Effects of Union Organization on Strike Incidence in EU Companies

Abstract

The author reinvestigates the relationship between the organizational power of trade unions and strikes based on data from the European Company Survey 2009 (ECS-2009) and the Institutional Characteristics of Trade Unions, Wage Setting, State Intervention and Social Pacts (ICTWSS) database, which include more than 5,000 firms across all 27 European Union (EU) member states. He shows that the incidence of strikes is higher in companies for which workplace union membership is high, the number of workplace unions is high, and unions dominate establishment-level works councils. These factors interact to affect strike incidence. In addition, the company-level effects of union organization on strike incidence vary across countries. These country differences can partially be explained by differences in national trade union systems, such as decentralization and membership density.

Undermining mobilization? The effect of job flexibility and job instability on the willingness to strike

“…According to Simms and Dean, shop stewards, but also union officials, may play a crucial role in framing collective interests and building solidarity among groups of temporary workers. The current study, however, was unable to evaluate factors related to the union presence at the workplace (Jansen, 2014). Further research is therefore needed to test these and other factors facilitating mobilization among flexible workers, not only in the Dutch context, but preferably also in a comparative perspective.…”

“…In terms of associational power, the few studies on union membership among temporary workers generally suggest that temporary workers are indeed less likely to join a union (Nätti et al, 2005; Van den Berg, 1995), and, once a member, are more likely to quit (Van der Putte, 1995). Moreover, union membership has often been linked to the ‘capacity to strike’ as the decision to strike is typically made by trade unions, and primarily union members will strike (Jansen, 2014; Kaufman, 1982; Shorter and Tilly, 1974; Snyder, 1975). However, the relationship is not perfect: not all union members are equally likely to join a strike, and also non-union members may sometimes be willing to participate.…”

Antagonism beyond employment: how the ‘subordinated agency’ of labour platforms generates conflict in the remote gig economy

“…Collective action-also termed collective voice-can be defined as 'any attempt at all to change, rather than to escape from, an objectionable state of affairs… through… collective petition… actions and protests, including those which are meant to mobilise public opinion' (Hirschman, 1970, p.30). While a desire for unionism and collective action arises from employees perceiving they are being treated unjustly (Hodder et al, 2017), the realisation of this desire is dependent on adequate resources and organisational capacity (Edwards and McCarthy, 2004;Jansen, 2014;Hodder et al, 2017;Kelly, 1998). Support for collective action by workers is often termed solidarity (Heckscher and McCarthy, 2014, p.629), which can be understood in terms of a sense of shared interest and community developing via bonding and bridging within and between groups with situational commonalities (Jarley, 2005;Morgan and Pulignano, 2020;Sundary et al 2012, drawing on Putnam 2001.…”

Interpreting strike activity in western Europe in the past 20 years: the labour repertoire under pressure

“…As the average size of establishments tends to be smaller in the private services sector, this upgrading implies a lower likelihood of unionization. Thus, other than de-unionization as such, weakening workplace unionism can further explain the declining trend in strike activity (Jansen, 2014). As mobilization theory highlights, workplace union activists are crucial in a sequential process of framing: they help in identifying potential issues of conflict, making workers aware of social injustice and attributing it to management; fostering group identification; and defending strike action as an effective means of mitigating or undoing perceived social injustice when the occasion arises (Buttigieg et al, 2008).…”