IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/treure/v26y2020i4p415-430.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Post-socialist labour and the dual logic of collective action: workers’ unrest and trade union strategy in Fiat Automobiles Serbia

Author

Listed:
  • Francesco Bagnardi

    (10185European University Institute, Florence, Italy)

  • Valentina Petrović

    (10185European University Institute, Florence, Italy)

Abstract

In this article we examine the episode of labour discontent that occurred at the Fiat-Chrysler assembly plant in Kragujevac, Serbia, in the summer of 2017. The article traces the process through which the two main trade unions organised and channelled labour unrest at the plant level. Drawing on Offe and Wiesenthal’s conceptualisation of workers’ collective action dilemma, the case highlights the trade-off between on the one hand the need for institutional legitimation and on the other hand responsiveness to workers’ demands. We attempt to show that unions still have space in which to represent workers’ interests effectively when disputes emerge, regardless of unfavourable structural constraints and legacies. The article shows that not even traditionally non-conflictual and legacy unions can be fully sheltered from democratic pressures from workers and competitor organisations. Therefore, the ability to mediate between democratic and bureaucratic logics of action and legitimation remains crucial for any union and determines unions’ ability to represent effectively the interests of labour. Dans cet article, les auteurs examinent l’épisode de mécontentement des travailleurs qui s’est produit à l’usine d’assemblage Fiat-Chrysler à Kragujevac, en Serbie, à l’été 2017. L’article retrace le processus par lequel les deux principaux syndicats ont organisé et canalisé les conflits de travail au niveau de l’usine. En se fondant sur la conceptualisation développée par Offe et Wiesenthal du choix de l’action collective des travailleurs, ce cas met en évidence le compromis entre, d’une part, le besoin de légitimation institutionnelle et, d’autre part, la capacité à répondre aux demandes des travailleurs. Les auteurs tentent de montrer que les syndicats disposent encore de l’espace nécessaire pour représenter efficacement les intérêts des travailleurs lorsque des conflits surgissent, indépendamment des contraintes structurelles et de l’héritage défavorables qui leur ont été laissés. Cet article montre que même les syndicats traditionnellement non conflictuels et ceux issus du passé ne peuvent pas être totalement à l’abri des pressions démocratiques des travailleurs et des organisations concurrentes. Par conséquent, la capacité de médiation entre les logiques démocratiques et bureaucratiques de l’action et de la légitimation demeure primordiale pour tout syndicat et détermine la capacité des syndicats à représenter efficacement les intérêts des travailleurs. Im vorliegenden Artikel untersuchen wir die Auseinandersetzungen zwischen der Belegschaft und der Unternehmensleitung im Fiat-Chrysler-Montagewerk in Kragujevac, Serbien im Sommer 2017. Der Artikel zeichnet nach, wie die beiden großen betrieblich vertretenen Gewerkschaften die Unzufriedenheit der Arbeitnehmer auf der Werksebene kanalisiert und organisiert haben. Unter Bezugnahme auf Offes und Wiesenthals Konzeptualisierung des Dilemmas des kollektiven Handelns von Arbeitnehmern ist dieser Fall symptomatisch für den Zielkonflikt zwischen der Notwendigkeit institutioneller Legitimation einerseits und dem Reaktionsvermögen auf Forderungen von Arbeitnehmern andererseits. Wir versuchen nachzuweisen, dass Gewerkschaften nach wie vor Handlungsspielräume haben, um in Konfliktfällen Arbeitnehmerinteressen ungeachtet struktureller Einschränkungen und Altlasten effektiv zu vertreten. Der Artikel zeigt, dass nicht einmal traditionell konsensorientierte Gewerkschaften und Rechtsnachfolger der früheren sozialistischen Gewerkschaften umfassend vor demokratisch legitimiertem Druck von Arbeitnehmern und Mitbewerberorganisationen geschützt werden können. Die Fähigkeit, zwischen demokratischer und bürokratischer Handlungslogik und Legitimation vermitteln zu können, ist deshalb für alle Gewerkschaften von entscheidender Bedeutung und bestimmt ihre Fähigkeit, die Interessen von Arbeitnehmern wirksam zu vertreten.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Bagnardi & Valentina Petrović, 2020. "Post-socialist labour and the dual logic of collective action: workers’ unrest and trade union strategy in Fiat Automobiles Serbia," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 26(4), pages 415-430, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:treure:v:26:y:2020:i:4:p:415-430
    DOI: 10.1177/1024258919879803
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1024258919879803
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1024258919879803?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Magdalena Bernaciak, 2013. "Social dialogue revival or ‘PR corporatism’? Negotiating anti-crisis measures in Poland and Bulgaria1," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 19(2), pages 239-251, May.
    2. Magdalena Bernaciak, 2015. "All roads lead to decentralization? Collective bargaining trends and prospects in Central and Eastern Europe," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 21(3), pages 373-381, August.
    3. Sarah Ashwin, 2004. "Social Partnership or a ‘Complete Sellout’? Russian Trade Unions’ Responses to Conflict," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 42(1), pages 23-46, March.
    4. Vera Glassner, 2013. "Central and eastern European industrial relations in the crisis: national divergence and path-dependent change," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 19(2), pages 155-169, May.
