IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mhr/jinste/urnsici0932-4569(201406)1702_336tsoflu_2.0.tx_2-q.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Structure of Firm-Specific Labour Unions

Author

Listed:
  • Thorsten Upmann
  • Julia Müller

Abstract

We apply a model with two types of labour where each group decides on whether it prefers to be represented by an independent craft-specific labour union or by a joint union. Applying the asymmetric Nash bargaining solution, we find that it is beneficial for at least one group of labourers to form its own independent union - and in some cases even both groups are worse off under a joint union. Consequently, a joint union must be considered as a rather unstable institution. Correspondingly, profits are lower if the firm bargains with two independent craft unions.

Suggested Citation

  • Thorsten Upmann & Julia Müller, 2014. "The Structure of Firm-Specific Labour Unions," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 170(2), pages 336-364, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:mhr:jinste:urn:sici:0932-4569(201406)170:2_336:tsoflu_2.0.tx_2-q
    DOI: 10.1628/093245613X13941110635976
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mohrsiebeck.com/en/article/the-structure-of-firm-specific-labour-unions-101628093245614x13941110635976
    Download Restriction: Fulltext access is included for subscribers to the printed version.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1628/093245613X13941110635976?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Svejnar, Jan, 1986. "Bargaining Power, Fear of Disagreement, and Wage Settlements: Theory and Evidence from U.S. Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(5), pages 1055-1078, September.
    2. Ray, Debraj, 2007. "A Game-Theoretic Perspective on Coalition Formation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199207954.
    3. Ken Binmore & Ariel Rubinstein & Asher Wolinsky, 1986. "The Nash Bargaining Solution in Economic Modelling," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(2), pages 176-188, Summer.
    4. John Duggan, "undated". "Non-Cooperative Games Among Groups," Wallis Working Papers WP21, University of Rochester - Wallis Institute of Political Economy.
    5. Andrea Gavosto, 1997. "The British Docks: A Test of Alternative Models of Wage and Employment Determination," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 11(2), pages 225-248, June.
    6. Dowrick, Steve, 1993. "Enterprise Bargaining, Union Structure and Wages," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 69(207), pages 393-404, December.
    7. Christofides, Louis N., 1990. "Non-nested tests of efficient bargain and labour demand models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 91-96, January.
    8. Stefan Boeters, 2004. "Green Tax Reform and Employment: The Interaction of Profit and Factor Taxes," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 60(2), pages 222-239, August.
    9. Brown, James N & Ashenfelter, Orley, 1986. "Testing the Efficiency of Employment Contracts," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 40-87, June.
    10. Davidson, Carl, 1988. "Multiunit Bargaining in Oligopolistic Industries," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(3), pages 397-422, July.
    11. Emmanuel Petrakis & Minas Vlassis, 2004. "Endogenous wage bargaining institutions in oligopolistic sectors," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 24(1), pages 55-73, July.
    12. Kim Moody, 2009. "The Direction of Union Mergers in the United States: The Rise of Conglomerate Unionism," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 47(4), pages 676-700, December.
    13. Gerber, Anke & Upmann, Thorsten, 2006. "Bargaining solutions at work: Qualitative differences in policy implications," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 162-175, September.
    14. JOHN CREEDY & IAN M. McDONALD, 1991. "Models of Trade Union Behaviour: A Synthesis," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 67(4), pages 346-359, December.
    15. Miyagawa, Eiichi, 2002. "Subgame-perfect implementation of bargaining solutions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 292-308, November.
    16. Klaus Kultti & Hannu Vartiainen, 2010. "Multilateral non-cooperative bargaining in a general utility space," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 39(4), pages 677-689, October.
    17. Britz, Volker & Herings, P. Jean-Jacques & Predtetchinski, Arkadi, 2010. "Non-cooperative support for the asymmetric Nash bargaining solution," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(5), pages 1951-1967, September.
    18. McDonald, Ian M & Solow, Robert M, 1981. "Wage Bargaining and Employment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(5), pages 896-908, December.
    19. Nicholas Lawson, 2011. "Is Collective Bargaining Pareto Efficient? A Survey of the Literature," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 282-304, September.
    20. Bill Yang, 1995. "Unionized oligopoly, labor-management cooperation, and international competitiveness," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 33-53, February.
    21. Eric van Damme, 1984. "The Nash Bargaining Solution is Optimal," Discussion Papers 597, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    22. Steve Dowrick, 1993. "Enterprise Bargaining, Union Structure and Wages," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 69(4), pages 393-404, December.
    23. Per Skedinger, 1992. "Employment determination in the Swedish wood industry : a test of the labor demand model," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 27-37, Spring.
    24. Walter Trockel, 2002. "A universal meta bargaining implementation of the Nash solution," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 19(3), pages 581-586.
    25. Creedy, John & McDonald, Ian M, 1991. "Models of Trade Union Behaviour: A Synthesis," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 67(199), pages 346-359, December.
    26. Laruelle, Annick & Valenciano, Federico, 2008. "Noncooperative foundations of bargaining power in committees and the Shapley-Shubik index," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 341-353, May.
    27. MaCurdy, Thomas E & Pencavel, John H, 1986. "Testing between Competing Models of Wage and Employment Determination in Unionized Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 3-39, June.
    28. Thorsten Bayindir‐Upmann & Matthias G. Raith, 2005. "Unemployment and Pollution: Is One Policy Suited for Two Problems?," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(255), pages 378-393, December.
    29. Ralitza Dimova, 2006. "Monopolistic wages or efficient contracts?: What determined the wage–employment bargain in post‐privatization Bulgaria?," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 14(2), pages 321-347, April.
