IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ecoind/v32y2011i1p5-27.html

Partnership and organizing: An empirical assessment of two contrasting approaches to union revitalization in the UK

Author

Listed:
  • Vidu Badigannavar

    (University of London, UK, Vidu.Badigannavar@rhul.ac.uk)

  • John Kelly

    (University of London, UK)

Abstract

The Trades Union Congress (TUC) in Britain has been advocating two contrasting approaches to union revitalization namely: ‘labour—management partnership’ and ‘union organizing’. Using a case study of a public services union this article examines empirically the prospects of union revival offered by these two contrasting approaches. Public services with relatively high union density should offer better prospects for union revival through partnership. However, the authors’ findings indicate that even in public services, partnership was not associated with management’s support for union recruitment, better facility time provisions for union representatives, lower worker grievances or union membership gains. Rank-and-file organizing, on the other hand, was associated with lower worker grievances, greater worker satisfaction with the union, higher worker involvement in union activities and union membership gains. Overall, the findings question the ‘mutual gains’ assertions of partnership advocates and lend support to the critics of partnership who propose an alternative organizing approach to union revitalization.

Suggested Citation

  • Vidu Badigannavar & John Kelly, 2011. "Partnership and organizing: An empirical assessment of two contrasting approaches to union revitalization in the UK," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 32(1), pages 5-27, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:ecoind:v:32:y:2011:i:1:p:5-27
    DOI: 10.1177/0143831X10365925
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0143831X10365925
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0143831X10365925?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. Stephen Deery & Roderick Iverson & Peter Erwin, 1999. "Industrial Relations Climate, Attendance Behaviour and the Role of Trade Unions," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 37(4), pages 533-558, December.
    2. David E. Guest & Riccardo Peccei, 2001. "Partnership at Work: Mutuality and the Balance of Advantage," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 39(2), pages 207-236, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jens Arnholtz & Christian Lyhne Ibsen & Flemming Ibsen, 2016. "Importing low-density ideas to high-density revitalisation: The ‘organising model’ in Denmark," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 37(2), pages 297-317, May.
    2. Gregor Gall & Jack Fiorito, 2016. "Union effectiveness: In search of the Holy Grail," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 37(1), pages 189-211, February.

    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. Heung-Jun Jung & Mohammad Ali, 2017. "Corporate Social Responsibility, Organizational Justice and Positive Employee Attitudes: In the Context of Korean Employment Relations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-24, October.
    2. Stephen J. Deery & Roderick D. Iverson, 2005. "Labor-Management Cooperation: Antecedents and Impact on Organizational Performance," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 58(4), pages 588-609, July.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Denis Harrisson & Mario Roy & Victor Haines III, 2011. "Union Representatives in Labour–Management Partnerships: Roles and Identities in Flux," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 49(3), pages 411-435, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Lazarova, Mila & Peretz, Hilla & Fried, Yitzhak, 2017. "Locals know best? Subsidiary HR autonomy and subsidiary performance," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 83-96.
    8. Martin Behrens & Markus Helfen, 2016. "The Foundations of Social Partnership," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 54(2), pages 334-357, June.
    9. Peter Butler & Olga Tregaskis & Linda Glover, 2013. "Workplace partnership and employee involvement – contradictions and synergies: Evidence from a heavy engineering case study," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 34(1), pages 5-24, February.
    10. Sprenger, Wim, 2011. "Trade Unions and innovation - innovative unions? Experiences from selected EU member states," Rostocker Beiträge zur Wirtschafts- und Organisationspsychologie 7, Universität Rostock, Seniorprofessur für Wirtschafts- und Organisationspsychologie.
    11. Anthony Dobbins & Patrick Gunnigle, 2009. "Can Voluntary Workplace Partnership Deliver Sustainable Mutual Gains?," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 47(3), pages 546-570, September.
    12. Catherine Casey & Helen Delaney, 2022. "The effort of partnership: Capacity development and moral capital in partnership for mutual gains," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 43(1), pages 52-71, February.
    13. Jeremy Waddington, 2013. "The Views of Members towards Workplace Union Organization in Banking between 1999 and 2008," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 51(2), pages 333-354, June.
    14. Peter Samuel, 2007. "Partnership consultation and employer domination in two British life and pensions firms," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 21(3), pages 459-477, September.
    15. AttaUllah & Zeeshan Javed & SaifUllah & Muhammad Sheraz & Prof. Dr. Anwar Irshad Burney, 2018. "The Impact of Human Capital Well-being on the Work Performance and Organizational Productivity," KASBIT Business Journals (KBJ), Khadim Ali Shah Bukhari Institute of Technology (KASBIT), vol. 11(1), pages 34-56, December.
    16. White, Michael & Bryson, Alex, 2018. "HPWS in the Public Sector: Are There Mutual Gains?," IZA Discussion Papers 11965, IZA Network @ LISER.
    17. John Geary & Andrea Signoretti, 2022. "The role of socio-economic embeddedness in promoting cooperation in the workplace: Evidence from family-owned Italian firms," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 43(4), pages 1867-1890, November.
    18. Clark, Andrew E., 2001. "What really matters in a job? Hedonic measurement using quit data," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 223-242, May.
    19. Alberto Bayo-Moriones & Jose Enrique Galdon-Sanchez & Sara Martinez-de-Morentin, 2016. "The process of wage adjustment: An analysis using establishment-level data," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 37(2), pages 245-268, May.
    20. Christina McCloskey & Anthony McDonnell, 2018. "Channels of employee voice: complementary or competing for space?," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(2), pages 174-193, March.

    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:32:y:2011:i:1:p:5-27. 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.