IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/brjirl/v61y2023i4p951-974.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional support for new work roles: The case of care coordinators in the United States and England

Author

Listed:
  • Nick Krachler

Abstract

Drawing on comparative employment relations literature, this article explores how employment relations (ER) institutions support the ‘care coordinator’, a new role tasked with aiding the exchange of information between health and social services in the United States and the UK. Findings show that in both countries, multi‐employer collective bargaining facilitated this role by providing good working conditions and a stable work environment; additionally, the new role performed better in England due to the broader scope of bargaining and supportive management practices. The article advances a comparative institutional perspective on the creation of new tasks focused on sub‐national (sectoral and regional) ER.

Suggested Citation

  • Nick Krachler, 2023. "Institutional support for new work roles: The case of care coordinators in the United States and England," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 61(4), pages 951-974, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:61:y:2023:i:4:p:951-974
    DOI: 10.1111/bjir.12748
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjir.12748
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/bjir.12748?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. repec:mpr:mprres:7472 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Nick Krachler & Jennie Auffenberg & Luigi Wolf, 2021. "The Role of Organizational Factors in Mobilizing Professionals: Evidence from Nurse Unions in the United States and Germany," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 59(3), pages 643-668, September.
    3. John Godard, 2004. "A Critical Assessment of the High‐Performance Paradigm," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 42(2), pages 349-378, June.
    4. Arindrajit Dube & Ethan Kaplan & Owen Thompson, 2016. "Nurse Unions and Patient Outcomes," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 69(4), pages 803-833, August.
    5. Richard M. Locke, 1992. "The Demise of the National Union in Italy: Lessons for Comparative Industrial Relations Theory," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 45(2), pages 229-249, January.
    6. Ian Kessler & Paul Heron & Sue Dopson, 2013. "Indeterminacy and the Regulation of Task Allocation: The Shape of Support Roles in Healthcare," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 51(2), pages 310-332, June.
    7. Colm McLaughlin & Chris F. Wright, 2018. "The Role of Ideas in Understanding Industrial Relations Policy Change in Liberal Market Economies," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 568-610, October.
    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. Nick Krachler & Jennie Auffenberg & Luigi Wolf, 2021. "The Role of Organizational Factors in Mobilizing Professionals: Evidence from Nurse Unions in the United States and Germany," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 59(3), pages 643-668, September.
    2. Pauline Stanton & Timothy Bartram & Greg J. Bamber, 2022. "The role of nurses' unions in workplace innovation in Australian and Canadian hospitals: Analysing union strategies," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(5), pages 484-500, September.
    3. Catherine Casey & Helen Delaney & Antje Fiedler, 2021. "Recalling the moral dimension: Transnational labour interests and corporate social responsibilities," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(5), pages 389-405, September.
    4. Ariel C. Avgar & Niti Pandey & Kiwook Kwon, 2012. "Discretion in Context: A Moderated Mediation Model of the Relationship between Discretion and Turnover Intentions," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 106-128, January.
    5. Alex Bryson & Lucy Stokes & David Wilkinson, 2023. "Is pupil attainment higher in well-managed schools?," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(1), pages 129-144, January.
    6. Ian Greer & Thorsten Schulten & Nils Böhlke, 2013. "How Does Market Making Affect Industrial Relations? Evidence from Eight German Hospitals," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 51(2), pages 215-239, June.
    7. Giovanni Costa & Arnaldo Camuffo, 2014. "The evolution of human resource management in Italy: a historical-institutional perspective," Chapters, in: Bruce E. Kaufman (ed.), The Development of Human Resource Management Across Nations, chapter 11, pages 269-299, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Maddy Janssens & Chris Steyaert, 2009. "HRM and Performance: A Plea for Reflexivity in HRM Studies," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 143-155, January.
    9. John Geary & Aurora Trif, 2011. "Workplace Partnership and the Balance of Advantage: A Critical Case Analysis," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 49(Supplemen), pages 44-69, June.
    10. Pasi Koski & Anu Järvensivu, 2010. "The innovation diffusion paradox in the light of ‘shop-floor games’ and micro-politics," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 31(3), pages 345-363, August.
    11. Christopher Erickson & Andrea Ichino, 1995. "Wage Differentials in Italy: Market Forces, Institutions, and Inflation," NBER Chapters, in: Differences and Changes in Wage Structures, pages 265-306, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Wei Chi & Richard B. Freeman & Morris M. Kleiner, 2011. "Adoption and Termination of Employee Involvement Programs," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 25(1), pages 45-62, March.
    13. Blanchflower, David G. & Bryson, Alex & Forth, John, 2006. "Workplace Industrial Relations in Britain, 1980-2004," IZA Discussion Papers 2518, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Moshfique Uddin & Anup Chowdhury & Geoffrey Wood, 2022. "The resilience of the British and European goods industry: Challenge of Brexit," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(4), pages 934-954.
    15. Marco Hauptmeier, 2012. "Institutions Are What Actors Make of Them — The Changing Construction of Firm-Level Employment Relations in Spain," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 50(4), pages 737-759, December.
    16. Lindbeck, A & Snower, D-J, 1996. "Centralized Bargaining, Multi-Tasking, and Work Incentives," Papers 620, Stockholm - International Economic Studies.
    17. Mihajla Gavin & Scott Fitzgerald & Susan McGrath-Champ, 2022. "From marketising to empowering: Evaluating union responses to devolutionary policies in education," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 33(1), pages 80-99, March.
    18. 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.
    19. Kirchner, Stefan & Oppen, Maria & Bellmann, Lutz, 2008. "Zur gesellschaftlichen Einbettung von Organisationswandel : Einführungsdynamik dezentraler Organisationsstrukturen," IAB-Discussion Paper 200837, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    20. Alex Bryson & Rafael Gomez & Tobias Kretschmer, 2005. "Catching a Wave: the Adoption of Voice and High Commitment Workplace Practices in Britain: 1984-1998," CEP Discussion Papers dp0676, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    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:61:y:2023:i:4:p:951-974. 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: 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.