Comparative Employee Relations: Trade Unions

Employee Collectivism: representation and orientation

INTRODUCTION

The notion of trade unionism is well known, and this is in part due to the fact that in the second and third quarters of the twentieth

century trade unions became significant `actors’. In many parts of Europe they developed to represent the interests of workers

directly in the workplace and through influencing the regulation of labour markets through social pacts that served to shape

contemporary European welfare states (Ebbinhaus, 1995). In many parts of the colonised world of the twentieth century trade

unions were significant players in liberation and independence movements (Mihyo & Schiphorst, 1995, Henk, 1995, Hua Wu Yin,

1985).

However, since the last quarter of the twentieth century many trade unions in the advanced industrial countries have been faced

with fundamental challenges. These challenges have emerged from a combination of neo-liberalism and the associated pressures of

domestic and international competition, privatisation and marketisation of public sectors, as well as from a shift from manufacturing to service sector employment and the growth of

atypical workers. For some, these forces are seen as the explanation for the trend towards decentralisation and search

for increased labour productivity through `new’ management techniques associated with flexibility, quality, commitment and innovation as exemplified in the notion of human resource

management. While others authors may interpret the trends in

1

labour management as representing labour intensification both schools raise issues as to the necessity and desirability of

organised labour in the management of the economic affairs of companies and nation states in the era of globalisation. These

issues are affecting trade unions across the globe.

In the advanced newly industrialising countries such as Korea and Japan trade unions where trade unions have, arguably, been

secondary to the principal purpose of economic growth, intensification of competition, and financial crisis have posed

challenges to trade unions and led to pressures for labour market flexibility (Rowley and Benson, 2000).

In the less developed debt ridden countries of countries of Africa and Latin America unions have seen been affected by the impact of structural adjustment programmes, previously strong

presence in the public sector has been weakened owing to privatisations while the inability to develop a formal private

sector has seen the growth of the difficult to organise informal sector. These factors combined with a the feeling that unions

have been too closely attached to political elite has led some unions to re-evaluate and re-orientate their strategy (Mihyo &

Schiphorst, 1995).

The broad conclusion of most authors is that trade union influence and survival is either under threat or already in

decline, whilst those able to sustain their position are finding it difficult to grow (Eaton, 2000). The implication of this is the

possible demise of the significance of trade unions. The question as to whether we will see a convergence in the decline of trade

unionism per se or the development of a new type of unionism are important issues of interest and debate, and cross country

comparison of trade unions enables us to address such questions. Indeed despite the pressures that have been facing trade unions

there appears to be significant differences over the depth and nature of the challenge faced by them, with some showing growth, others fluctuating stability while others appear to be in

terminal decline (Ebbinhaus, 1995). For instance, the

2

institutionally embedded unions of in countries such as Belgium, Germany, Austria and Norway have not been under direct threat as

have UK unions (Visser, 1994; Hyman, 1999). Democratisation in countries such as Taiwan and South Korea have provided

opportunities for unions while countries such as Malaysia, Indonesia and China continue to be constrained by the emphasis on

export orientated industrialisation and the need to attract Foreign Direct Investment (Upchurch 1999, Rowley and Benson,

2000). The inability of many mainstream Latin American trade union leaders and policy makers to fashion an environment in which unions are seen as responsive to the needs of workers has

resulted in the increasing alliance between some unions and other social movements giving rise to a resurgence of left wing

coalitions in countries such as Brazil, Columbia and Bolivia.

After working through this chapter you will be able to account for

such differences of practice and assess the implication of these trends. In particular By the end of this chapter you will

Appreciate what trade unions do Develop an awareness of the issues and debates surrounding their

structure, role and function Develop an understanding of the impact of political economic

social historical and technological contexts on trade unions Be able to utilise models to be able to differentiate between

different trade union types

Why do trade unions arise?

At the most basic it needs to be noted that one of the distinguishing features of industrial societies is the

prevalence of waged labour, where the worker sells his labour in return for a wage. The ability to sell ones labour implies that

the `free’ worker is not tied to a particular employer as was the case in feudal and slavery societies. However while labour or

workers may be `free’ this does not imply that they have equal power with the employer. This is due to at least three reasons.

3

First, it is generally easier for employers to substitute the individual worker than for workers to substitute the employer.

Second, management and employers are usually granted legitimate power to command direct and control employees, the employee on

the other hand has a duty to obey. Third, individual employees rarely have the time and resources to gain an appreciation of the

organisational context of decision making and may not appreciate the impact of higher level decision making on their immediate

work environment . To counteract the weakening effects of substitutability, to exert some influence over the nature and

direction of managerial authority and to monitor and influence decisions that affect them, employees may form into trade unions

to provide collective `voice’ and gain the potential benefits of the power derived from acting collectively.

