In Unions We Trust! Analysing Confidence in Unions across Europe

This article contributes to debates about trade unions and conflict by studying how individuals’ perceptions of conflicts between management and workers relate to trade union membership, country-level trade union density and institutionalization (collective bargaining coverage, centralization and policy concertation). Hierarchical multi-level models are fitted to data from the International Social Survey Programme from 2009. The results show that union members tend to be more likely than non-members to perceive management–worker conflicts and that this appears not to vary substantially between countries. However, regardless of union membership, individuals in countries with higher trade union density and with policy concertation tend to be significantly less likely to perceive conflicts. These findings highlight the risk of atomic fallacies in research limited to the individual-level effects of union membership. Contrary to an argument often raised by pluralists, neither bargaining coverage nor centralization has significant effects. Overall, the results question depictions of trade unions as divisive organizations.

Section: Concluding Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

How do union membership, union density and institutionalization affect perceptions of conflict between management and workers?

Ringqvist

2020

“…Turner and D'Art (2012), using data from the 2002-2003 European Social Survey (ESS), showed that manual workers were more likely than managers or professional employees to hold favourable views of unions. Analysing the 2008-2009 wave of the ESS, Frangi et al (2017) operationalize 'social class' using the nine categories taken from the ESeC. In their primary model, they find that managers, professionals, supervisors and the self-employed demonstrate significantly lower levels of trust in unions relative to those with 'routine jobs'.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We examine worker support for unions across advanced industrial democracies in the pre-and post-recession eras, employing data from the 2005 and 2015 Work Orientations Modules of the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP). Unlike recent studies on the topic (Frangi et al, 2017;Givan and Hipp, 2012;Turner and D'Art, 2012), we rely on multilevel models and estimate the influence of country-level factors in order to capture major structural differences in the role of unions in different contexts. In order to distinguish between labour market insiders and outsiders, we develop a four-quadrant categorization that captures both immediate labour market status (number of hours worked) and degree of economic vulnerability (skill level).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insider and outsider support for unions across advanced industrial democracies: Paradoxes of solidarity

Oliver

Morelock

2020

Why do workers support trade unions? For insider–outsider analysts, unions display limited concern with representing interests beyond the full-time labour force. However, recent research on union revitalization and inclusionary practices stresses new initiatives towards labour market outsiders. We use multilevel regression models, employing data from the 2005 and 2015 International Social Survey Programme, in order to study how workers perceive the role of unions. We develop a four-quadrant categorization of insiders and outsiders that captures both current labour market status and vulnerability. We find that outsiders, and more specifically all categories of non-insiders, are more likely to agree with the need for strong unions than insiders. These results hold both before and after the Great Recession.

“…Some studies have analysed different concepts of trust in the employment relationship, including institutional and system trust (Lange, 2015), while others have explored intra-organizational trust. Within this literature, research has analysed the role of trust between employees, management and trade unions in the implementation and efficacy of various HRM policies and practices (Dietz, 2004; Frangi et al, 2017; Guest et al, 2008; Holland et al, 2012); others have investigated the impact of organizational change on trust relationships (Laplante and Harrisson, 2008). Another research strand analyses the determinants of trust in the employment relationship by focussing on the factors that explain employee trust in the employer (Bryson, 2001; Holland et al, 2012; Morgan and Zeffane, 2003; Searle et al, 2011).…”

Section: The Employment Relationship and Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variations and (a)symmetries in trust between employees and employers in Europe: Some (not so) well-known stylized facts

Brandl

2019

I analyse the incidence of trust between employee representatives and management at the firm level in EU member states. Most previous analyses focus primarily on employees’ trust in the employer, but I consider both sides. The analysis confirms, but generalizes, some known stylized facts such as that trust is relatively high in Scandinavian countries but relatively low in Mediterranean countries. My analysis also reveals a number of novel stylized facts, including a high degree of variability in Central and Eastern Europe. Furthermore, strong mutual trust is very rare throughout Europe and the trust relationship is systematically asymmetric, as employers’ trust in the employee side is systematically higher than the reverse relationship.