Search results

A recent OECD report on labour disputes noted that there has been a considerable increase in strike activity in the public sector of a number of member countries in recent times. Moreover, it was noted that strikes have started to occur in the traditionally “quiet” parts of the public sector in various countries. There is little need to stress this point in the last few years as the strikes that are attracting attention throughout the world are virtually all in the public sector; witness, for example, the air traffic controllers' dispute in the United States, the campaign of selective industrial action by civil servants in Britain and the postal and telecommunications disputes in Australia in mid‐1981.

During the recent strike wave, Britain and other industrial market economies experienced a marked increase in the annual total number of working days lost through stoppages. A question arises, however, as to the validity of these comparisons, and the true meaning of strike statistics. There has been substantial controversy in recent years on the validity of making international comparisons of strike behaviour. All the conceptual and practical problems involved in strike statistics come to the surface when these comparisons are made. It is likely that statistics from different countries will be subject to differing national minimum definitions, and will be based on different answers to the question: What is a strike?

A strike is not the only available collective sanction open to a dissatisfied workforce, which may have recourse to alternative forms of militant action such as the go‐slow or overtime ban. Nevertheless, despite their well known limitations, strike statistics constitute the only available quantitative barometer of overt and organised industrial conflict. In order to explain the incidence of strike action at an aggregative level a number of studies have been carried out in recent years which test quantitative relationships via the use of multiple regression techniques and which postulate an economic interpretation of strike activity. The advantage of the quantitative approach as a method of analysis and insight into the relationships involved is that it “replaces improvised ad hoc explanations of strike activity with a behavioural model which….does yield refutable implications”. That is, in terms of providing more solid and systematic empirical knowledge, its performance is testable and, by amendments and refinements, capable of improvement.

This study explores match related factors and their impact on the batting strike rate in Twenty20 cricket – an aspect which can generate excitement and fan engagement in cricket matches.

Data was collected from www.cricinfo.com using a web scraping tool based on R programming from February 17, 2005, to October 25, 2022, numbering 4,221 men’s Twenty20 international innings featuring 41 national teams that had taken place in 85 venues across 11 countries of play. Hypothesis testing was conducted using one-way ANOVA.

The findings indicate that batters score faster in the first inning of a match, and mean strike rates also vary significantly based on the country of play. Further, the study analyses the top performing national sides, venues and country of play in terms of mean batting strike rate, thus providing insights to cricket boards, international regulating bodies of cricket, sponsors, media companies and coaching staff for better decision-making based on batting strike rate.

The originality of the study lies in its focus on using non-marketing strategies to increase fan engagement. Further, this study is the first one to examine different venues from the perspective of batting strike rate in men’s Twenty20 international matches.

Labor unions play a key role in combating inequality. Recent research focuses on unions' ability to shape “moral economies” that make greater inequality socially inappropriate. But this research largely hypothesizes moral economy pathways for combating inequality, rather than showing them in action. Through a case study of the 2018 teachers' strike wave, we identify mechanisms that allow unions to shape moral economies. Based on analysis of in-depth interviews with key strike leaders, social media discussion groups, and contemporaneous media coverage, we find that the interaction of sustained mass disruption and worker–organizer intervention were the key mechanisms that allowed the teachers and their unions to reshape moral economies. Externally, the strikes created a social and political crisis to which political elites had to respond, while tying the teachers' struggles to broader community issues, galvanizing public support for the strikes. As disruptions escalated, the teachers' experience of collective action created a positive feedback effect, reshaping workers' understanding of what they wanted, what they deserved, and what they could win. The 2018 teachers' strike is analytically useful because it managed to reshape norms and expectations around educational and economic inequality rapidly, on a large scale.

After decades of declining strike rates in the industrialized world, recent years have seen a surge of militant walkouts in the global South, political strikes in Europe, and unconventional strikes in nonunion sectors in the United States. This new diversity of strike action calls for a new theoretical framework. In this paper, we review the historical strengths and limits of traditions of strike theory in the United States. Building on the emerging power resources approach, we propose a model based on a multidimensional view of associational power, power resources, and arenas of conflict in the economy, state, and civil society. We demonstrate the utility of our approach via a case analysis of strikes in the “Fight for $15” campaign in the United States.

School climate strikes are opening spaces of appearance, becoming differently active forms of public pedagogy where new and previously unthought collective climate action is possible. This inquiry contributes to understanding school climate strikes as important forms of climate justice activism by exploring how they work as public pedagogy.

