Search results

This paper presents an historical reconstruction of the radicalisation of Alan Fox, the industrial sociologist and a detailed analysis of his early historical and sociological writing in the classical pluralist phase.

An intellectual history, including detailed discussion of key Fox texts, supported by interviews with Fox and other Biographical sources.

Fox’s radicalisation was incomplete, as he carried over from his industrial relations (IR) pluralist mentors, Allan Flanders and Hugh Clegg, a suspicion of political Marxism, a sense of historical contingency and an awareness of the fragmented nature of industrial conflict.

Recent academic attention has centred on Fox’s later radical pluralism with its “structural” approach to the employment relationship. This paper revisits his early, neglected classical pluralist writing. It also illuminates his transition from institutional IR to a broader sociology of work, influenced by AH Halsey, John Goldthorpe and others and the complex nature of his radicalisation.

This paper presents the findings of a case study undertaken in a UK utility company, referred to as Energy Co. The main aim of the study was to assess how the agreement of a partnership arrangement in 1995 had affected the conduct of employment relations. The study found that partnership was born out of a poor industrial relations climate, and driven primarily by management. They hoped that it might improve industrial relations, raise employee commitment, inform and educate the workforce, and increase employee contribution. Partnership was not intended to encourage joint governance or power sharing. In practice, partnership combined direct employment involvement (EI) such as team briefing and problem solving groups, with representative participation through a formal partnership council system. Management suggested that, on balance, partnership had been successful, with benefits including improved industrial relations, quicker pay negotiations and increased legitimacy of decision making. It was also suggested that there was a positive link – albeit indirect and intangible – with organisational performance. Union representatives also proposed that partnership was a success, citing benefits including greater access to information, greater influence, inter‐union co‐operation, and more local decision making. Employee views were more mixed. There was also clear evidence of several tensions. Four were particularly noteworthy: employee apathy, management‐representative relations, employee‐representative relations, and the role of full‐time union officials (FTOs). Despite espoused partnership, management hostility to unions was evident, and a preference for non‐union employment relations clear. Consequently, the future of the partnership in its current form is uncertain.

The advent of a worldwide economic recession has weakened union power and put pressure on management to increase efficiency or “die”. The emergence of Thatcherism has reinforced this. The study examines the impact of this new context on management attitudes, behaviour and overall style at the workplace level.

British industrial relations has changed greatly over the past decade. A central development has been management′s sponsorship of new, direct forms of employee involvement (EI) such as team briefing, quality circles and profit sharing. In many larger manufacturing firms new schemes now co‐exist with traditional union‐centred collective bargaining structures. In 1988 Employee Relations Vol. 10 No. 6 reported on a quality circle programme and a range of other EI initiatives at Brown′s Woven Carpets. Here returns to Brown′s several years on, as part of a wider, Department of Employment funded research project on “New Developments in Employee Involvement” carried out at Manchester School of Management, UMIST. The Brown′s case illustrates how employee participation develops in successive “waves” – a major theme of the larger study. The firm has now entered a period of consolidation. No new schemes have been introduced, but the early 1980s initiatives have gained a stable if not dominant place in company industrial relations; while the emphasis has moved on from a “reactive” to a more “proactive” usage of EI.

The subject of employee involvement (El) has become much more central to debates about industrial relations and personnel management over the course of the last decade. Employers, confronted by increasingly competitive product markets and a greater emphasis on quality and customer care, have started to focus attention much more explicitly on attempts to develop and motivate employees, as well as aiming to draw more fully upon employee knowledge and talents. At the same time, developments within the EC — especially via the Social Charter — have caused British employers to think more carefully about how to involve employees at work. Amongst the academic community, the subject has also undergone a renaissance, with researchers questioning whether EI is really new, whether it is little more than a facade for u itarist management, or how it interrelates with human resource management or the “new industrial relations”. It is within such a context that our study of employee involvement was commissioned by the Department of Employment and commenced in the summer of 1989.

Presents 35 abstracts from the 2001 Employment Research Unit Annual conference held at Cardiff Business School in September 2001. Attempts to explore the theme of changing politics of employment relations beyond and within the nation state, against a background of concern in the developed economies at the erosion of relatively advanced conditions of work and social welfare through increasing competition and international agitation for more effective global labour standards. Divides this concept into two areas, addressing the erosion of employment standards through processes of restructuring and examining attempts by governments, trade unions and agencies to re‐create effective systems of regulation. Gives case examples from areas such as India, Wales, London, Ireland, South Africa, Europe and Japan. Covers subjects such as the Disability Discrimination Act, minimum wage, training, contract workers and managing change.

The progress towards 1992 and the European Social Charter promise to draw UK industry further into the European pattern of employee relations. For many years Industrial Relations theory, in particular, has focused on our distinctive voluntarist and pragmatic tradition (Clegg, Flanders, Kahn‐Freund etc), while several Economic and Political writers (Marquand, MacInnes etc) have seen the associated patterns of strong trade union workplace organisation and anarchic, decentralised bargaining as major causes of Britain's economic decline.

Uses a longitudinal case study approach to analyse changes in industrial relations in a chemical company over the last decade. The authors argue that the concept of “waves” can be used to help understand developments during this period. The first wave related to the crisis of the early 1980s and a “turnaround project”, while the second was part of a longer term and in a sense less urgent cultural change initiative. There was thus a shift in management thinking, from emphasizing compliance with short‐term imperatives, to an attempt to develop a more fully co‐operative relationship, where commitment was seen as central to the new way of working. However, underpinning this shift to a more co‐operative relationship was a considerable shift in the balance of workplace power, a fact which explains the new relationship more effectively than increased employee understanding or the growth of consensus at the workplace. At the same time, there remained ambiguity amongst the key actors in the process. Whilst senior management strongly supported the new programme of change, middle managers and supervisors were much less enthusiastic. Unions also were ambivalent in their attitudes, given the dimunition of their role. Amongst other things, the case illustrates the difficulty encountered when management attempt to change organizational culture to achieve high trust industrial relations.

This paper explores new directions in labour relations in the U.S. car industry by focussing on new developments in “Jointness” and “Teamworking” at a General Motors components plant in up state New York. Given the increasing emphasis on plant agreements in the U.K., the potential undermining of national bargaining in the U.S., and certain common material and ideological factors influencing Capital in both countries, the U.S. experience will hold important lessons for industrial relations in the U.K.

Argues that the discipline of Industrial Relations has become marginalized, as discussion about business, work and employment has been increasingly dominated by the popular nostrums of “Enterprise Culture”, “Excellence” and “Human Resources Management”. Attempts to restate the “basic case” for a critical industrial relations perspective on unerstanding the employment relationship, notwithstanding important changes in contemporary society and industry. Briefly outlines and criticizes the challenge from popular management. Next, outlines a viable, modern definition of industrial relations. Following this, makes the case for a rigorous social science approach to understanding employment relations. However, the discipline also requires an ethical vision, and the conclusion suggests how this might inform some of the key issues in contemporary industrial relations.