience.

Skills and Career Advancement: Workers have equitable opportunities and tools to progress to future good jobs within their organizations or outside them. Workers have transparent promotion or advancement opportunities. Workers have access to quality employer- or labor-management-provided training and education.

2. Several weeks ago, I wrote about hard-to-work states where workforce participation rates are extraordinarily low. In some states, nearly half of the working population aren’t in the workforce. Interestingly, many of those states are among the most fervently right-to-work states and have fewer worker rights’ protections.