Front-line supervisors shape culture, influence votes, and define trust. Their alignment can mean the difference between remaining union-free or facing a costly election.
By Mark A. Lema, MHR, SPHR, SHRM-SCP.
Union campaigns can be emotionally charged and complex. During our work supporting employers who aim to remain union-free, we occasionally encounter one of the toughest situations—a supervisor or manager showing sympathy or open support for the union movement.
Under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the term supervisor refers to any manager or company agent with authority over employees. When one of them sides with the union, many CEOs or senior leaders react with shock—or even anger—sometimes labeling it as betrayal. Yet in most cases, this reaction overlooks the deeper cause.
Through years of consulting, I’ve learned that this usually involves front-line supervisors—the individuals most connected to their teams. They hear employees’ frustrations, witness daily struggles, and often share similar concerns. The difference is that supervisors do have a seat at the table—but too often, their voices go unheard.
Repeatedly raising employee concerns to upper management without acknowledgment or follow-up breeds disillusionment. Over time, this disconnect erodes trust and creates resentment—not just toward leadership decisions, but toward the organization as a whole. When these supervisors see their own concerns ignored while being expected to defend company policies, their loyalty begins to fade.
In some campaigns, we find that supervisors’ issues never reach senior decision-makers. In others, middle management blocks communication, driven by a “management-by-fear” approach—focused on cost-cutting and personal performance bonuses while ignoring the long-term cultural damage caused by disengagement.
When that happens, the seeds of union sympathy aren’t planted by outside organizers—they grow from within. Unless leadership takes the time to listen, understand, and address root causes, those seeds can quickly take hold, even among the company’s own ranks.
The good news is that these supervisors are often “flippable.” With the right approach, they can become some of your strongest allies in countering a union drive. The key is communication. Many supervisors simply don’t understand the potential negative consequences unionization may bring, or they’re unaware of the company’s position and strategy.
In these cases, a strong campaign kickoff—led by a credible, decisive leader—can be transformational. Openly acknowledging communication gaps and demonstrating a genuine commitment (no promises) to addressing concerns goes a long way. This step isn’t optional; it’s essential before launching any counter-campaign.
I cannot stress enough: your supervisors must be aligned, engaged, and ready to lead if you expect an effective educational campaign. They are the bridge between leadership and the workforce—and without that bridge, even the strongest anti-union strategy will crumble.
Ultimately, the engagement and full support of your front-line supervisors is the single most critical factor in countering a union election. These leaders shape daily employee experiences and have the strongest influence on workplace culture. Senior leadership must remember that these supervisors are the most influential people on the floor—they can be the deciding factor between winning or losing a union campaign.
And remember—any leadership or communication gaps that fueled dissatisfaction will only be yours to correct after the campaign, and only if employees trust you enough to vote “No.”