Labour in ‘lean’ times: geography, scale and the national trajectories of workplace change

Abstract

In this paper we argue that far from being surpassed by globalization, the nation‐state remains a key space for organized labour. However, labour geographers’ focus on patterns of union organization and strategies of ‘internationalism’ underplays the enduring role of national institutions. Moreover, while labour geographers have recognized the significance of new forms of work organization, such as just in time and lean production, with some exceptions they have not examined how unions both formally and informally determine the trajectory of workplace change. Based on case studies of unions in the Canadian and German auto industries, we stress that the linkage between national and workplace scales remains critical to understanding how unions are responding to the challenges being presented by lean and just in time production. Finally, while there is a re‐scaling of bargaining in the automobile industry to the firm or enterprise scale, the outcomes of decentralization depend largely on the national regulatory context.

Learning from America? Knowledge Flows and Industrial Practices of German Firms in North America

“…Nonetheless, despite the tenor of public rhetoric, senior managers in German privately admit that industrial unions and workers are actually considerably more flexible than the prevailing wisdom would indicate, suggesting that there is room for adaptation and change at home (Rutherford and Gertler 2002). There continues to be an active public debate within Germany about the necessity of introducing institutional changes to facilitate the evolution of the German model in a direction that resembles Anglo-American practices.…”

“…The works council serves as a forum in which to discuss both day-to-day and longer-term strategic and technological issues (for a fuller description of the German system of employment relations and current pressures for change, see Rutherford and Gertler 2002). They are accompanied by another key institution-the works council-which is designed to act as a neutral intermediary between management and labor.…”

“We Simply Have to Do that Stuff for our Survival”: Labour, Firm Innovation and Cluster Governance in the Canadian Automotive Parts Industry

“…Labour geographer's focus on local–global networks (see Waterman and Wills 2001) has meant that labour's relationship with the nation‐state has been a less significant object of research. Yet, despite its weakening, the nation‐state is still critical in shaping outcomes for labour (Gindin 2004; Rutherford and Gertler 2002; Smith et al 2002). In the case of the automotive industry in Ontario, union and university researchers argue that national standards for training/apprenticeships, stronger employment protection legislation, legislation to better facilitate union certification, are all critical to restoring some balance of power between labour and capital (see Godard 2004; Robertson 2003).…”

“…For example, a recent and otherwise comprehensive textbook synthesis of “geographies of labour” (Castree et al 2004) contains no reference to the role of labour in either firm innovation or cluster/industrial district governance. Furthermore, while labour geographers have begun to engage more directly with industrial relations approaches (see Herod 2002; Herod, Peck and Wills 2003; Rutherford and Gertler 2002) they have not addressed labour's role in the wider institutional political economy of innovation. Yet, as we argue below, exploring the industrial relations literature on innovation offers potentially significant insights for developing an alternative labour geography of innovation and cluster governance.…”

“…However, given the reliance of the automotive parts sector on incremental, shop‐floor innovation the CAW does make significant contributions to innovation in the industry. In part, this is facilitated by a higher level of unionization in Canada compared to the United States (45% vs just over 20%), longer job tenure, lower worker turnover, less use of part‐time and temporary workers, and a generally stronger voice for unions within firm internal labour markets (Robertson 2003; Rutherford and Gertler 2002; Yates and Gibbs 2003). The CAW also derives advantage from a well developed research capacity on the auto industry (see Kumar 1995).…”