In their relations with employers and management trade unions are not only interested in the wage-work bargain (see market

relations). Also important could be the manner in which employees are managed at work and this can include control over and change

to the nature of work, (job control) and the rules and regulations surrounding their relationship with employers, both of which

present a circumcision of managerial authority (see managerial relations). The rules governing these areas may be derived

through the process of collective bargaining. However trade unions as representatives of waged labour may attempt to

influence the employer from above by involvement in the political arena. In this arena trade unions, like other interest groups

including employers, can also attempt to influence social and economic and other policy, which has a direct bearing on the lives

of working people as workers or citizens. Indeed, if trade unions wish to influence the direction, depth and scope of social and

welfare policy that affects their members as citizens, action at the state and political level cannot be avoided.

Further the representation of and advancement of the interest of their constituency can represent not only a fundamental freedom

in democratic societies but possibly also a component and

4

protector of democracy itself. As a body representing the largest force in society they potentially command vast support and

influence which can be deployed to advance narrow sectional interests of their direct members or it can be used to advance the

broader interests of workers in society. The strategic preference of trade unions over these issues will partly be a reflection of the ideological and political orientation of trade

unions.

5

Trade Unions Are Key To Sustaining Democratic Gains

Trade unions have stood up against tyrants, because for them democracy is really a two-way street. Free trade unions need a stable, democratic environment to protect the political and

economic rights of their members." Though trade unions focus on the economic interests of their worker members,

they engage in democratic processes in order to achieve their objectives. Because they must answer to their membership, free and independent trade

unions can approach governments with the same appreciation for and insistence on accountability.

Trade unions are often the only institutions that give a voice to workers, whose circumstances are often neglected by those in power. More important

still, sometimes they are the only mass-based organizations that stand against authoritarian regimes. Trade unions have stood up against tyrants, because for them democracy is really a two-way street. Free trade unions need a stable, democratic environment to protect the political and economic rights

of their members. Trade unions cannot adequately protect worker interests if they are subject to the whim and caprice of a government that does not respect

democratic principles or the sanctity of law.

Not only do trade unions have a role in propelling the transition to democracy, they also have a role in sustaining and consolidating democracy's gains.

Unprecedented political and economic reforms are often followed by reactionary co-option and subversion of democratic development…While free

and fair elections are the first critical step for democracy, trade unions are one of the institutions that help to insure the long-term sustainability of

newly emerging democracies.

When trade unions remain steadfast in their commitment to democratic and accountable governance, they represent a key institution to sustaining

democratic gains. The large membership and geographic reach of trade unions often can help deepen and broaden support for democratic principles and

practices within a country. It is no coincidence that in countries in which there is a free and active trade union movement the movement towards more

democratic, more transparent, and more representative governance is more rapid.

Free trade unions can help ensure that workers have a role in shaping change, which helps to dissipate resistance to change. Free trade unions help to

provide the underpinning for nations undergoing economic growth and democracy by contributing to the emergence of a stable, fairly paid, working

middle-class. Without free unions, developing countries tend to enrich only

Trade Union Diversity

For comparative study trade unions need to be viewed like any other organisational body and institution in society with a

recognition that they are the institutional representatives of worker interests (Bean 1994). From this perspective trade unions

can be analysed as organisations in themselves i.e. with their own goals and objectives, internal structures, processes and

dynamics. The analysis of trade unions as organisations in themselves cannot be de-coupled from analysis, and appreciation

of the historical development of trade unions, the industrial relations system, and wider society. The nature of trade union

organisation is important for understanding the manner in which trade unions as the embodiment of the worker interest are

6

represented and interact with other organisations and institutions in society such as at the state, management etc. The

remainder of this chapter will address these issues

Trade Union Structure, role and function

The manner in which trade unions are structured differ across nations. Differences and similarities in national trade union

structures can be surfaced through four variables – Unity (as opposed to division), concentration, competition and

inclusiveness (Visser, 1996). Unity refers to the degree to which there is a unitary union organisation, which would be reflected

in the number of union federation a country has, which may be reflection of political and ideological division, or the

separate union organisation for different types of workers (blue collar vs white collar, craft unions vs general unions). However

even where there are division they may not have a significant impact if the there is a high degree of concentration whereby a

small number of large unions are able to dominate the smaller ones giving rise to possibility of greater unity. Competition refers

to the extent to which unions are in competition with each other on ideological (religious or political) and or for influence and

membership. Issues of competition may serve to undermine collaboration and achieve a sustainable long-term common

platform. Inclusiveness refers to the degree to which trade unions are encompassing of workers as a whole or serve the more

limited interests of their members, thus even with low levels of membership high inclusiveness can result in a significantly felt

union presence.

