Towards more disorganised decentralisation? Collective bargaining in the public sector under pay restraint

Abstract

While sector-level collective bargaining can provide the institutional leverage to sustain and improve employment standards, a proliferation of disorganised local settlements may reduce its effectiveness. This article examines this proposition for local government in the UK, highlights the risks of a 'destructive' disorganisation of employment relations and calls for a renewal of articulation mechanisms between sector and local levels of collective bargaining.

Employment relations without collective bargaining and strikes: the unusual case of civil servants in Germany

“…nation‐Fwide CB is, in contrast to a growing number of other sectors, still the dominating form (Flächentarifvertrag) and the number of ‘bargaining units’ is still very small. In contrast to developments towards more disorganised decentralisation in other countries (Grimshaw et al, ), adverse outcomes from the employees' point of view, such as undermining or erosion of existing standards, do hardly take place.…”

Doing the right thing? An institutional perspective on responsible restructuring in UK local government

“…Viewed through the prism of Scott's (2008) three pillars, local authorities might be expected to pursue a responsible, rather than pure, approach to restructuring. In regulative terms, a two‐tier framework of collective bargaining in local government allows employers and trade unions to negotiate nationally over core issues such as pay and conditions, supplemented by local negotiations over staffing levels and working practices (Grimshaw et al., 2017). In normative terms, local politicians and managers have significant ‘sunk investments’ in a model employer approach underpinned by job security, internal career progression and paternalistic HRM that are hard to unpick (Beszter et al., 2015).…”

“…On the other hand, the limited restrictions on hiring and firing in the UK and the weak tradition of social plans mean that simply following legal procedures on collective redundancies may be seen as a legitimate attempt to act responsibly during restructuring. Furthermore, the two‐tier framework of collective bargaining in local government provides significant lateral room for individual local authorities to set their own policies around redundancies and severance pay in line with political agendas, funding pressures and local trade union strength (Connolly, 2020; Grimshaw et al., 2017; Kessler & Purcell, 1996). More broadly, a prolonged period of austerity may call into question the legitimacy of ‘soft’ approaches to public sector HRM when others industries have suffered job cuts and downward pressure on pay and conditions (Bach & Stroleny, 2017).…”

‘We just get a bit set in our ways’: renewing democracy and solidarity in UK trade unions

“…In local government, the largest component of public sector employment, sustained financial pressures, and policies of restructuring and outsourcing, have steadily eroded key features of public sector employment such as job security, fair reward and collective representation through trade unions. Although centralised collective bargaining remains in place, the institutions of bargaining have become increasingly ‘perforated’ over time, setting only minimum standards and broad procedural rules, thereby allowing for diverging standards at a local level (Grimshaw et al, 2017). While a key driver of change in UK local government is the national political and economic context, research shows that specific local responses depend on the dynamic interplay between local political agendas, local trade union capacities and local managerial strategies for reform (Johnson et al, 2019).…”