IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/brjirl/v53y2015i3p423-459.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Unions Good or Bad for Organizations? The Moderating Role of Management's Response

Author

Listed:
  • Dionne Pohler
  • Andrew Luchak

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Dionne Pohler & Andrew Luchak, 2015. "Are Unions Good or Bad for Organizations? The Moderating Role of Management's Response," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 53(3), pages 423-459, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:53:y:2015:i:3:p:423-459
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/bjir.2015.53.issue-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. John W. Budd & Dionne Pohler & Wei Huang, 2022. "Making sense of (mis)matched frames of reference: A dynamic cognitive theory of (in)stability in HR practices," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 268-289, July.
    2. Yi-Ying Chang & Paul Hughes & Ian Hodgkinson & Che-Yuan Chang & Yi-Tai Seih, 2022. "The antecedents of corporate entrepreneurship: multilevel, multisource evidence," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 355-390, February.
    3. Wen Wang & Jason Heyes & Roger Seifert, 2023. "Trade union influence on innovation in the British private sector: Direct and indirect paths," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 44(2), pages 604-627, May.
    4. Martin Behrens & Andreas Pekarek, 2021. "Divided We Stand? Coalition Dynamics in the German Union Movement," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 59(2), pages 503-531, June.

    More about this item

    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:bla:brjirl:v:53:y:2015:i:3:p:423-459. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    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.