For illustrative purposes, differences between German and UK unions are depicted in diagram 1 below, where the solid line

represents the UK and the dotted line Germany. In contrast to the situation in Germany where there were some 12 unions affilliated

to the largest national centre while in Britain 90 of the 219 registered trade unions were affiliated to the british TUC. The

larger number of trade unions in Britain contributes to a

7

situation of multi-unions at the industrial and even plant level while making trade union unity at national level more difficult

than would otherwise be the case. The UK has also been through a period of inter union competition as unions have sought to

address the issues arising from membership loss. The small number of German arises because they are organised on the basis of one

union one industry, although a few unions exert particular power, especially IGmetal, the engineering union (unions thus have a

high degree of concentration). Agreements between unions and employers can be extended to non participating employers. The

central trade union centre is dominated by the DGB, which owing to the smaller number of unions gives rise to a unity that assists

their efforts at national level to ensure that workers interests as a whole are addressed at state policy level. Thus German

Two possible different types of trade union structures

Unityhigh

Inclusivenesshigh

low concentra

tion high

highCompetitio

n

8

trade unions could be said to be more inclusive, united and less competitive than UK unions. Although there may not significant differences in terms of concentration given that UK unions are

dominated by a handful of `super-unions’ (Transport and General Workers Union, UNISON), the issue of competition and

inclusiveness serve to undermine a united front.

Trade Union Function

The manner in which trade unions attempt to enhance employee power and influence can differe from trade union to trade union

and from country to country. Some Trade unions may represent only those workers which are members whilst others may see their role

as representing all workers, whether members or not. Some unions may see their role in terms of ensuring that the interests of

workers are advanced I society as a whole whist others may see the role as one confined to protecting and representing workers

within the workplace. Given these differences we can usefully define a trade union as any organization, whose membership consists of workers, which seeks to organise and represent the interests of it members or workers in the workplace and/or society. It may seek to regulate the

employment relationship through the direct process of collective bargaining with management and through community and political action. Implicit in the

representative function is the notion that trade unions are independent from management and exercise organisational

autonomy in advancing the interests of their constituency.

Role and function

The four variable- Unity, Competition, Inclusiveness and Concentration do nor arise spontaneously but rather are the

outcome of social, political, economic, trechnological and social forces. Hyman (1999) argues that trade unions have two

objective, namely to ensure justice (social and political) and to advance the vested interests of their members (economic and

technological). Thus the idea of worker solidarity through

9

unions can mean mutual support to protect and advance the interests of members or it can be more ideological referring to

the ideas of the need for the strong to support the weaker in society. These two faces of unions and unionism arguably gives

rise to the paradoxical situation where unions are perceived and represented as progressive and conservative institutions.

Trade unions differ across, and within nations, in the degree to which they emphasise parochial interest or interests of the

working class as a whole. In the former case the trade unions can have an instrumental focus , in the latter case it is much more of a

political focus . Poole (1986) distinguishes between unions that are driven by instrumental rationality (a commitment to utilitarian ends

relating to the distribution of material benefits examples include the United Kingdom, United Stakes), and value rationality -

with political, religious or nationalist objectives predominate. The particular orientation the trade union, or the

trade union movement, has can have a significant affect on its relations with the state, employer's and the members. While there

are differences within countries, and these should not be forgotten, there exist differences across nations. For

instance, French and Italian unions have been divided along communist-religious lines, Dutch, Belgian and Swiss unions by

religious-secular lines while Scandanavian unions are organised around blue collar/white collar distinctions (Ebbinghaus, 1995). Trade unions can also be distinguished according to the

relative emphasis and priority they place on the economic and political. Authors have distinguished between the three types of

unionism - unions which act primarily as collective bargaining agents for particular groups of workers (United States, United kingdom,

Japan), can be seen as having a predominantly market orientation: unions which serve as constituent elements in systems of political unionism

(France, Italy, Spain, Portugal) can be said to have a class orientation, unions which operate as partners within social

democratic governing arrangements (Austria, Sweden, Germany and more recently a Ireland) have been said to have societal orientation

(Frege and Kelly, 2003; Edwards 1986).

10

While useful such classifications can hide as much as they reveal. For instance the Polish union Solidarnosc (Solidarity) had

a right wing political orientation advocating the unleasing of competitive forces, while societal orientation tend not to be

revolutionary but reformist. Equally market based unions while focusing on parochial economic matters may support a labour party

as in the UK. We could therefore suggest that unions differ according to the aim of their action (instrumental or value

rationality) which can vary from radical social change, to social reform or simply be directed to increasing the purchasing power

of their members. On a second related dimension unions differ according to the level of their action which could

be at the level of the workplace, industry or societal extent that their action is local or encompassing

and revolutionary or supportive of the status quo. On these dimensions different types of unionism could

be plotted as below whereby a societal orientation could incorporate the three levels and the two aims

of action.

Radical Social Change Class Unionism

Social Reform Political Economism/

Societal Orientation

Purchasing power Market Orientation

Local Industrial Societal Level action

11

Rationalit

y

Instrument

al

Value

American unions have been noted for their focus on economic struggle and collective bargaining at the level of the workplace

rather than a concern with wider societal distributional issues. American unions, however, can be contrasted with British unions,

which have attempted to pursue wider societal issues. This is indicated by the fact that the British Labour Party arose out of

the trade unions to act as the political wing of Labour (unlike the US unions which have all had a little close or direct

connection with political parties). However, these patterns should not be seen as set in stone and unions should be seen as actors with the ability and potential to re-orientate

themselves. Bean (1997) argues that US unions have been increasing their political activity, while there has been an

ongoing debate for the need for business unionism in the United Kingdom. Equally unions in Italy and France are increasingly becoming disillusioned in the faith of the working class as a

motor of social change. This is in contrast to the situation in South Korea, Spain and in other parts of the world where the trade union movement is becoming, or sees the need to become,

politically active.

12

by Connie Furdeck accessed March 2003 at www1.minn.net/~nup/workshop.htm

Economistic Unionism In a history of the labor movement, there have been two concepts of the role of

unions. In the first, unions were seen as the recruiting base for the working- class and their goal was to change society…to go beyond capitalism. The second

concept of unionism, which became the predominating form during the 20th-century, was linked to the idea that there should and could be improvements within the

framework of capitalism.

Union movement that adopt such an instrumental rationality have been labelled business unions or economistic unionism. The focus of such unions is not to

challenge the economic system but to ensure they get a `fair share’. In this there is a belief that at the very core, workers and employers have common interests.

This is exemplified in the language of “ensuring competitive survival”, "getting the job done" and "a fair day's work for a fair day's pay." Much of this is embodied

in the employment contract which deals with the “price of labour”. The object of unions is to ensure that, without distrupting the production arrangements which

produce the outputs that generate surpluses, the best possible terms and conditions are achieved through negotiation with management. Employee solidarity

represented through unions enances the bargaining power of workers, and may result in terms and conditions that are better than their equivalent non-union

counterparts (union mark-up). Critics point out that while such a strategy may result in gains for one segment of the labour force at the expense of others. The manner in which this is manifest will differe from country to country depending

how unions are organised into particular interests, which may be around a particular profession or trade, firm, industry. There may also be differential

gains for members within unions as a result of vested interests. For instance older, higher-paid, senior workers may be favoured over the younger, lower-paid

workers. Further, union leaders may exercise considerable decision making powers and develop intimate relationships with management counterparts resulting in the

centralised powers in the union leadertship and bureaucracy. Nevertheless, such a model may bring improvements for some workers as well as providing employers a means of addressing and managing the conflicts inherent in the employment

relationship.

Unions have been under threat, and this is the case in in many parts of Europe, where unions have been most embedded. In particular some employers are

questioning the degree and form, if not need, of union involvement in the bargaining process. Unions are losing membership, but their responses are to do

more of the same. While hoping the Social Democratic Parties will be re-elected and will enact regulations making the unions respectable again as partners they are engaged in mergers, believing that by becoming bigger they will be stronger.

Regardless of the problems of traditional unionism, some believe that unions are a vital necessity. New unionism, sometimes called Social Movement Unionism represents a return to some of the old values.

Trade Union Power and Density

Density figures have declined in many countries partly as a result of the changing industrial structure, lower levels of

inflation, high levels of unemployment. However the extent to which membership figures can be explained by structural

variables as opposed to the `strategic choice of actors' (State, employers, employees, trade union leaders, full time officials)

remains a source of dispute. For instance it has been argued that some state's and employers have been redrawing the nature of

industrial relation in particular by decentralising bargaining (e.g. Britain, Sweden) while in others there has been a direct

13

state assault on trade unions (Britain, New Zealand). In others state and employer support has continued despite low or declining

levels of union membership (e.g. Netherlands, Visser 1998). In light of the diversity of trade union experience, Visser (1992)

argues low density does not mean low power and high density does not mean high power , there is a need to look at labour laws, collective

bargaining practices, public role of labour, membership recruitment, retention and mobilization. In short we need

institutional, organisational and political detail

Density varies across the globe, with density in the UK at 29% (1995) Sweden 83% (1995) France 11% (1995), Italy 38% (1995),

Malaysia 10% (1990), Korea 14% (1995), Japan 24% (Bamber and lansbury 1998). Density figures can be explained by the political

development of the trade union movement. Internal political developments have been used to explain membership levels (e.g.

the low level of French membership is due to an anarcho- syndacalist emphasis on developing a core group of militants to

mobilise rather than on expanding a paper membership, Goetschy 1998). Employer and state support can be used to enhance

membership levels through check off, closed shops and administration of state unemployment schemes (Belgium, Sweden,

Denmark, Finland, Visser 1992). However, while the degree of embedded state and employer support may affect density the

commitment that membership may vary (Hyman 1979), as Visser (1992) notes union membership in France is a commitment to

militancy. While the density figures clearly have an important impact on union funding, they do not provide an indication of

power or influence, thus France with low levels of union density has seen significant mobilisations in the mid 1990's (e.g. lorry

drivers dispute). Furthermore trade union density figures have been related to the size of establishment indicating that large

workplaces are likely to have greater membership and these can act as trend-setters for the rest of the economy (see Sako 1997

Fujimura 1997).

14

Trade Union Structure

Trade unions can be classified according to whether they are occupational, industrial, general or enterprise unions. The

greater the differentiation in the union structure the greater the number of unions that may exist. Therefore in 1995 while there

were 6,606 union is Korea, 70, 699 union in Japan there were 238 in the UK and 16 sectoral unions in Germany. In Germany Unions are

organised predominantly on an i ndustrial sectoral basis and 83% of all members belonged to unions affiliated to one centre (DGB). While

most unions in Britain are affiliated to one centre there is a mixed union structure i.e. one with a variety of organisational

forms. In contrast to the UK and Germany, there are different centres for white and blue collar workers in Sweden while political

affiliations divide the three main centres in Japan (Shinoda 1997). In 1996 there were four trade union centres in the Netherlands

each with ideological and cultural differences based on right/left and religious affiliations . Like fragmented unionism in the

UK, in the Netherlands there is a situation of multi-unionism within the workplace. In the case of Britain this reflects the

occupational and industrially mixed organising basis of her trade unions in contrast to the religious/ideological

differences in the Netherlands which have historically weakened the power of labour, (though this is changing with increasing

union coordination) (Visser, 1998). The main German trade union centre and its affiliated unions in contrast to the others

discussed have not been formally affiliated to any political party although unions themselves are characterised by

ideological pluralism, leaving scope for internal competition amongst factions. In contrast in Korea an alternative to the 1961

government sponsored trade union centre has been organising on the basis of an independent trade unionism at some of the largest

Korean firms. The support has been significant and since 1997 the Government was forced to officially recognise it in the context

of its large support base and increasing opposition to the old incumbent leaderships (Park Young-bum and Leggett, 1998).

However unlike the countries discussed, Korea is grappling with issues of creating a new structure of representation while in the

other countries changing balance of forces are, to varying

15

degrees in the process of reshaping old union structures in response to new threats.

Trade union organisation appears to be affected by the extent to which unions have developed out-with state structures and

without state and employer support. Therefore in systems which developed strong post war social democratic systems based on

`partnership between employers, labour and the state', but `employer dominated' (e.g. Germany, Belgium, Netherlands,

Norway) the consolidation of trade union power in relatively centralised systems of collective bargaining and tripartitism

seems to be retained with modification. These structures are supported by industrial relations institutions that have permeated vertically within the labour movement in a co- ordinated and integrated manner and have been accepted

horizontally. These industrial relations institutions include systems of centralised bargaining and tripartitism at national

level between `peak' bodies in the context of `socially responsible' trade unions. Such systems could be said to be articulated. However, in other systems where the nature of social

democracy has been labour led, the employer onslaught of decentralisation in the turbulent 80's and 90's has threatened

the old certainties of these trade union movements (Sweden). Where there has been little central control and the structure is

decentralised and fragmented either on political or ideological grounds, union rapprochement requires an alteration of value

rationalities. This may mean a realignment or abandonment of fundamental principles as has been the tendency in countries with

communist parties abandoning their positions in the post USSR/post communist era. Where trade union have been

occupationally divided and sustained by instrumental rationalities, the raison d'être of the very basis of trade unionism

could be threatened by reducing the function of economism for the achievement of absolute and relative advantage. In these cases

one could ague that there is an institutional tendency for uncoordinated decentralizations, although this makes the unions

susceptible to the changing balance of power.

16

The Impact of economic and technological contingencies

The Impact Of Socio-political and historical contexts

Valuenzela (1992) classifies labour Movements into five different types. Three of these types arise in Democratic regimes

and two in Authoritarian ones. He argues that the particular types have arisen because of variations in the contextual

circumstances pertaining to the relationship between labourmovements and the political sphere. The characteristics of each

of these five types and offer some explanations why they may arise and the consequences for union behaviour.

It is argued that there are three types that occur in democratic regimes and two types in authoritarian regimes . In democratic

regimes , i.e. those with the characteristics of pluralist democracies, which have regular elections, an independent

government and a commitment to respecting minority rights, the three types of labour movement identified are - Social Democratic,

Contestory and Pressure-group . In Authoritarian regimes , which lack one or more of the characteristics of democratic regimes, two

types are identified- State Sponsored, Confrontational. These types can vary over time, and there can be more than one type for

different segments of the workforce. Each of the union types is associated with different types and sources of power, have

different orientations, and different attachments and relationsips with political parties and employers. They also

differ in terms of their structure.

Social Democratic unions ( UK, Austria,Ger, Neth, Bel, Swe, Nor, Den,Venezuela) tend to be associated with relatively strong plant level

presence. They are also moderately socialist and reformist but concentrate on distributional issues include `social wage' .

This is enabled by a close political party-union ties, which can act as unifying force in some countries and party-union

understandings over programmes and policies which both accommodate needs of business while ensuring that business

17

engages in a dialogue with unions allows unions to concentrate on industrial issues. Centralization or articulatedness (Crouch

1998) enables co-ordination to the extent that change is discussed and negotiated rather than imposed. centralization of

decision-making gives little insight over its acceptability and therefore one can have a disorganized centralization because

recipients of centralized decision do not accept such dictates (Crouch,1992). The degree of integration between different

levels (and between unions and other institutional forms) is important in degree of trade union cohesion and integration; this

is captured by the notion of articulatedness. In this sense the peak body in the UK has less power than its counterparts in

Germany, Sweden, etc). Part of the reason for employer and state acceptance of unions is explained by the fact that early

organisational consolidation of union presence was achieved through and employer willingness or acquiescence to directly

negotiate with unions, although unions themselves need to accept the rights of business.

