Search results

The trade union movement as a whole has given a cautious welcome to the new technology provided that it is introduced in a controlled fashion and safeguards are provided against exploitation of the workforce. An examination of the literature produced by the TUC indicates that there is a tendency for many officials to concentrate on traditional areas of union concern, to the detriment of other areas such as job design and ergonomic, health and safety factors. The standard of new technology agreements have varied but both unions and management now have a clearer idea of what terms to bargain for; there has been a corresponding recognition of the need to develop a spirit of co‐operation in management/union problem solving. The way forward rests on union officials' readiness to monitor the operation of equipment and the need for all those in the workforce being affected by new technology to be trained in both equipment operation and the health and safety factors involved.

In this paper analysis is made of an important development in British industrial relations; the extension of collective bargaining to include managerial level employees. The questions posed include those such as: Why are managers increasingly joining unions? What kind of union are they attracted to? How do managers behave as trade unionists and how do employers react to the development of managerial unionism on their virgin territory? In suggesting answers to such topical questions, it is argued that although some existing unions are becoming more ambitious in recruitment, managers themselves are now interested in organizing collectively to defend their employment status and declining pay differentials. It is noted that George Bain's explanation of white collar union growth is also applicable to the development of managerial unionization, and that managers' unionism is spreading from the public to the private sector, although managers may, however, have reservations about some manifestations of aggressive trade unionism. But, despite their prevailing attitudes, managers can be militant themselves and may offer a more profound challenge to employers' prerogatives than more traditional unions. It is concluded that employers may try to undermine incipient managers' unions but that in the long term these attempts are doomed to failure not least because they will be countered by public policy.

The Employment Act 1980 has repealed Sections 11‐16 of the Employment Protection Act 1975, with the result that statutory union recognition provisions no longer exist in Britain. At the present time there are relatively few people who would mourn the passing of these provisions. From the start many employers were unhappy with what they saw as strongly pro‐union provisions, while the unions became increasingly disenchanged with the lengthy procedural delays in hearing claims, and ACAS itself was unhappy with a number of court rulings that substantially restricted their discretion in hearing and deciding such claims. As a consequence there are likely to be few persons hoping for, much less calling for, the re‐introduction of statutory union recognition provisions, even in a modified form, in the immediate future. Indeed no less an individual than the former Chairman of ACAS himself is on record as saying that:

“Managerial unionism” commented one writer recently “consititutes an emergent industrial relations phenomenon of major significance”. Long established in the public sector the movement of junior and middle managers into trade unions is indeed becoming increasingly evident throughout private industry. Rising job insecurity, dissatisfaction with salary levels and a decline in the individual treatment of managers by employers are some of the factors encouraging this development. New unions have been created and existing ones adapted to meet the demand. There are now more than a dozen unions catering exclusively for managerial and executive grades, as well as the more general white‐collar unions which recruit managers, notably Clive Jenkins' Association of Scientific, Technical and Managerial Staffs.

Examines the history of the Commission on Industrial Relations (CIR) 1969‐74 ‐ its origins, organization and policies ‐ and then evaluates its contribution as an agent of reform in the context of the perceived problems of the 1960s and 1970s. Considers whether there are any lessons to be learnt for the future given the possibility of a Labour Government, developments in Europe and the 1995 TUC policy document Your Voice at Work. Despite the drastic changes in industrial relations and in the economic, political and social environment, the answer is in the affirmative. In particular, the importance of a new third‐party agency having an independent governing body like the CIR and not a representative body like the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS); in its workflow not being controlled by government; and in its decisions on recognition being legally enforceable.

Through a survey of 200 employees working in five of the thirty establishments analysed in previous research about the microeconomic effects of reducing the working time (Cahier 25), the consequences on employees of such a reduction can be assessed; and relevant attitudes and aspirations better known.

The authors examine the lack of trade union membership in building societies. To form conclusions as to reasons for this lack of representation they look at the period from 1971. The emergence of staff associations and the employers' obvious reluctance to allow TUC union representation in their organisations are held to be responsible in part. The authors then discuss TUC unions' current strategies such as mergers with staff associations, and consider the possibilities for the future.

In the last four years, since Volume I of this Bibliography first appeared, there has been an explosion of literature in all the main functional areas of business. This wealth of material poses problems for the researcher in management studies — and, of course, for the librarian: uncovering what has been written in any one area is not an easy task. This volume aims to help the librarian and the researcher overcome some of the immediate problems of identification of material. It is an annotated bibliography of management, drawing on the wide variety of literature produced by MCB University Press. Over the last four years, MCB University Press has produced an extensive range of books and serial publications covering most of the established and many of the developing areas of management. This volume, in conjunction with Volume I, provides a guide to all the material published so far.

Iron and steel is an old industry. As a cyclical and a strategically important industry, it has long been subject to extensive government intervention in most countries, including Britain. When Labour won the general election in 1945, it was already pledged to nationalise several industries, including coal and steel. But steel had a lower priority than coal; the labour movement had not agreed a plan for steel nationalisation, which became the most complex and bitterly contested of the post‐war nationalisations.

I. INTRODUCTION In this monograph we point out and analyse various dimensions of bargaining structure, which we define broadly as the institutional configuration within which bargaining takes place, and attempt to provide some guidelines for management action. We look at the development, theory, and present framework of bargaining structure in Britain and then examine it in terms of choices: multi‐employer versus single employer, company versus plant level bargaining, and the various public policy issues involved.