This article compares forms of labour transnationalism in three industrial sectors: motor manufacturing, maritime shipping and clothing and textile manufacturing. In each case, unions engage in very different transnational activities to reassert control over labour markets and competition. As institutions of transnational cooperation deepen, unions continue to struggle with competitive tensions (worker to worker and union to union) which vary from one industry to another. The Industrial Determinants of Transnational Solidarity: Global Interunion Politics in Three Sectors Mark Anner Pennsylvania State Ian Greer Cornell University Marco Hauptmeier Cornell University Nathan Lillie University of Helsinki Nik Winchester Cardiff University ABSTRACTThis article compares forms of labour transnationalism in three industrial sectors: motor manufacturing, maritime shipping and clothing and textile manufacturing. In each case, unions engage in very different transnational activities to reassert control over labour markets and competition. As institutions of transnational cooperation deepen, unions continue to struggle with competitive tensions (worker to worker and union to union) which vary from one industry to another.

In this article we argue that International HRM research will benefit from an extended research agenda that moves: i) beyond the enterprise, ii) beyond managerialism, and iii) beyond universalism. This will require both a wider range of theoretical resources to be brought to bear and a greater attentiveness to the interpenetrating levels of the empirical worlds that are subject to evaluation and explanation. The article reflects on the opportunities for drawing on theoretical frameworks from proximate research areas and advances a multi-level approach in order to achieve a more holistic and situated understanding of HRM in its international and comparative contexts.

This paper examines labour transnationalism within four multinational automakers. In our sample, we find different forms of labour transnationalism, including transnational collective bargaining, mobilisation, information exchange and social codes of conduct. We explain these differences through the interaction between management and labour in the context of the company structure; of particular importance are transnational coercive comparisons by management and the orientations of worker representatives as political entrepreneurs or co-managers. We conclude that, although intensified worker-side crossborder cooperation were not preventing wage-based competition in general (due to the lack of between-firm coordination), they have reshaped employment relations within these MNCs. We explain these differences through the interaction between management and labour in the context of the company structure; of particular importance are transnational coercive comparisons by management and the orientations of worker representatives as political entrepreneurs or co-managers. We conclude that, although intensified worker-side crossborder cooperation were not preventing wage-based competition in general (due to the lack of between-firm coordination), they have reshaped employment relations within these MNCs.

What are the conditions under which transnational collective action is initiated and sustained? This paper presents a case study of General Motors Europe, where labor leaders have mobilized the workforce and bargained with management at the transnational level repeatedly over more than a decade as a response to management whipsawing and threats of plant closures. In contrast to structuralist interest-based theories of union behavior, we identify a process of "identity work" that was necessary to sustain transnational worker cooperation. KeywordsGeneral Motors, identity work, Europe, industrial relations, collective bargaining This paper presents a case study of General Motors Europe, where labor leaders have mobilized the workforce and bargained with management at the transnational level repeatedly over more than a decade as a response to management whipsawing and threats of plant closures. In contrast to structuralist interest-based theories of union behavior, we identify a process of "identity work" that was necessary to sustain transnational worker cooperation. Suggested Citation

The purpose of this article is to highlight the role of ideas in shaping the form, dynamics and products of the employment relationship. This article differentiates between different types of ideas, emphasizes the various types of agency that are involved in the creation, maintenance and defence of ideas and identifies a number of mechanisms that help to understand how actors promote ideas, how ideas gain broader prominence and how ideas change. Finally, we discuss the importance of context and resources in shaping ideational processes.

This article analyses the variation and change in firm‐level employment relations in Spain between the transition to democracy and the global financial crisis. Using three auto companies as case studies, I address a crucial puzzle in the institutional literature on comparative employment relations: How do employment relations change and vary, even when national employment relations institutions do not? This article argues that differences in actor ideologies shape the construction of national institutions at the firm level, which explains change and variation of employment relations over time and across cases. The study identifies four drivers of ideological change — generational change, leadership change, identity work and diffusion — that impact the variation and change in employment relations at the firm level.

Focusing on employers’ organizations in the United Kingdom, this article contributes to the literature on employer interest representation by advancing three interrelated arguments, which reflect how the methods, structure and interests of employer representation have evolved. First, the primary method of collective interest representation has shifted from collective bargaining, nowadays only pursued by a minority of employers’ organizations, to political representation, now the most frequent form of collective interest representation. Second, the structure of employer interest representation has evolved and is fragmented between a small number of large, general employers’ organizations, a large majority of sectoral employers’ organizations, regional interest representation in the devolved nations, which has become more important, and a new type of employer body, the employer forum, which focuses on corporate social responsibility. Third, the shift in collective interest representation is complemented by a broadening of individual interest representation, with employers’ organizations having developed a wide range of services.

This article compares how the United States and Germany deregulated labor markets between the 1980s and 2010s in response to the rise of neoliberalism. Building on literature with a focus on ideas and national knowledge regimes, the authors argue that the trajectories of labor market deregulation across the two countries are explained by the distinct social organization of ideas. The latter refers to the actors and institutions involved in the production and dissemination of ideas (including think tanks and public research institutes), their access and ways of communicating to political elites and electorates, levels of shared academic standards across the political divide, and related degrees of competition or cooperation in the production of new knowledge and policy ideas. Moving beyond previous employment relations literature with a focus on institutions and power, the article breaks new theoretical ground by demonstrating how the social organization of ideas is a key intermediary in explaining employment relations change and continuity.