Where political parties arose out of, or in tandem with the labour movement with the prime aim to advance the worker interest, the

relationships could be seen as being close. The political party, Valenzuela argues, has a vested interest in developing a mass

support, which requires the minimisation of division between workers and the unions and this explains their consolidating

role. On the other hand, where political parties formed after the union movement, the embedded divisions and fragmentation of

unions were difficult to transcend. If the party was formed by the labour movement (as in the UK) the party itself would be peopled

by trade union leaders with their own vested/sectionalinterests.

In contrast unions in contestory political regimes ( Chile, France,Italy) have relatively weak plant presence or influence owing

largely to historical Employer resistance and the fact that a wider Ideologically and politically divided environment has

become reflected in the trade unions movement resulting not only in fragmentation and division but also with no single political

18

party with which to build alliances and attempt to influence through the political process. Such union in such types of

political regimes develop early links with anti-clerical and pro-republican movements while the church may respond by forming

its own unions in response. This gives rise to a fragmented but political and ideologicallyCompetitive unions with Low levels

of articulation and Highly political leadership/activists.

Nevertheless while there is no single union centre or single party of labour the different union party links may be close. The

ideological fragmentation and proliferation may also reflect the need for coalitions, and workers interest may be advanced

through the process of political coalition bargaining. The Ability to make such trade off may be particularly the case in

political systems based on proportional representation. Given this type of ideological maneouvering it is to be expected that if

Conservatives gain power one would expect an anti-union stance, while if a party with uniuon attachments gains power and attempts

to adopt a more moderation stance it may find itself under intense criticism from other union centres thus reducing the possibility

for the embedding of a social democratic type dialogue.

Nevertheless, the fact that unions are in competition with each other results in Competitive Escalating demands and desire to

advance their community presence on ideological, mutual aid etc. grounds. Unions in these political regimes may be viewed by the

rank and File as riddled with politics rather than focusing on their instrumental concerns whilst employers’ view of unions as

politically motivated may provide ongoing justification for resisting them. In these cases one would expect to see little

managed decentralisation and it would tend to be disorganized, uneven and largely tactical.

Pressure Group unions are the third type that may exist in democratic regimes. These unions are characterised by Little

ideological division and derive their strength from a populism derived from different sectors of society and underpinned by a

concentration on distributional issues.These unions have

19

developed without political party but have linked to pre- existing ones but the fact that union are one pressure/interest

group amongst many they may have little embedded institutional support and advances are made on the basis of union support for

political candidates being contingent upon support for labour in the government process. Unions operating as pressure groups are

open to employer resistance through anti-union or non-union strategies.

The characteristics of and explanations for the ideal types identified by Valenzuelas are summarised in tables below.

20

DEMOCRATICREGIMES

Characteris tics of

Unions

Orientations

Explanations

Trade Union party Links

Party in Power UnionMorphology

SocialDemocratic

UK, Austria,Ger, Neth, Bel, Swe, Nor, Den,

Venezuela

+Relatively Strong Plant level

presence +One national

union confederation (or fragmentation

based on ascriptive, but

notideological/Polit

ical differences) +Linked to single

Political party

ModeratelysocialistReformist

Distributional issues include

`social wage'

Rank and File standard of

living=support

Early organisational

consolidation via Direct Negotiation

with Employer

Close Party acts as

unifying force in some (Sweden,

Germany) but difficult in UK*

Need for party-union understandings over

programmes andpolicies

Such need to accommodate needs of

business Party sponsors

business-uniondialogue

Centralizationvs

articulatedness1

(Crouch 1998)I

OrganisedDecentralisat

ion

DisorganizedCentralizatio

n (Traxler 1996)

Contestory

Chile, France, Italy

+Relatively weak in plant owing to

Employer resistance

+Ideologically and politically

divided +No single party

Link

Community based Unions on

ideological, mutual aid etc.

grounds

Competitive Escalating demands

Rank and File view unions as

`excessively riddled by

politics'

Early links with anti-clerical and

pro-republicanmovements

Workers interest arising from

political coalition

bargaining

Union party links close but no single

centre

If Conservative anti-union

Unions' party in power creates Moderation tendency which

cannot be actualised owing to other unions rhetoric.

Ability to pressurise via proportional representation

Fragmented butpolitical/ide

ological

PoliticallycompetitiveDisorganizeddecentralisat

ion

Lowarticulatedne

ss

1 Crouch (1992) argues centralization of decision-making gives little insight over its acceptability and therefore one can have a disorganized centralization because recipients of centralized decision do not accept such dictates. The degree of integration between different levels (and between unions and other institutional forms) is important in

degree of trade union cohesion and integration; this is captured by the notion of articulatedness.

