Manajemen | Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji 2005 20
BOOK REVIEWS
READER IN GENDER, WORK AND ORGANIZATION
Edited by Robin J. Ely, Erica G. Foldy and Maureen A. Scully. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, Massachussetts, 2003, xiv + 440 pp., US$97.00 (paperback)
Compiled in the USA, this important collection aims to achieve the crucial goal
that was earlier formulated in the UK in the 1990s—by the influential and interdisciplinary British journal, Gender, Work and Organization. A growing dialogue
between feminist theorists of work and scholars in organisation studies spurred
the formation of the journal in 1993 with a charter to emphasise gender as a
central and essential theme of all social science research in the field of work and
organisation. Interestingly, the editors of this Reader in Gender, Work and Organization make no mention of the groundbreaking work of that British journal. Such
omission seems to verify the argument of Patricia Martin and David Collinson
in their 2002 article (Over the pond and across the water: developing the field of
gendered organizations. Gender, Work and Organization 9, 244–65), who puzzled
over the gap in interaction that appears to divide British and American work in this
area. Martin and Collinson observed that in the pages of the journal, European,
Canadian and Australian articles jostled for space alongside British contributions,
yet American articles were few and far between.
However, the Reader in Gender, Work and Organization gives the lie to any idea
that—at least in this sector of the US tradition—theory is viewed as less important
than empiricism. The book draws on 31 previously published theoretical articles
(most of them from North American writers) to provide the background to the
editors’ own theory of organisational intervention. That theory, developed as
a basis for gaining organisational support for gender equity by the Center for
Gender in Organizations (CGO) at Simmons College in Boston, argues that if one
is to successfully challenge the inequalities which continue to produce ineffective
workplaces, then one needs a gender lens to surface and combat the assumptions
that privilege the middle-class white men who run them. The CGO is renowned
for using that theory as a basis for its interventionist work with organisations.
This book is designed to explain and interrogate that theory by showing its links
with the growing canon of feminist ideas on work and organisations. Based around
seven sections, the collection takes the reader through a journey of discovery.
It begins by demonstrating how a gender lens can illuminate the gendering of
organisations, then goes on to assess how other dimensions of difference can
complement, but also unsettle their own theoretical approach. The first section
should be required reading not only for students, but also for all who work in
industrial relations and human resource management (HRM). It sets the scene
for the book by introducing the reader to the concept of gender, and in so doing
demonstrates four different ‘frames’ for understanding gender in organisations.
THE JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, VOL. 47, NO. 2, JUNE 2005, 242--258
BOOK REVIEWS
243
The editors begin with three articles, all of which the introductory overview
critiques as inadequate in some sense. The section then turns the reader’s attention
to the CGO’s preferred ‘fourth frame’ approach, based on the theory of gendered
organisation developed by Acker, and complemented by ideas of ‘doing gender’
(West and Zimmerman), theories of men and masculinities (Collinson and Hearn)
and the complications that race and class add to a gender analysis (Holvino). This
section also includes an overview that sets out the CGO framework for promoting
gender equity in organisations.
The later sections of the book deepen and complicate the analysis of gendered
organisations by emphasising key topics in management: negotiation, leadership,
organisational change and intervention, diversity, HRM and globalisation. Although the book as a whole would make a strong text for an interdisciplinary
postgraduate program, teachers will also find it useful for introducing a gender
segment to general courses on those topics. To this end, Fletcher’s chapter on
post-heroic models in the leadership section, Meyerson and Scully’s chapter on
‘tempered radicals’ in the organisational change area, Hochschild’s ‘nanny chain’
in the globalisation section and Thomas and Ely’s chapter on diversity make lucid
and telling reading. For areas more directly recognisable as industrial relations,
the sections on negotiation and HRM provide much room for reflection.
I recommend this book as a useful contribution to one’s shelves, first, as a
teaching resource for drawing together much of the recent writing in the field, and
second, for showing how practical interventionist work, despite its vulnerabilities
and uncertainties, can be solidly based on theoretical innovation.
UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
JOAN EVELINE
EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS AND HRM IN SOUTH KOREA
By Dong-One Kim and Johngseok Bae. Ashgate, Aldershot, 2004, xviii +238 pp.,
£55 (hardback)
The book provides an historical and highly detailed overview of industrial relations and human resource management (HRM) practices in South Korea, with a
particular focus on key developments such as the ‘Great Labour Struggle’ of 1987
and the aftermath of the Asian Economic crisis from late 1997. The introduction
discusses the factors underpinning Korea’s rapid industrialisation. It emphasises
the significance of external factors, such as Japanese investment in the electronics
industry and US economic aid, alongside internal factors, such as the role of the
state in providing the impetus for late industrialisation and the actions of Korean
firms. A general model is outlined that explores the impact of such environmental factors on employment relations and HRM practices and on ‘organisational
architecture’ (strategy, structure, culture and leadership). This model is derived
from Dunlop’s systems model and in a similar vein to Dunlop’s model, it provides
a largely static framework within which to explore the often dynamic and fluid
nature of Korean industrial relations.
244
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
Korea’s rapid economic development is examined in chapter 2. The economy
grew by approximately 10% per year in the 1970s and 1980s and by some 7% a year
up to the financial crisis of 1997. Such high growth rates culminated in per capita
income rising from US$240.00 in 1970 to US$11380.00 in 1996. Nevertheless,
the authors note that ‘the labour market also has a dark side, epitomized by long
working hours and a high incidence of industrial accidents’ (p. 27). There was a
considerable rise in fatalities at work, from 1660 in 1986 to 2528 in 1998, and a
concomitant jump in occupational injuries over the same period.
In chapter 3, the authors provide a detailed overview of the cultural influences
that permeate Korean society and that have had an important bearing on workplace relationships. These cultural influences include Korea’s Confucian heritage
and neo-Confucianism which takes into account the impact of Western values and
Christianity on Korean society. A further cultural influence is that of ‘dynamic
collectivism’ which involves maintaining a strong degree of harmony among the
‘in-group’, an optimistic outlook towards the future, and the demonstration of a
‘can do’ approach to achieving difficult goals. Nevertheless, the authors suggest
that there is also a downside to such single mindedness: ‘Some negative implications include neglect of due process, sacrifice of personal and family life and loss
of health’ (p. 43). A further cultural trait is that of Yongoism whereby people are
connected by virtue of their blood relationships, education or as a result of coming
from the same birthplace. Blood relatives receive strong preferential treatment in
promotion decisions to senior managerial positions. Coming from the same high
school or university is also very important to career progression within political
parties, managerial hierarchies and Korean universities. For example, in 2001,
some 96% of the academic staff employed by Seoul National University were
former graduates of that university.
An excellent review of the history of Korean industrial relations is provided in
chapter 4. It documents the formation of the first unions in seafaring and mining
communities in the 1890s, repression of labour unrest and harsh working conditions for much of the Japanese occupation from 1910 to 1945, the outlawing of the
left leading union movement Chun Pyung by the American Military Government
in the post World War II period, and the widespread suppression of labour unrest
by the military dictatorship of Park Chung-hee from 1961 to 1979. The chapter
also emphasises the role of the Korean Central Intelligence Agency in manipulating union elections and the role of ‘disguised workers’, mainly student activists,
who entered industrial estates in the early 1980s to organise factory workers.
In chapter 5, the ‘Great Labour Struggle’ from 1987 to 1989 that such union
organising facilitated is explored. In June 1987, mounting civic discontent against
the authoritarian military rule and rising inequality erupted into nationwide
street demonstrations. This was followed by some 3000 strikes involving 1.2
million workers. In the aftermath of the ‘Great Labour Struggle’, the state experimented with a form of laissez-faire pluralism, and from 1987 to 1989, the
police and intelligence agencies declined from interfering in private sector industrial relations. This relaxation in the level of state intervention into workplace industrial relations facilitated the growth of Korean unions, whose density
reached almost 19% in 1989, or an increase of over 50% from the 1987 figure.
BOOK REVIEWS
245
Union membership also changed dramatically from predominantly femaledominated unions in light industries to male-dominated unions in heavy industries, and white-collar employees in the banking, insurance and communications
industries. In addition, collective bargaining became widely established and a
labour movement independent from employers and the state emerged. Nevertheless, the authors note that this beneficial period for independent union organisation ended in 1989 when the state and employers resumed their traditional
approach of union suppression and avoidance. For example, the police resumed
their former practice of intervening on the side of employers in industrial disputes.