    5. Richard Hyman, 1997. "The Future of Employee Representation," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 309-336, September.
    6. Hyman, Richard., 2010. "Social dialogue and industrial relations during the economic crisis : innovative practices or business as usual?," ILO Working Papers 994545023402676, International Labour Organization.
    7. repec:ilo:ilowps:454502 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Béla Greskovits, 2015. "Ten years of enlargement and the forces of labour in Central and Eastern Europe," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 21(3), pages 269-284, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Marta Kahancová, 2015. "Central and Eastern European trade unions after the EU enlargement," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 21(3), pages 343-357, August.
    2. Béla Greskovits, 2015. "Ten years of enlargement and the forces of labour in Central and Eastern Europe," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 21(3), pages 269-284, August.
    3. Bryson, Alex, 2001. "Union effects on managerial and employee perceptions of employee relations in Britain," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 4957, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Miguel Martínez Lucio & Stefania Marino & Heather Connolly, 2017. "Organising as a strategy to reach precarious and marginalised workers. A review of debates on the role of the political dimension and the dilemmas of representation and solidarity," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 23(1), pages 31-46, February.
    5. Aleksandra Gregorič & Thomas Poulsen, 2020. "When Do Employees Choose to Be Represented on the Board of Directors? Empirical Analysis of Board‐Level Employee Representation in Denmark," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 58(2), pages 241-272, June.
    6. Guglielmo Meardi & Arianna Tassinari, 2022. "Crisis corporatism 2.0? The role of social dialogue in the pandemic crisis in Europe," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 28(1), pages 83-100, February.
    7. Valentina Franca & Anja Strojin Štampar, 2021. "Board‐level employee representative independence: Myth or reality? Theoretical analysis and empirical research—the case for Slovenia," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 92(4), pages 569-585, December.
    8. William K. Roche & Paul Teague, 2015. "Antecedents of concession bargaining in the Great Recession: evidence from Ireland," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(5-6), pages 434-445, November.
    9. Magdalena Bernaciak, 2013. "Social dialogue revival or ‘PR corporatism’? Negotiating anti-crisis measures in Poland and Bulgaria1," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 19(2), pages 239-251, May.
    10. John T. Addison & Alex Bryson & Paulino Teixeira & André Pahnke & Lutz Bellmann, 2013. "The Extent of Collective Bargaining and Workplace Representation: Transitions between States and their Determinants. A Comparative Analysis of Germany and Great Britain," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 60(2), pages 182-209, May.
    11. Thomas Amossé & Philippe Askenazy & Martin Chevalier & Christine Erhel & Héloïse Petit & Antoine Rebérioux, 2016. "Industrial Relations and Firms’ Reactions to the Recession: A Comparative Micro-Econometric Analysis of France and Great Britain [Relations sociales et ajustements à la crise : une analyse micro-st," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-02172455, HAL.
    12. Ilaria Armaroli, 2022. "Integrating direct employee voice within the framework of worker representation: The role of an Italian trade union in organising disintermediation," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 43(2), pages 658-684, May.
    13. Kurt Vandaele, 2021. "Applauded ‘nightingales’ voicing discontent. Exploring labour unrest in health and social care in Europe before and since the COVID-19 pandemic," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 27(3), pages 399-411, August.
    14. John T. Addison & Alex Bryson & Paulino Teixeira & André Pahnke & Lutz Bellmann, 2013. "The Extent of Collective Bargaining and Workplace Representation: Transitions between States and their Determinants. A Comparative Analysis of Germany and Great Britain," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 60(2), pages 182-209, May.
    15. John T. Addison & Alex Bryson & Paulino Teixeira & André Pahnke, 2011. "Slip Sliding Away: Further Union Decline In Germany And Britain," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 58(4), pages 490-518, September.
    16. John T. Addison & Claus Schnabel, 2011. "Worker Directors: A German Product that Did Not Export?," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 354-374, April.
    17. Alan Tuckman & Jeremé Snook, 2014. "Between consultation and collective bargaining? The changing role of non-union employee representatives: a case study from the finance sector," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(1), pages 77-97, January.
    18. Maria da Paz Campos Lima & Antonio Martín Artiles, 2018. "Social protests, discontent and politics in southern and eastern Europe," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 24(2), pages 195-215, May.
    19. Vera Glassner, 2013. "Central and eastern European industrial relations in the crisis: national divergence and path-dependent change," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 19(2), pages 155-169, May.
    20. Lyytikäinen, Laura & Kemppainen, Teemu, 2016. "Regional inequalities in self-rated health in Russia: What is the role of social and economic capital?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 92-99.

    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:sae:treure:v:26:y:2020:i:4:p:415-430. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.