Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Directly through legislation, dispute resolution and for some, as employer Indirectly providing important context Rules of engagement in employee relations boundaries of acceptability and legitimacy Shaping climate and priorities in employee relations Best practice in employee relations setting an example
The State
Specific interests and objectives of the State in employee relations more complex at various times
The State:
The State
Legislator
Peacekeeper
Economic Manager
Ideology
Statism State control over major elements of employee relations China, Eastern Europe (in past), Singapore(?) Corporatist/Neo-Corporatist/Bargained Corporatist (tripartite arrangements shared decision-making) Scandinavia, Netherlands, Austria, Ireland, Denmark Liberal Collectivism State support for free CB and for trade unions (Voluntarism in C20th Britain) Market Individualism free market model (Thatcher 1980s) support for managerial prerogative, constraints on market imperfections (e.g trade unions)
The State
Ideology
Market Individualism Liberal Collectivism Bargained Corporatism State Corporatism Statism Trade Union Power Market Regulation Social Justice
LaissezFaire
Industrial Conflict
Corporatism
Traditional view limited state role in employee relations for much of C20th - voluntarist period of collective laissez faire (Ewing 1998) State encouraged voluntary collective bargaining By 1939, voluntary collective bargaining at industry level established in many sectors Post war social settlements in Britain and Europe By 1960s state concerns with low productivity, inflation and the role of unions in restrictive practices Royal Commission (Donovan) 1968
The State:
Historical Background
State response more interventionist In Place of Strife (1969), Industrial Relations Act 1971 attempts at restrictive labour law but failed
Mid 1970s - return to support for CB ACAS and auxiliary legislation 1974-79 and Social Contract. 1970s Present day. Growth of individual employment rights areas of discrimination law, maternity, equal pay.
The State:
Historical Background
State has played the major role in shaping development of employment relations in Britain in last 150 years
Highly interventionist in three key stages 1890 1940 and establishment of industry-wide CB voluntarism highly interventionist (Ewing 1998) 1940 1979 shift to decentralised system of employment relations 1979 de-regulation of employment relations; neoliberal offensive
Thatcherism - break with post-war consensus and social settlement major ideological shift See now in France, Germany and much of EU Free market ideology and New Right policies but strong state in employee relations restrictive law until 1997. Unions and collective bargaining market imperfections influence curbed. Period 1979-97 an attack on the bases of trade union power and emphasis on managerial prerogative.
Legal regulation dominant post-1979 supplants CB Six major pieces of legislation 1980-1989 curbed trade union power and influence. Different notion of model employer in public sector GCHQ, changes to ACAS remit
Individual labour law extended to areas previously untouched by statute law wage levels, hours of work, holidays Efficiency wage thesis higher labour costs force employers to use labour more efficiently Business friendly has made changes but emphasis on flexibility and anti EU initiatives that impose undue burdens on business (I&C) Blair sees the New Labour project as nothing less than a culture change in employment relations is he right? New employment relations for a modern (knowledge) economy
Recent assessment (Dickens and Hall 2006) suggests pursuit of Fairness but only up to a point contingent on business concerns Others, less generous (Smith and Morton 2006) many of the claimed benefits are rarely attained in practice Anna Pollert (2005, 2007), highlights continuing problems faced by unorganised workers
Many unaware of their rights but even when they are, unable to defend them through lack of effective representation.
Sets the rules of engagement, establishes climate and context and sets an example.
Influence on the issues and conduct of employment relations greater than is commonly assumed. Often does this by appearing to do very little collective laissez-faire can be a distant observer at the ringside but intervenes when necessary.
At times a more interventionist stance Industrial Relations Act, Miners Strike, Firefighters dispute.
Continuing evidence that national institutions matter (Boyer 1999) National systems of regulation continue to exert influence even in EU (Rubery et al. 2008) Legal regulation in nation state continues to be dominated by the laws of that state Many employee relations institutions remain firmly located within the nation state