IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ecoind/v30y2009i1p93-119.html

`Trojan Horse' or `Vehicle for Organizing'? Non-Union Collective Agreement Making and Trade Unions in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Rae Cooper

    (University of Sydney)

  • Chris Briggs

    (University of Sydney)

Abstract

Unions have historically had a central place in industrial relations in Australia. However, they have been sidelined in recent years by, among other things, the development of non-union forms of agreement making. In the context of declining union density and power, this article examines the dynamics and outcomes of collective non-union agreement making in Australia between 1996 and 2005. In particular, it questions the extent to which these agreements have been used as a vehicle for deunionization or whether, on the other hand, they have offered unions opportunities to organize in non-union worksites. The study finds that the direct effect upon Australian unions, as measured by non-union agreement coverage 1996—2005, was limited. Nevertheless, there is evidence of employers using agreements to undermine union activity. They have been used as instruments to stymie organizing drives and to pre-empt or to undo union collective bargaining. On the other hand, unions have been presented with some opportunities to leverage organizing activities by the structured, collective processes of the non-union agreement-making stream. The study concludes that the uses and effects of non-agreement making were contingent upon a number of variables including: the relative power of unions and employers in a given worksite; the relationship between unions and their members over time; the bargaining history of the parties; and the intentions and choices of employers seeking to make agreements.

Suggested Citation

  • Rae Cooper & Chris Briggs, 2009. "`Trojan Horse' or `Vehicle for Organizing'? Non-Union Collective Agreement Making and Trade Unions in Australia," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 30(1), pages 93-119, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:ecoind:v:30:y:2009:i:1:p:93-119
    DOI: 10.1177/0143831X08099435
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0143831X08099435
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0143831X08099435?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. Jack Fiorito, 2001. "Human Resource Management Practices and Worker Desires for Union Representation," Journal of Labor Research, Transaction Publishers, vol. 22(2), pages 335-354, April.
    2. Richard Hyman, 1997. "The Future of Employee Representation," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 309-336, September.
    3. Rae Cooper & Bradon Ellem, 2008. "The Neoliberal State, Trade Unions and Collective Bargaining in Australia," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 46(3), pages 532-554, September.
    4. Towers, Brian, 1997. "The Representation Gap: Change and Reform in the British and American Workplace," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198289463.
    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. 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.
    2. Gollan, Paul & Markey, Ray & Ross, Iain, 2001. "Additional forms of employee representation in Australia," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 5033, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Alex Bryson & Richard Freeman, 2013. "Employee Perceptions of Working Conditions and the Desire for Worker Representation in Britain and the US," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 1-29, March.
    4. Michael Terry, 2003. "Partnership and the Future of Trade Unions in the UK," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 24(4), pages 485-507, November.
    5. Gollan, P.J. & Markey, R. & Ross, I., 2001. "Additional Forms of Employee Representation in Australia," Economics Working Papers wp01-11, School of Economics, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
    6. Amanda Pyman & Peter Holland & Julian Teicher & Brian K. Cooper, 2010. "Industrial Relations Climate, Employee Voice and Managerial Attitudes to Unions: An Australian Study," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 48(2), pages 460-480, June.
    7. 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.
    8. John H. Pencavel, 2004. "The Surprising Retreat of Union Britain," NBER Chapters, in: Seeking a Premier Economy: The Economic Effects of British Economic Reforms, 1980–2000, pages 181-232, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Bob Carter, 2001. "Lessons from America: Changes in the US Trade Union Movement," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 15(1), pages 185-194, March.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Tom Barratt & Caleb Goods & Alex Veen, 2020. "‘I’m my own boss…’: Active intermediation and ‘entrepreneurial’ worker agency in the Australian gig-economy," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(8), pages 1643-1661, November.
    13. Cameron Roles & Sukanya Ananth & Michael O’Donnell, 2022. "Reinforcing managerial prerogative in the Australian Public Service during the COVID-19 pandemic," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 33(1), pages 18-36, March.
    14. Lixin Cai & C. Jeffrey Waddoups, 2011. "Union Wage Effects in Australia: Evidence from Panel Data," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 49(Supplemen), pages 279-305, July.
    15. Marc-Antonin Hennebert & Marcel Faulkner, 2020. "Are strikes still a tool for union action? A qualitative investigation into the private sector in Quebec, Canada," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 41(1), pages 73-97, February.
    16. Nina Pološki Vokić & Alka Obadić, 2014. "The future of trade unions in Croatia – various stakeholders’ perspectives," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 20(4), pages 521-536, November.
    17. A Charlwood, 2003. "The Anatomy of Union Decline in Britain: 1990-1998," CEP Discussion Papers dp0601, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    18. Stephen Machin, 2000. "Union Decline in Britain," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 38(4), pages 631-645, December.
    19. Jianxuan Lei, 2024. "The importance of legal strength for trade unions: Theory and evidence from China," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(4), pages 491-511, October.
    20. Daryl D'Art & Thomas Turner, 2008. "Workers and the Demand for Trade Unions in Europe: Still a Relevant Social Force?," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 29(2), pages 165-191, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:ecoind:v:30:y:2009:i:1:p:93-119. 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: http://www.ekhist.uu.se/english.htm .

    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.