21

Employers view unions as

politicallymotivated

Highlypolitical

leadership/activists

PressureGroup

USA,

+lack of institutional

support +open to employer

resistance +no party link

Distributionalissues

Unions develop without political

party but link to pre-existing

ones**

Not symbiotic, but more based on union

support for candidates in

return for favouring labour

legislativeinterests

Little ideological division but based on populism derived

from different sectors of society

Disorganizeddecentralisat

ion

Non-unionsim

AUTHORITARIANREGIMES

Characteris tics of

Unions

Orientations

Explanations

Trade Union party Links

Party in Power UnionMorphology

StateSponsored

Argentina(1943- 55), Brazil(-mid

1970's) Singapore, S.

Korea

+Direct/ indirect

subordination to state

Can be populistauthoritarianism

Co-optation Unions unable to gain footing at plant

autonomously

Governmentsponsorship

+precedes Union +Power via union +union links

Direct party/union

leader links

Need for union to maintain

good relations with

government

Recognizes need union for union support

Organisedcentralization

Restricted local

autonomy Possible distance

from Rank and File

22

after power Need to advocate

worker interest to maintain

Rank and File

supportConfrontational

State represses

unions

Oppositional May be led by

politicalactivists

No avenue for union

influence

High degree ofrestriction

Repression and arms length

regime opening

Tolerate/sponsor moderateLeadership

Keep unions out ofPolitics

Centralize bargaining or use market mechanism

Reliant on Rank and

File.

Sensitive to R&F

Leadershipineffectual

Where political parties arose out of, or in tandem with the labour movement with the prime aim to advance the worker interest, the relationships could be seen as being close. The political party, Valenzuela argues, has a vested

interest in developing a mass support, which requires the minimisation of division between workers and the unions and this explains their consolidating role. On the other hand, where political parties formed after the union movement,

the embedded divisions and fragmentation of unions were difficult to transcend. If the party was formed by the labour movement (as in the UK) the party itself would be peopled by trade union leaders with their own vested/sectional

interests.

** In this case unions' demands are but one from a number of groups who form the party's support. In this case the demands of unions are but one source, and possibly a marginal source, of pressure on political parties for concession.

23

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CASE STUDY

A Comparison between Nigeria, Brazil, South Africa and Zimbabwe

An meeting of trade unionists from South Africa (COSATU), Zimbawe(ZCTU), Brazil (CUT) and Nigeria (NLF) concluded that Unions political engagement

with social economic and democratic change differs, not least because the conditions under which unions engage with these issues varies according to

national contexts.

In Brazil social and political opposition against military rule and the implementation of a step by step transition programme to civilian rule lay the

basis for the creation of a left wing political party (PT) in the early 1980's. The social forces around this party also decided to organise a trade union

confederation (CUT) to defend the workers interests in the political transformation processes. Subsequently, CUT has established relations with

all progressive political organisations and organised structures of the civil society. The relationship between CUT and the left wing parties is not one of

subordination but to develop common projects of social transformation while building a permanent process of debate and common action to ensure the unity of

the social forces that associate with a working class agenda. When a leftwing government is in place Cut will support its policies to the extent that they

are in line with projects that were agreed upon in the context of the electoral campaign. Government initiatives that contradict such understandings will be

opposed by CUT.

Until the mid 1990's, the relation between the `Alliance’ which comprised the South African Communist party (SACP), African National Congress (ANC) and the trade union movement were shaped in the context of struggle against apartheid.

With the electoral victory and the progress of " de-racialisation " of class politics in South Africa the social composition and ideological leanings of

the organisations of the Alliance started to become stain their relationship. Whereas COSATU and the SACP were clearly identifying themselves as

organisations of the working class with the proclaimed aim to realise socialism in South Africa, the ANC was a multi-class organisation that had

never subscribed to the socialist agenda of its two Alliance partners. Further more the ANC government came under increasing pressure both from the domestic

and international industrialist and capitalist interests to adopt policy orientations that were based on fiscal discipline and relied less on the state

and more on the private sector to promote economic development. These contradictions led COSATU to review its strategy of political engagement in

the context of the Alliance. As part of its new attitude COSATU reasserts its political independence from government and has been mobilising social forces

to protest in national strike actions against government initiatives. In

24

addition COSATU seeks to develop new alliances with progressive segments in civil society `as a complement to and a source of progressive support for an

effective Alliance'.

In Zimbabwe the trade union movement formed as part of the liberation struggle although subordinated to the political groupings of the liberation movement.

