Search results

The purpose of this paper is to consider how far different unions representing white‐collar workers fulfil the expectations of their memberships. In order to focus upon this problem we intend to concentrate on the area of white‐collar membership of predominantly manual workers' unions: in particular we shall take as examples the cases of the steel and mining industries. At a time when major trade unions representing the white‐collar labour force are competing for membership on an unprecedented scale and when proposals for union amalgamations are currently being voiced, the appropriateness of union policies for this category of employees and their approval by the rank and file are of obvious relevance.

Industrialization in capitalist societies ushered in the growth of trade unions and the development of union activities of industrial workers. In the late eighteenth and the early nineteenth centuries in the West when unionism began, trade unions took diverse forms. These forms varied by society and were significantly influenced by the country’s specific historical background and socioeconomic and cultural conditions. Yet such diverse union structures began to merge into “industrial unionism” in the late nineteenth century, which embraced all types of workers within the boundaries of an industry. Industrial unionism has been considered the organizational form that most effectively ensures the collective power of trade unions and their sociopolitical sway over contending forces, notably, the state and employers’ associations, and thus has remained a prototypical union system. Accordingly, nonwestern societies and latecomers to unionism in the West have modeled their unions on the basis of the industrial union structure.

This research identifies factors which affect the unionisation of white collar workers and provides an analytical model for the use of practitioners in employee relations. The article is based on a study carried out at Sheffield City Polytechnic from 1974–1977. The research took a company or organisation‐level perspective rather than the national or industrial ones favoured by previous researchers. In an organisational context the union recognition process is one which creates a profound change in relationship between white collar staff and their employer; a change from what may be described as an “individualistic” to a more “collective” relationship.

White‐collar trade unionism has aroused considerable interest among students of industrial relations, but relatively little attention has been paid to staff associations, which Crompton noted perform similar functions to trade unions and to which white‐collar workers are partial. At present, white‐collar and partly white‐collar unions account for roughly half of the unions in Britain and some 35 per cent of the membership. The density of white‐collar membership has increased to 40 per cent (over 50 per cent if staff and professional associations are included), compared with 53 per cent for manual workers. White‐collar workers are traditionally thought to be less disposed to join trade unions and, as Bain et al note, “when white collar workers do unionize, they are believed to carry with them certain aspects of the status ideology which affects the behaviour of their unions”. Blackburn and Prandy offer a theoretical framework which may be used to compare the “unionateness” of white‐collar and manual forms of employee representation. Most white‐collar unions satisfy the criteria of unionateness, but a large proportion of staff associations fail on the question of independence from employers for the purposes of negotiation. In the first four years of his appointment, the Certification Officer refused certificates of independence to fifty‐one organisations, all of them staff associations.

A recent study illustrates that shop stewards are unambitious in their demand for and use of financial information in the negotiating arena. The TUC, however, is anxious to extend rights to information, consultation and representation in recognition of financial information as an important power resource.

The nature of work has changed in the past 30 years but we do not know what these changes have meant for worker job stress. In this chapter we compare data from three surveys of the quality of work life from 1972 to 2002. At the most general level, work today is less stressful than it was in 1972. Workers report fewer job demands, more decision latitude, less job strain, more job security and greater access to job resources and job support. However, these changes have not affected all workers equally. Women, those with less education, non self-employed workers, blue collar workers and workers in manufacturing industries showed the greatest decreases in job stress although levels of job stress remain higher than for comparison groups (men, college educated, white collar, service workers). Changes were not always linear across time suggesting that some aspects of job strain are sensitive to economic cycles.

A series of projects is reported which focus on various aspects of white‐collar trade unionism, and which had to confront the theoretical limitations of some of the conventional ways of studying white‐collar trade unions.

The unionisation of professional, scientific and technical employees has attracted considerable attention in recent years. Much of the debate has concerned the issue of whether unionism and professionalism are compatible. During the 1970s, established white‐collar unions and a new breed of “professionals‐only” unions sought to recruit in this area on the assumption that they were. However, the early 1980s saw a decline in the rate of recruitment and a fall in the membership of some “professionals‐only” unions. Subsequently, a period of consolidation and reorganisation has taken place, with the established white‐collar unions leading the way in devising new organisational arrangements. These entailed absorbing some of the “professionals‐only” unions into their ranks. How far, though, is trade union membership regarded as compatible with professional status by individual engineers?

This study explores the representation of identity groups and their interests within the labor movement using lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals as my case group. The goal is to provide new knowledge about how national and international unions in the United States are responding to sexual orientation. Data on the official polices of the 13 largest national and international unions was collected through a telephone survey of union staff and officials possessing specialized knowledge about their unions’ responses to sexual diversity.

The data collected here was used to test whether structural and demographic arguments regarding union responsiveness to LGBT issues explain the divergences in union initiatives to recognize sexual diversity. The results of this study confirmed earlier research that structural and demographic variables do matter but revealed that it is necessary to go beyond these variables to more fully explain variation in union responses to sexual diversity. Future research needs to explore other factors involving collective agency, history, ideology, and so on and the differences between the social movement unionism rooted in old class politics and one more influenced by the new social movements to understand why unions such as Service Employees International Union (SEIU) are the most responsive to minorities and the most successful in changing union culture as well as practice.

This article is the result of my personal interest as an engineer and manager in the attitudes of engineers working in industry toward engineering unions. The article is divided into three parts: