The Burke Group
| Company type | Private |
|---|---|
| Industry | Management consulting |
| Founded | 1982 |
| Founder | Steven J Burke Sr. |
| Headquarters | Los Angeles , United States |
Area served | International (United States, Australia, United Kingdom) |
| Products | Management consulting services in labor relations, union recognition advising, business growth strategies, leadership development |
The Burke Group is an international management consulting firm based in the United States, established in 1982 by Steven J Burke Sr. The organization maintains offices in Canberra, Australia; Casper, Wyoming; Los Angeles; and London.
Claiming expertise as a global authority in advising management during union recognition efforts, The Burke Group provides services to both private and public sector employers, including business growth strategies and leadership development. However, some critics categorize the firm's activities as professional union avoidance.
Business
The Burke Group Labor supports employers aiming to prevent unionization. Their U.S. website states that employees contemplating joining a trade union "deserve access to both employer and union perspectives to make an informed decision before voting." Typically, employers hire The Burke Group or legal advisors to respond appropriately and within legal boundaries to union organizing efforts.
Operating internationally from its inception, The Burke Group broadened its offerings within the European Union following the introduction of the Employee Relations Act 1999 (ERA 1999) in the UK. This legislation established new protocols for trade union recognition and ballot elections. Employers rely on consultants such as The Burke Group to manage these procedures, which include automatic recognition or conducting ballots. The UK's mixed system permits either employers or the Central Arbitration Committee to recognize unions based on membership evidence or election results.
For direct employee communication strategies known as third-party persuading, The Burke Group advises clients to collaborate with Labor Information Services, headed by CEO David J Burke. This service allows employees to interact directly with professional consultants during organizing campaigns, offering information beyond that provided by union representatives. These communications adhere to the Landrum-Griffin Act (Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act), which mandates comprehensive reporting of third-party involvement.
Labor Information Services also addresses language barriers faced by non-English-speaking workers within U.S. industries. Since most supervisors lack bilingual skills or labor law expertise, LIS consultants deliver communications in multiple languages including English, Spanish, Tagalog, French, Portuguese, Vietnamese, and various Chinese dialects.
Agreement between AFL-CIO and TUC on anti-union practices by U.S. companies
In 2008, the Trades Union Congress (UK) partnered with the AFL-CIO (USA) to initiate a collaborative campaign opposing employer tactics they alleged were designed to "vilify trade unions and intimidate workers from joining." Their report, titled "US Union Avoidance Consultants: A Threat to the Rights of British Workers," condemned firms that hired consulting agencies during union recognition drives and ballot elections. It outlined strategies purportedly employed by American consultants and legal advisers, highlighting the involvement of the Burke Group within the UK context.
The Burke Group issued a statement dismissing the report as biased and deceptive, asserting it relied on partisan research. They also emphasized that neither they nor their clients were approached for comment or verification prior to the report’s release.
Issues concerning trademarks
Between 2001 and 2005, Burke International secured and rigorously defended the US trademark for rooibos, a widely recognized regional herb name. Utilizing the trademark obtained from former client Annique Theron, they sought payments of US$5000 from tea cafés and online retailers. This enforcement action prompted Rooibos Limited to initiate legal proceedings in 2002, supported by various tea distributors and sellers opposing Burke’s trademark claims. The conflict concluded with a 2005 settlement that resulted in the trademark being relinquished.
Case study: Cable and Wireless
In May 2007, the UK Communication Workers Union (CWU) requested "automatic recognition" for their Field Service unit at Cable and Wireless by submitting form 1A to the Central Arbitration Committee, which approved the unit. Nevertheless, Cable and Wireless Worldwide contested this decision, citing concerns over the unit’s limited size and potential fragmentation issues.
By August 2007, CWU appointed representatives at Cable and Wireless to assist employees regarding union membership, while the company simultaneously engaged its own representatives to advise management. The CWU criticized this dual representation, warning it might generate hostility and dissatisfaction among staff.
Following a review of the appropriate bargaining unit in April 2008, the Central Arbitration Committee mandated a workforce ballot election instead of granting automatic recognition. The election recorded a 92% turnout among Field Services employees, with 77% voting against CWU representation for collective bargaining purposes.
In May 2009, contesting the ballot results, CWU lodged complaints with both the Central Arbitration Committee and The Joint Committee on Human Rights. Investigations revealed that The Burke Group (TBG) had been contracted by Cable and Wireless to provide guidance on navigating the complex statutory recognition procedure. TBG adopted an evidence-based strategy enabling management to communicate effectively with teams about union recognition implications. Importantly, TBG did not engage directly with employees but supported a fair ballot process by ensuring both Cable and Wireless and CWU had equal opportunities to access staff during the 20-day voting period.