Rethinking Industrial Relations, or at least the British radical frame

Abstract

This article provides a short overview of the analysis in John Kelly’s 1998 book Rethinking Industrial Relations ( RIR) of long-run cycles and trends in worker collective mobilization and conflict, Kelly’s development of a model to explain these patterns, the model’s integrative combination of ideas drawn from Kondratiev long wave theory, Marxian political economy, and Tilly’s sociological model of social mobilization theory, and the book’s central prediction – a resurgence in union growth and industrial conflict. The second part of the article provides a critical evaluation of RIR as a general work in industrial relations theory, the strengths and weaknesses of Kelly’s theoretical model, and an assessment of its empirical explanatory power. The conclusion is that RIR provides an insightful conceptual framework for studying worker mobilization but falls short in both theory and empirical explanation because of defects in its Marxian/long wave foundation and overly British-centric focus.

‘You couldn’t have a heart and want to strike’: Mobilising workers in England’s social care sector

“…Exploitation factored into some workers’ perceptions of collectivism. While non-members did not seem to feel that they were exploited by an out-group (as predicted by Kaufman 2018), exploitation did play into unionised workers’ conceptualisation of their work.…”

“…Kaufman (2018) similarly critiques the Marxism of the mobilisation framework. Kaufman (2018) argues that analyses which focus on class are 'ill-suited' (p. 59) for understanding the experiences of contemporary workers and questions whether workers feel as if they are exploited. Kelly's emphasis on injustice has also, however, been critiqued from a Marxist perspective.…”

Not so exceptional? Prosocial influences on union support among US workers

“…This underscores the potential of Kelly’s ‘fusion thesis,’ whereby unions can form viable alliances with social movements, such as those supporting immigrant rights, women’s rights, anti-racism, a living wage, environmentalism, and gender equity in order to effect social change (Heery, 2018; Kelly, 1998). Such coalitions provide an empowered ‘united front for progressive social change [and] the union movement is then better positioned to recruit new members, extend its range of influence, and modernize its image and broaden its social purpose’ (Kaufman, 2018: 592). As McCartin (2016: 133) asserted, ‘[M]ilitancy and collective action are most likely to succeed when their practitioners can credibly claim that they are advancing the common good rather than their own special interests.’ Drawing on prosocial themes may be useful in organizing workers in sectors where unions have made little headway, and movements such as Fight for $15 might gain even greater traction by seeking coalitions and highlighting non-wage goals.…”

John Kelly Ni̇n Mobi̇li̇zasyon Teori̇si̇ Yi̇rmi̇ Yaşinda Sendi̇kalar İçi̇n Hala Yeni̇ Mi̇

“…Bütün bu koşullar altında, mobilizasyon teorisinin öngördüğü bazı değişimlerin henüz gerçekleşmediği görülmektedir. Bu bağlamda, özellikle Kelly'nin uzun dalgalar teorisini kullanması ve sendikal canlanma hipotezi üzerinden yapılan eleştiriler yoğunluk arz etmektedir (Martin, 1999;Kaufman, 2018).…”

“…Kelly'nin 2000'li yıllarda bir yeniden canlanmanın olabileceği üzerinden yaptığı değerlendirmeler bir hata olarak kabul edilebilir (Kaufman 2018). Fakat mobilizasyon teorisini kâhinlikten ziyade çalışma ilişkisinin ve kolektif eylemlerin dinamiğini anlamaya çalışan teorik bir açıklama tarzı olarak görürsek, teorinin gücünün daha iyi farkında olabiliriz.…”