IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wrk/warwec/753.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Unions, Wages and Labour Productivity : Evidence from Indian Cotton Mills

Author

Listed:
  • Gupta, Bishnupriya

    (Department of Economics, University of Warwick)

Abstract

This paper uses firm level data from all the textile producing regions in India to examine the relation between wages, unionization and labour productivity. We find that fewer workers were employed per machine in the unionized mills in Bombay and Ahmedabad, as compared to non-unionized regions implying that low labour productivity was not due to union resistance to increased work intensity. Our findings suggest that while low wages in India encouraged overmanning, higher wages, prompted by unionization, had productivity enhancing effects. We explore alternative explanations for low labour productivity, arising from the managerial and institutional structure of Indian cotton mills.

Suggested Citation

  • Gupta, Bishnupriya, 2006. "Unions, Wages and Labour Productivity : Evidence from Indian Cotton Mills," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 753, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:wrk:warwec:753
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/workingpapers/2006/twerp_753.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Clark, Gregory, 1994. "Factory Discipline," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 54(1), pages 128-163, March.
    2. Steven G. Allen, 1983. "Unionization and Productivity in Office Building and School Construction," NBER Working Papers 1139, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Brown, Charles & Medoff, James, 1978. "Trade Unions in the Production Process," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 86(3), pages 355-378, June.
    4. Gary R. Saxonhouse, 1977. "Productivity Change and Labor Absorption in Japanese Cotton Spinning 1891–1935," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 91(2), pages 195-219.
    5. Edward C. Prescott & Stephen L. Parente, 1999. "Monopoly Rights: A Barrier to Riches," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1216-1233, December.
    6. John T. Addison & Claus Schnabel (ed.), 2003. "International Handbook of Trade Unions," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2705.
    7. Robert E. Hall & Charles I. Jones, 1999. "Why do Some Countries Produce So Much More Output Per Worker than Others?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(1), pages 83-116.
    8. Machin, S.J., 1988. "The Productivity Effects Of Unionisation And Firm Size In British Engineering Firms," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 293, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    9. Clark, Gregory, 1987. "Why Isn't the Whole World Developed? Lessons from the Cotton Mills," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(1), pages 141-173, March.
    10. Gary R. Saxonhouse & Gavin Wright, 1984. "New Evidence on the Stubborn English Mule and the Cotton Industry, 1878-1920," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 37(4), pages 507-519, November.
    11. Steven G. Allen, 1986. "Unionization and Productivity in Office Building and School Construction," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 39(2), pages 187-201, January.
    12. Wolcott, Susan, 1994. "The Perils of Lifetime Employment Systems: Productivity Advance in the Indian and Japanese Textile Industries, 1920–1938," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 54(2), pages 307-324, June.
    13. Keijiro Otsuka & Gustav Ranis & Gary Saxonhouse, 1988. "Comparative Technology Choice in Development," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-19140-6, December.
    14. Brian Bemmels, 1987. "How Unions Affect Productivity in Manufacturing Plants," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 40(2), pages 241-253, January.
    15. repec:bla:econom:v:58:y:1991:i:232:p:479-90 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Bishnupriya Gupta, 2011. "Wages, unions, and labour productivity: evidence from Indian cotton mills," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 64(s1), pages 76-98, February.
    2. Jerzmanowski, Michal, 2007. "Total factor productivity differences: Appropriate technology vs. efficiency," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(8), pages 2080-2110, November.
    3. Berthold Herrendorf & Arilton Teixeira, 2005. "How Barriers to International Trade Affect TFP," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 8(4), pages 866-876, October.
    4. Ashvin Ahuja & Thammarak Moenjak, 2002. "Economic Arrangements and Long-Term Growth in Thailand," Working Papers 2002-05, Monetary Policy Group, Bank of Thailand.
    5. David Lagakos, 2009. "Superstores or mom and pops? Technolgy adoption and productivity differences in retail trade," Staff Report 428, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    6. Barry T. Hirsch, 2012. "Unions, dynamism, and economic performance," Chapters, in: Cynthia L. Estlund & Michael L. Wachter (ed.), Research Handbook on the Economics of Labor and Employment Law, chapter 4, pages 107-145, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Herrendorf, Berthold & Teixeira, Arilton, 2003. "Monopoly Rights can Reduce Income Big Time," CEPR Discussion Papers 3854, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Chiquiar Daniel & Ramos Francia Manuel, 2009. "Competitiveness and Growth of the Mexican Economy," Working Papers 2009-11, Banco de México.
    9. Tomoko HASHINO & Keijiro Otsuka, 2021. "Selective Technology Choice, Adaptations, and Industrial Development: Lessons from Japanese Historical Experience," Discussion Papers 2124, Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University.
    10. Rosés, Joan R., 1998. "The choice of tecnology in the Mediterranean basin : some evidence from the Spanish, Italian, British and us cotton mills(1830-1860)," IFCS - Working Papers in Economic History.WH 6182, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Instituto Figuerola.
    11. Aditi Dixit & Elise van Nederveen Meerkerk, 2022. "Supply of labour during early industrialisation: Agricultural systems, textile factory work and gender in Japan and India, ca. 1880–1940," The Indian Economic & Social History Review, , vol. 59(2), pages 223-255, April.
    12. Diego Comin & Bart Hobijn & Emilie Rovito, 2008. "Technology usage lags," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 237-256, December.
    13. Andrea Asoni, 2008. "Protection Of Property Rights And Growth As Political Equilibria," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 953-987, December.
    14. Rok Spruk & Mitja Kovac, 2018. "Inefficient Growth," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 9(2).
    15. Mr. Ashvin Ahuja, 2012. "De-Monopolization toward Long-Term Prosperity in China," IMF Working Papers 2012/075, International Monetary Fund.
    16. Alejandro Ayuso‐Díaz & Antonio Tena‐Junguito, 2020. "Trade in the shadow of power: Japanese industrial exports in the interwar years," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 73(3), pages 815-843, August.
    17. Timothy Leunig, 2003. "A British industrial success: productivity in the Lancashire and New England cotton spinning industries a century ago," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 56(1), pages 90-117, February.
    18. Edward C. Prescott & Stephen L. Parente, 1999. "Monopoly Rights: A Barrier to Riches," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1216-1233, December.
    19. Jerzmanowski, Michal & Tamura, Robert, 2019. "Directed technological change & cross-country income differences: A quantitative analysis," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    20. Andres Erosa & Ana Hidalgo, 2005. "On Capital Market Imperfections as a Source of Low TFP and Economic Rents," Working Papers tecipa-200, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wrk:warwec:753. 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: Margaret Nash (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dewaruk.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.