IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Industrial conflict in the engineering construction industry in Britain


  • Gregor Gall


The militant and unofficial grassroots-led engineering construction strikes of 2009 starkly indicated that the industrial relations of the engineering construction industry in Britain can be characterized and termed as old-fashioned, adversarial and robust. This article takes these strikes as its point of departure to provide an overview of the nature and contours of the contemporary industrial relations of the engineering construction industry (ECI). This demonstrates that not only is this characterization broadly correct but it is surprising in as much as it forms a break with the previous decades of industrial relations in the ECI. The article provides a synopsis of the strikes in 2009 and a contextualized analysis of the social dynamics underpinning them. This is followed by an examination of the nature of the labour market, cycles of engineering construction activity, and processes of industrial relations in the ECI, where the 2009 strikes are used as a prism by which to view them. Thereafter, the issue of assessing the nature and extent of industrial conflict is returned to.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregor Gall, 2012. "Industrial conflict in the engineering construction industry in Britain," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(7), pages 535-544, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:30:y:2012:i:7:p:535-544
    DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2012.661442

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    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 are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Janet Druker & Geoffrey White, 2013. "Employment relations on major construction projects: the London 2012 Olympic construction site," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(5-6), pages 566-583, November.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:taf:conmgt:v:30:y:2012:i:7:p:535-544. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.