The inquiry process involved poetic inquiry to produce an affective poetic witness statement to an event of school climate strikes, and then a performative enactment of diffractive reading using the poem created. The diffractive reading is used to conceptualise school climate strikes as public pedagogy and move towards an understanding of how school climate strikes work as public pedagogy. Diffused throughout is the question of where the more-than-human fits in public pedagogy and youth climate justice activism.

School climate strikes are dynamic and differently acting (diffracting) public pedagogies that work by open spaces of appearance that enable capacities for collective action in heterogeneous political spaces. Consideration of entanglements and intra-actions between learner, place, knowledge and climate change are productive in understanding how phenomena work as public pedagogy.

This inquiry extends on important considerations in both climate change education and public pedagogy scholarship. It diffuses consideration of the more-than-human throughout the inquiry and enacts a move beyond the humanist limits of existing public pedagogy scholarship by introducing climate intra-action, heterogeneous political spaces and non-conforming learning to an understanding of activist public pedagogies and the educative agent.

Purpose – We make a case for bridging two types of logics – analytic and dialectic – for explaining processes of social-historical change, and maintain that a successful bridge between these two logics depends on a variety of conditions and most especially the type of analytic logic or model one employs for capturing dynamic processes.

Methodology/approach – Conventional models of social change processes typically presuppose ergodic social worlds and are problematic as analytic approaches generally and most certainly are not fertile grounds for feeding dialectic theorization. Instead, we propose modeling dynamic processes that begin by assuming a nonergodic social world – one in flux, one that is nonrepeating, one within which model process and parameter structures are historically contingent and change with time, one that is autocatalytic, creating and changing its own possibilities.

Findings – We develop the line of thinking adumbrated above and illustrate these modeling strategies with empirical examples from US labor movement history. Results from these examples lend much weight to our proposals. Thus, this chapter demonstrates that concerns about the use of ergodic assumptions and about greater use of dialectical reasoning when studying social processes are not idle speculations within theoretical commentaries but have practical consequences in the conduct of research and the building of better theory.

Research limitations/implications – To approximate such an approach, social scientists should avoid cross-sectionalist and longitudinal modeling strategies that presuppose stability and homogeneity in parameter and process structures. Homogeneity and stability in parameter and process structures should be demonstrated, not assumed.

Originality/value – Rather than accepting the alienated spheres of social science analytics and dialectic theory, our proposal presupposes nonergodic social worlds and takes pragmatic steps for estimating analytic models that are more amenable to dialectic reasoning. Models that take nonergodicity seriously not only have the potential to produce better, historically grounded analytics but are also best suited to bridge with dialectic logic, thus taking advantage of the strengths of both forms of logic.

This paper develops and tests a new integrative theoretical framework for the study of workplace conflict that links the literatures of such disciplines as organization behavior, industrial relations, management, psychology, sociology, and social movement. It provides testable hypotheses where conflict is structurally blocked by laws, organizational rules, or social norms. It is hypothesized that a blockage of one expression will cause conflict to take on more covert forms of that same expression and to shift to other permitted forms.

In a test of the theory in municipal collective bargaining, the paper found that conflict that was structurally blocked in the form of strikes was redirected to both covert collective actions (sick-outs, slowdowns, etc.), other permitted collective actions (e.g., unfair labor practices) and such individual expressions as grievances.

There would appear to be a promising agenda for future research into the other cases described in the framework. For example, from the nonunion employer where collective actions are prohibited but individual grievances allowed it is hypothesized that such covert conflict as absenteeism, theft, or sabotage will be reduced. On the other hand, these same nonunion firms are predicted to have higher levels of individual conflict than unionized firms where both strikes and grievances are permitted.

Future research that evaluates workplace conflict resolution ought to take into account the complex relationships between conflict expressions suggested in the new framework. The temptation of researchers to study one expression at a time should be resisted.

The campaign for striker replacement legislation, which began in the late 1980s and had effectively ended by the mid-1990s, was the most important political battle over labor legislation since the defeat of the Labor Law Reform Bill in 1978. Striker replacement was the AFL-CIO’s top legislative priority in the early 1990s and, coming quickly after the passage of NAFTA, which labor had opposed, the defeat of its campaign solidified organized labor’s reputation for failure in legislative battles. As yet, however, the political campaign for striker replacement legislation has attracted surprisingly little attention from industrial relations scholars.