Dimensions of internationalism and the politics of the labour movement

Abstract

PurposeMuch is being claimed in terms of new forms of trade union networking and co‐ordination at the international level during the past two decades. However, there is a need to ground these views in terms of the reality and contexts of trade union activity. This article seeks to argue that tension within the different modes of international labour activity is nothing new. In fact, political and organisational differences in terms of the practices and strategies of the labour movement have been salient features of trade unionism for over a century. The article will map the interest in networking as a form of labour co‐ordination and the question of the emergence of competing international models of network‐based trade union action.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on a general and literature review of the debates on labour internationalism supported by insights gained from a variety of research initiatives.FindingsAs noted by a variety of authors, the reality is that there are assorted types of global and international movements within trade unionism, which are based on four dimensions in terms of specific sectoral, ideological, organisational and national factors. There is a need is to understand the tensions between these models, and not just work from a “vertical” view of power based on hierarchies and levels.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper is mainly a critical review of debates and discussions.Practical implicationsNetwork‐based initiatives should not just be contrasted with bureaucracy per se, but be understood in terms of distinct initiatives, meanings and politics. In fact, one could see the signs of emerging “managerialist” modes of labour internationalism.Social implicationsNew forms of trade union and worker representation in a global context are engaging with social and political issues – they are engaging with a range of social and organisational activities such as those of non‐government organisations. These represent an important debate on the way work‐related issues are organised around.Originality/valueThe paper indicates how the question of labour networking is a significant academic discussion and needs to be seen from different perspectives.

Implementing global framework agreements: the limits of social partnership

“…More often than not, ensuring the rights embodied in GFAs has proven to be conflict laden with respect to both union-management relations and relationships among cooperating unions. Concerning the latter, the history of trade union internationalism is wrought with political and organizational conflict (Lucio 2010) and we recognize that transnational unionism, with its many strategic and organizational dimensions, is a highly complex issue involving organizations 'characterized by asymmetrical power relations, resources and capabilities' (Lévesque et al 2013: 279).…”

The importance of being … transnational

“…. transnational be done, and it is beginning to happen as reported by many sources (Pulignano, 2009;Martinez Lucio, 2010;The Observer, 2014;Döellgast et al, 2015).…”

The effectiveness of international framework agreements as a tool for the protection of workers' rights: A metasynthesis

“…On the managerial side, several studies underline the key role of signatory companies' headquarters and their managers in disseminating and enforcing the content of IFAs. Some authors emphasize that the degree of centralization of a firm's management systems is likely to influence the level of control that the head office has over its facilities and business partners in implementing IFAs (Josserand & Kaine, 2016;Martínez Lucio, 2010). It is also demonstrated that companies open to social dialogue may be fertile ground for the implementation of bilateral regulatory mechanisms (Dehnen & Pries, 2014).…”