    30. Damme, Eric van, 1986. "The Nash bargaining solution is optimal," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 78-100, February.
    31. Bughin, J, 1993. "Union-Firm Efficient Bargaining and Test of Oligopolistic Conduct," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(3), pages 563-567, August.
    32. Bean, Charles R & Turnbull, Peter J, 1988. "Employment in the British Coal Industry: A Test of the Labour Demand Model," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(393), pages 1092-1104, December.
    33. Dowrick, Steve, 1989. "Union-Oligopoly Bargaining," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(398), pages 1123-1142, December.
    34. Byoung Heon Jun, 1989. "Non-cooperative Bargaining and Union Formation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 56(1), pages 59-76.
    35. Bayindir-Upmann, Thorsten & Raith, Matthias G., 2003. "Should high-tax countries pursue revenue-neutral ecological tax reforms?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 41-60, February.
    36. Miyakawa, Toshiji, 2008. "Note on the equal split solution in an n-person noncooperative bargaining game," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 281-291, May.
    37. John T. Campling & Grant Michelson, 1997. "Trade Union Mergers in British and Australian Television Broadcasting," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 35(2), pages 215-242, June.
    38. Walter Trockel, 2000. "Implementations of the Nash solution based on its Walrasian characterization," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 16(2), pages 277-294.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Julia Müller & Thorsten Upmann, 2013. "Centralised Labour Market Negotiations," CESifo Working Paper Series 4470, CESifo.
    2. Claus-Jochen Haake & Thorsten Upmann & Papatya Duman, 2020. "Wage Bargaining and Employment Revisited: Separability and Efficiency in Collective Bargaining," CESifo Working Paper Series 8422, CESifo.
    3. Claus-Jochen Haake & Thorsten Upmann & Papatya Duman, 2019. "The Decomposability of the Nash Bargaining Solution in Labor Markets," Working Papers CIE 128, Paderborn University, CIE Center for International Economics.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Claus-Jochen Haake & Thorsten Upmann & Papatya Duman, 2019. "The Decomposability of the Nash Bargaining Solution in Labor Markets," Working Papers CIE 128, Paderborn University, CIE Center for International Economics.
    2. Claus-Jochen Haake & Thorsten Upmann & Papatya Duman, 2020. "Wage Bargaining and Employment Revisited: Separability and Efficiency in Collective Bargaining," CESifo Working Paper Series 8422, CESifo.
    3. Julia Müller & Thorsten Upmann, 2013. "Centralised Labour Market Negotiations," CESifo Working Paper Series 4470, CESifo.
    4. Nicholas Lawson, 2011. "Is Collective Bargaining Pareto Efficient? A Survey of the Literature," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 282-304, September.
    5. Claus‐Jochen Haake & Thorsten Upmann & Papatya Duman, 2023. "Wage bargaining and employment revisited: separability and efficiency in collective bargaining," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 125(2), pages 403-440, April.
    6. Paul Heidhues, 2000. "Employers’ Associations, Industry-wide Unions, and Competition," CIG Working Papers FS IV 00-11, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    7. António Brandão & Joana Pinho, 2018. "Productivity Shocks in a Union‐Duopoly Model," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 86(6), pages 722-756, December.
    8. Thorsten Upmann, 2009. "A positive analysis of labor-market institutions and tax reforms," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 16(5), pages 621-646, October.
    9. repec:pri:indrel:dsp01cc08hf62w is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Papatya Duman & Walter Trockel, 2016. "On non-cooperative foundation and implementation of the Nash solution in subgame perfect equilibrium via Rubinstein's game," The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design, Society for the Promotion of Mechanism and Institution Design, University of York, vol. 1(1), pages 83-107, December.
    11. Louis N. Christofides & Andrew J. Oswald, 1991. "Efficient and Inefficient Employment Outcomes: A Study Based on Canadian Data," NBER Working Papers 3648, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Thomas Eichner & Thorsten Upmann, 2014. "The (Im)Possibility of Overprovision of Public Goods in Interjurisdictional Tax Competition," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 70(2), pages 218-248, June.
    13. Bill Yang, 1995. "Unionized oligopoly, labor-management cooperation, and international competitiveness," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 33-53, February.
    14. Trockel, Walter, 2017. "Can and should the Nash Program be looked at as a part of mechanism theory," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 322, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    15. Marcus Dittrich, 2010. "Minimum Wages and Unemployment Benefits in a Unionized Economy: A Game-Theoretic Approach," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 11(2), pages 209-229, November.
    16. Chica Páez, Yolanda & Espinosa Alejos, María Paz, 2005. "Union Formation and Bargaining Rules in the Labor Market," DFAEII Working Papers 1988-088X, University of the Basque Country - Department of Foundations of Economic Analysis II.
    17. Ellen Brock & Sabien Dobbelaere, 2006. "Has International Trade Affected Workers’ Bargaining Power?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(2), pages 233-266, July.
    18. Christian Jansen, 2003. "Economic Effects of the New German Copyright Contract Law," Law and Economics 0302003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Ana Paula Martins & Rui Coimbra, 2004. "Efficient Union Contracts in the Presence of Homogeneous Labor and Differentiated Unions," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 5(1), pages 27-46, May.
    20. Dittrich, Marcus, 2007. "Minimum Wages and Union Bargaining in a Dual Labour Market," Dresden Discussion Paper Series in Economics 13/07, Technische Universität Dresden, Faculty of Business and Economics, Department of Economics.
    21. Trockel, Walter, 2017. "Integrating the Nash program into mechanism theory," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 305, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • J31 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials
    • J41 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Labor Contracts
    • J51 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining - - - Trade Unions: Objectives, Structure, and Effects

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mhr:jinste:urn:sici:0932-4569(201406)170:2_336:tsoflu_2.0.tx_2-q. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Wolpert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mohrsiebeck.com/jite .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.