This authoritarian approach continued under the presidency of Kim Young-sam
from 1993 to 1998.
The impact of the financial crisis is considered in chapter 6. Unemployment
rose from 2.1% in 1997 to 8.6% in 1999 and ‘has become a more chronic, entrenched social problem than previously’ (p. 121). Concession bargaining and a
concern for job security dominated wage negotiations and real wages fell by 9.3%
in 1999. There was also a significant rise in the use of contingent workers by employers, up from 46% of the overall workforce to 53% by 2000. Nevertheless, the
authors contend that the crisis has made trade unions more active and dynamic
in the long run. It increased the level of union organising among employees in
small and medium-sized firms, with non-unionised workers bearing the brunt of
job shedding. It also led to increased competition between the conservative union
body, the Federation of Korean Trade Unions, and the more militant and independent Korean Confederation of Trade Unions for members. This resulted in
both union bodies initiating waves of strikes in opposition to employers’ downsizing initiatives. In addition, the fallout from the financial crisis facilitated a move
from an enterprise-based to an industry-based union structure.
Given the wealth of empirical evidence to the contrary, it is difficult to concur
with the authors’ optimistic conclusions that Korean industrial relations have
shifted from state corporatism (1890–1986) to ‘exploratory pluralism’ (1987–
1997), to societal corporatism (post-1997). Much of the book points instead to
a return to a more authoritarian approach by the state after 1989, albeit under
greater scrutiny by the international community, and a return to union avoidance
by many employers. The authors do, however, demonstrate a convincing need
for stronger institutions to enable the parties to negotiate and settle industrial
disputes. The lack of an adequate institutional structure is linked to the excessively narrow scope for taking legal industrial action and the subsequent high rate
of imprisonment experienced by trade union activists. The authors encourage
the Korean government to revise the legal framework for industrial relations so
that it complies with international labour standards. Overall, the book is strongly
recommended because of its exhaustive account of Korean industrial relations
supported by a wealth of tables and statistical data. Such detailed analysis will
prove an invaluable resource to those interested in comparative industrial relations and to those with an interest in the turbulent evolution of Korean industrial
relations.
AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
MICHAEL O’DONNELL
246
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
THE PARADOX OF AMERICAN UNIONISM: WHY AMERICANS LIKE
UNIONS MORE THAN CANADIANS DO BUT JOIN MUCH LESS
By Seymour Martin Lipset and Noah M. Meltz. Cornell University Press, Ithaca
and London, 2004, xii +226 pp., US$32.50 (hardback)
Industrial relations and labour studies researchers on the North American
continent have long been fascinated by the sharply different trajectories of the
US and Canadian labour movements since the mid-1960s. Before 1965, union
density in the two countries was very similar, but since that time union density in the USA went into freefall (from about 25% to about 14% in 2001),
whereas the Canadian rate rose to about 35% and then fell back to 30%. What
makes this divergence between the two countries so fascinating is that in many
other respects the two countries are so similar. They have a massive unguarded
border, quite similar and thoroughly integrated economies, the same language
(with the exception of the French-speaking province of Quebec) and broadly
similar cultural and entertainment industries. What could possibly explain the
difference in the fate of the labour movement in these two roughly similar
counties?
To deepen the paradox, polls show that citizens of the USA approve of unions
more strongly than do Canadian citizens. A poll conducted by the authors found
that 91% of union members in the USA approve of unions versus 84% in Canada,
whereas 66% of nonmembers in the USA share that opinion as opposed to 55%
in Canada. A number of similar sentiments, such as tending to side with unions
in the event of a dispute, or believing that unions are good for the country as a
whole show consistently more favourable attitudes among US citizens, member
and non-member alike.
How can we explain the difference? The authors provide evidence that some
frequently stated explanations are not sound. For example, Canadian employers
(according to the book’s poll) are more hostile to unions than are their US counterparts, not less. It must be noted that the results of their poll on the US side are
almost impossible to believe, because they show employer attitudes strongly at
variance with employer behaviour. According to the poll, 15% of US employers
would actually welcome a union, whereas 44% would do nothing to oppose one.
