Towards the managerialization of trade unions? Recent trends in France and Germany

Abstract

This article focuses on recent changes in internal trade union organizational practices in France and Germany, drawing on interviews and internal union documents. Whereas the union renewal literature has emphasized the introduction of elements from the action repertoire of social movements into trade unions, this article finds that union officials and leaders are also transferring private sector managerial rhetoric and practices into trade unions. The extent and dynamics of this process termed ‘managerialization’ are discussed, as well as its effects on role definitions of union leaders, officials and members, comparing two trade unions: in France the Fédération Chimie Energie and in Germany the Vereinte Dienstleistungsgewerkschaft. The resulting tensions between trade unionism’s administrative and representative rationalities are highlighted.

What are the consequences of a managerial approach to union renewal for union behaviour? A case study of USDAW

“…Unions have been referred to as dual entities, existing between democratic voluntary organisations and an administrative structure that demands efficiency and as such, leaves space in between for the prevalence of managerialisation (Thomas, 2013). Such tensions have also been argued to have arisen in the pursuit of partnership strategies.…”

“…The term 'managerialism' suffers from definitional incongruity in the employee relations literature with a range of terms utilised to depict the concept, including: managerialisation (Thomas, 2013); managerial-led renewal (Heery and Kelly, 1994;Bach and Kolins Givan, 2008;Waddington and Kerr, 2009); managed activism (Heery, 2003;Simms, 2007;; and leadership-oriented renewal (Charlwood, 2004). The managerialism concept has also tended to focus independently, on three key themes: leadership-led or centralised renewal strategies (topdown) (Charlwood, 2004); the use of private sector performance management techniques in unions (Bach and Kolins Givan, 2008); or, the managerialisation of union roles (Thursfield, 2012;Thomas, 2013).…”

“…In drawing on the notion of managerialism, we also acknowledge the problem of inconsistent definitions within the literature. The term is further undermined by disparate conceptual frameworks which tend to study aspects of managerial renewal in isolation, typically either: the professionalisation of union roles (Thursfield, 2012;Thomas, 2013); leadership-led or centralised renewal strategies (top down) (Charlwood, 2004;Simms et al 2013); or, the use of private sector performance management techniques (Heery 2005(Heery , 2006Bach and Kolins Givan, 2008). In contrast, we 3 conceptualise these three aspects of managerialism concurrently to empirically explore how they impact upon union behavior.…”

“…Such an approach has not previously been undertaken in the UK or other advanced market economies. This contribution is important, because to date, the literature has tended to overlook the notion of managerialism and its impact on union behaviour (Dempsey and Brewster, 2009;Hall et al, 2011;Thomas, 2013) at a time when it is argued that unions must avoid overreliance on the state (Milner and Mathers, 2013) and instead adopt innovative organisational structures to renew (Bouneaud, 2007). The paper's empirical contribution is strengthened by the fact that USDAW has a close working relationship with the leading supermarket retailers having been long recognised as an exemplar of a union engaging in partnership with employers (McIlroy, 1998;Haynes and Allen, 2001;Heery, 2002;Parker and Rees, 2013), yet little recent analysis considers any subsequent adoption of managerialism.…”

“…Heery and Kelly, 1994;Willman, 2001;Back Bach and Kolins Givan, 2008;Waddington and Kerr, 2009;Thomas, 2013) and internal drivers for change (e.g. Heery, 2005;Levesque and Murray, 2010;Murray et al, 2010).…”