As a consequence, on the eve of independence the unions were divided into six national centres that were organisationally weak Immediately after

independence, in 1981, the ZANU-PF led government created a single trade union structure and laid the basis for the Zimbabwean Confederation of Trade Unions

(ZCTU) through a reform of the national labour laws. Throughout the 1980's the ZCTU remained organisationally weak and politically dependant on the goodwill

of the government. However, in response to the negative impact on Zimbawean workers of the governments economic policy programme of structural

adjustment on together with a government refusal to enagage with the unions to contain the negative effects of such economic policies led the ZCTU to assert

its political differences from the government in 1989. From the beginning of the 1990's the ZCTU consistently affirmed its political and ideological

autonomy in relation to the government and increased its critical political engagement with the ruling party. On its side government started to repress

these tendencies of the ZCTU by restricting the public protest actions. However the worsening economic situation lead to increased ZCTU militancy and

it became the rally point of opposition to increasing centralised government control. State violence eventually led to the creation of a political party,

the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) in 1999. The former ZCTU leadership that had taken over the leading positions in the MDC has been replaced by a new

group amongst which some have declared their unconditional support for the ZANU- PF. At the same time since the MDC has moved into Parliament it seems less

willing to confer with the ZCTU on the course of action to be taken against the government. The ZCTU leadership favourable to the MDC relies on their former

President and General Secretary in order to maintain the trade unions' movement influence on the party.

In Nigeria the trade union movement ventured twice into politics. Shortly after independence from British colonial rule trade union activists realised

that they had been marginalized in the politics of the young Republic. This was soon challenged by a coalition of radical scholars and students as well as

trade union leadership who created the Socialist Workers and Farmers Party (SWAFP). Labour was directly leading the party and all party campaigns were

backed-up by social mobilisation through the trade unions. After the elections in January 1966 the civilian government was overthrown and replaced

by thirteen years of military dictatorship. The second political enterprise by trade unions came in the context of the transition from military to civilian

rule in the late 1980's. The NLC decided that a Labour Party should be created. Although some trade union leaders saw this as an opportunity to pursue their personal agenda of venturing into politics. In 1991 Genral Babangida ordered

that all parties join either of the two parties that government had set-up and

25

the leadership of the labour party decided without consultation within the NLC structures to join the Social Democratic Party while others joined the Republican party bringing about a political division of the labour movement.

What are the similarities and differences in the development of trade unions in the above four countries?

How might you explain these similarities and differences?

From: A Report on International Dialogue on Trade Unions' Experiences of Political Engagement : Accessed http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cache:ntHJskT6X-

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References

26

Bamber, G and Russell Lansbury (1998), International and Comparative Employment Relations (3rd Ed.). London: Sage.

Bean, R (1994), Comparative Industrial relations: an introduction to cross- national perspectives . London: Routledge. Crouch, C (1979), The Politics of Industrial relations Glasgow: Fontana. Crouch, C (1992), `the fate of articulated industrial relations

systems: a stock-taking after the `neo-liberal decade' in Marino Regini, The Future of Labour Movements . London: Sage. Crouch, Colin and Traxler, Franz (eds.). 1995. Organized Industrial Relations in Europe: What Future? Aldershot: Avebury.

Eaton, J. (2000), Comparative Employment Reations. Oxford: Polity Press.

Ebbinghaus, B (1995), The Development of Trade Unions in Western Europe: Global Convergence or Cross-national Diversity?

EURODATA Newsletter, No.2, (Autumn 1995) Accessed athttp://www.mzes.uni-mannheim.de/eurodata/newsletter/no2/feature.html

Fujimura, H (1997), `new unionism: beyond enterprise unionism' in Mari Sako and Hiroki Sato , Japanese labour and management in

Transition: diversity, flexibility and participation . London: Routledge. Hyman, R (1999), An emerging agenda for trade unions? Geneva:ILO. Mihyo, P. and Schiphorst, F. ( 1995), A context of sharp economic

decline in Globalization and third world trade unions: the challenge of rapid economic change, Henk, T (ed). London: Zed

Books. Park Young-bum and C. Leggett (1998), `employment relations in

Korea' in Bamber, G and Russell Lansbury (1998), International and Comparative Employment Relations (3rd Ed.). London: Sage.

Poole, M (1986), Industrial Relations: Origins and patterns of Nationaldiversity . London: Routledge and Keegan-Paul.

Rowley, C. and Benson, J. (2000), Globalization and Labour in the Asia Pacific Region. London: Frank Cass.

Sako, M (1997), `the role of the employer and union coordination at the industry and inter-sectoral levels' in Mari Sako and

27

Hiroki Sato, Japanese labour and management in Transition: diversity, flexibility and participation . London: Routledge.

Shinoda, T (1997), `Rengo and policy participation' in Mari Sako and Hiroki Sato, Japanese labour and management in Transition: diversity,

flexibility and participation . London: Routledge. Traxler 1995. ”Farewell to Labour Market Associations? Organized

versus Disorganized Decentralization as a Map for Industrial Relations”, pp. 3-19, in Crouch, Colin and Traxler, Franz (eds.).

1995. Organized Industrial Relations in Europe: What Future? Aldershot:Avebury.

Valenzuela, S (1992), `Labour movement and political systems: some variations' in Marino Regini, The Future of Labour Movements .

London: Sage. Visser, J (1992), ¬ the strength of union movements in advanced

capitalist democracies: social and organisational variations' in Marino Regini, The Future of Labour Movements . London: Sage.

Visser, J (1994), European trade unions the transition years in Ferner, A. and R. Hyman (eds), New Frontiers in European

Industrial Relations. London: Blackwell.

28