Performance-related pay (PRP) and performance management (PM) are now a part of the organizationallandscape that unions face in the UK's public services. While PRP and PM threaten the scope of traditionalunion bargaining activities, they simultaneously offer a new role to unions as providers of 'procedural justiceservices' to both union members and employers. We explore the case of the introduction of these systems forclassroom teachers in England and Wales as a means of testing this idea. Our survey evidence shows thatclassroom teachers experiencing the introduction of PRP have expressed a strong demand for such services fromthe teachers' unions. Further, analysis of the PRP implementation process for classroom teachers indicates thatthe teachers' unions have progressively assumed a 'procedural justice role' since its introduction. Union actionin this regard has led to substantial modification over time of classroom teachers' PRP and PM. These changeshave addressed many of the concerns of teachers, have created a new institutional role for the relevant unions,and may permit the systems to avoid the operational difficulties they have experienced elsewhere in the UK'spublic services.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Centre for Economic Performance, LSE in its series CEP Discussion Papers with number
dp0660.
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
Did you know? You can include your works in the database easily by uploading them on the Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA) if you do not have access to an institutional RePEc archive.