Fighting precarious work with institutional power: Union inclusion and its limits across spheres of action

Abstract

Research shows that union inclusion is critical to resisting precariousness, yet the role of institutional power is not adequately addressed. Through an investigation of eight retailers in four countries, this study uniquely examines how inclusive union strategies, cost competition and institutional power interact in different ‘spheres of action’. In the product market sphere, unions struggle to prevent labour cost competition between firms from eroding working conditions. In the production sphere, unions struggle to prevent labour cost competition between workers in a single firm from eroding working conditions. This article finds that multi‐level sources of institutional power are a precursor to effective union inclusion and articulating action towards threats from cost competition. I thereby argue that union efforts to resist precarious work are contingent on access to power from institutions. The article concludes with reflections on how institutional power relates to other forms of power.

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

“…New information and communication technologies have also afforded firms greater opportunities to forgo traditional employment relationships without compromising on product and quality standards, via 'fissured' employment relations (Weil, 2014, p. 4) and 'vertical disintegration' (Doellgast and Greer, 2007;Holst, 2014). These practices transfer the risks of managing employment to other entities and open up non-core activities to cost competition (O'Brady, 2021).…”

Negotiating limits on algorithmic management in digitalised services: cases from Germany and Norway

“…Such a regulatory framework would function best if worker representatives were involved in its development and implementation, to ensure compliance over time. Ultimately, these represent alternative institutional models for strengthening worker voice and countervailing power (O’Brady, 2021), to ensure that innovations such as AI are used to improve the quality of work rather than to intensify management control.…”

Lopsided inclusion: The impact of multi‐employer bargaining and class‐based unionism on non‐regular employment in South Korea

“…Nonetheless, bargaining dynamics across enterprises affiliated with each confederation may be different and such workplace‐level bargaining histories continue to shape the characteristics of bargaining agreements over time. Although I attempted to adjust for workplace‐specific characteristics with the specifications of the statistical model, they might also differ in their access to institutional power (Paster, Oude Nijhuis & Kiecker, 2020; O'Brady, 2021). This study does not directly examine whether the FKTU and the KCTU differ in their institutional power and if so, how the differences influence workplace collective bargaining.…”