Overcoming Barriers to Transnational Organizing Through Identity Work: Finnish–Estonian Trade Union Cooperation

Abstract

This article analyses a project by Finnish and Estonian unions to adopt 'organizing model' strategies through establishing the transnational 'Baltic Organising Academy'. Initially aimed at Estonian workplaces, successful campaigns inspired Finnish unions to copy the model in Finland. This cooperation was originally motivated by labour market interdependence between the two countries, and the failure of past social-partnership oriented union strategies in Estonia. The willingness of Finnish and Estonian unions to commit resources to transnational cooperation around an 'organizing model' marks a dramatic departure from the unions' previous strategies. This change was accomplished by transnational activists who have developed and raised support for the adoption of 'organizing model' in the face of structural challenges and ideological opposition by some union officials. The project's transnational organizing exemplifies one possible solution to union weakness in Eastern Europe, and underlines the importance of 'identity work' in building transnational trade union coalitions around organizing.

Restructuring of Finnish Trade Unions – the Growing Importance of Women

“…New efforts are needed to attain new members, while more emphasis needs to be placed on less unionised, predominantly male sectors such as ICT. A return to an 'organising model' encompassing the strategic targeting of companies is one possibility; turning to this model actually signifies a return to original Finnish unions' previous strategies to unionise workers (Kall et al 2019). What is new in the model is that it also means engaging in an extended process of identity work, where old national jurisdictions and partnerships are completed or replaced by new ideas of aggressive campaigning and cooperation (ibid.).…”

Active Enactment and Virtuous Circles of Employment Relations: How Danish Unions Organised the Transnationalised Copenhagen Metro Construction Project

“…Third, having such resources, however, is not the same as using them successfully (Lévesque and Murray, 2010). Especially when resources need to be mobilised towards new challenges, unions need to make strategic choices and develop new strategies (Eldring et al, 2012; Heery, 2009; Kall et al, 2018). For instance, unions must learn to supplement formally inclusive union policies (as those described by Heery and Abbott, 2000) with inclusive practices that address workers’ real needs when dealing with new groups of contingent workers.…”

“…For instance, unions must learn to supplement formally inclusive union policies (as those described by Heery and Abbott, 2000) with inclusive practices that address workers’ real needs when dealing with new groups of contingent workers. They must also develop industrial action strategies that are based on and contribute to the formation of common identities and objectives across different groups of workers (Greer and Hauptmeier, 2012; Hyman, 1999; Kall et al, 2018).…”

“…Analysing the processes, the article argues that a combination of (1) continuous organising efforts, (2) politicisation of the public owners’ responsibility for employment relations, and (3) more selective enforcement were all instrumental for causing the shift towards a more inclusive enactment of institutions. While traditional union organising and enforcement strategies are challenged when transnational workers are involved (Heery, 2009; Kall et al, 2018), the case study shows that unions’ efforts to organise transnational workers can succeed when it is part of a broader strategic effort to improve the transnational workers’ employment relations. The analysis further highlights how unions need internal debates and learning processes to find effective ways of mobilising resources when facing new challenges and securing a better alignment between organising strategies and the needs of contingent workers such as transnational migrants (Simms and Holgate, 2010).…”

“…While most receiving countries have formally inclusive institutions governing the employment conditions of transnational workers, these institutions are often circumvented or re-interpreted by employers (Berntsen and Lillie, 2016). Additionally, it is hard to establish solidarity among domestic and transnational workers due to the short-term nature of the transnational workers’ stay, language barriers, cultural differences, economic disincentives (Caro et al, 2015), and lack of common identity and objectives (Kall et al, 2018; Refslund and Sippola, in press). Instead, the transnational workers are often heavily dependent on their employer and, therefore, often support the effort to circumvent institutions (Berntsen, 2016; Lillie, 2016).…”