The supposed 59%, who would in no way oppose unionisation are contrary to
private sector employer behaviour, where close to all private employers oppose
unionisation, many of them strongly and some of them viciously. Clearly, US
employers are not being candid when they answer polls in this manner. Be that
as it may, the authors make a good point that the difference between the two
countries seems to be that in the US employer opposition, including intimidating
and conflict-ridden forms of opposition, is allowed to a much greater degree, thus
making it much more effective.
The evidence, from the poll in this book and from others, is that there is an
enormous frustrated demand for unions in the USA that is not duplicated in
Canada. What explains this unmet desire for union representation in one country, but not in the other? The authors clearly point in the right direction when
they state that the answer seems to lie in the political arena. The political system in the USA has provided a relatively unfavourable climate for unions, aside
BOOK REVIEWS
247
from the depression and World War II years. Their case is quite convincing that
strength of political support (or opposition) is the key to organised labour’s overall
well-being.
So, why is the Canadian political climate so much more supportive of unions
than that of the USA, especially given that both countries are democracies and
that public approval of unions is higher in the latter? An obvious answer is the
absence of a labour party or social democratic (or socialist) party in the USA,
whereas Canada’s New Democratic Party (NDP) is firmly rooted in unions
and plays that role. The authors accept this answer as being the key to the
difference.
However, they attempt to go deeper by providing an explanation for why no
labour or social democratic party exists in the USA. This constitutes the controversial part of their book. They argue that positive attitudes towards unions in the
USA are actually at variance with much more deeply held values that are quite
harmful to unions. They claim that the USA has always been an individualistic and
hyper-capitalistic society, whereas Canada has always held more communitarian
(‘Tory-social democratic’) values at the core of its value structure. Thus, an infertile value structure prevents the USA from having a labour or labour-oriented
political party. No such obstacle exists in Canada, and thus the NDP is able to
push the ‘terms of debate’ sufficiently in a pro-labour direction and sees more
favourable labour law is enacted federally and in most provinces.
This is an intriguing hypothesis, and the authors produce much survey evidence
that US citizens tend to think in less collective terms. But this ‘values culture’ argument is quite debatable. Rather than some inherent ‘culture’ difference between
the two societies, it might simply be the fact that the USA, lacking a parliamentary
system like Canada’s, has a winner-takes-all political system that narrows political representation to two parties. Canada’s NDP originated as a third party—a
viable option in the Canadian parliamentary context, but a recipe for isolation
in the USA under any circumstances apart from the total breakdown of at least
one of the two major political parties. With only two political parties, it is next
to impossible to build a strong and ideologically labour-oriented electoral party
in the USA. This would not be a problem if the USA had a parliamentary system
such as the one that exists in Canada.
The authors’ cultural argument may be correct, but I am suspicious of arguments that explain differences by something as abstract as ‘values’ and ‘culture’.
A perfectly good explanation can be had by simply pointing to the differences in
the political systems of the two countries, differences that allow business interests
to dominate both parties and most political discourse in the USA to a degree not
possible in Canada. In any case, this is an interesting and provocative book. It is
well argued and the authors marshal their evidence well. This reviewer remains
unconvinced, but the authors have done us a favour by entering the debate of
North American unionism.
FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY
BRUCE NISSEN
248
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS: NEW ZEALAND’S EMPLOYMENT
RELATIONS ACT
Edited by Erling Rasmussen. Auckland University Press, Auckland, 2004, 210
pp., NZ$50.00 (paperback)
Over the past two decades, New Zealand workers have lived under four different
labour laws. Each of these has attempted to remake the law of the workplace in
order to achieve a broad set of goals. These laws have ranged from modernising
industrial relations and supporting collective bargaining to putting into effect
various economic theories, improving productivity and the economy in general,
and promoting the appropriate balance of workplace power. Clearly, labour law
in New Zealand bears a heavy burden.
This edited volume examines the performance of the most recent of these laws,
the Employment Relations Act (ERA), 2000. The book includes work from a number
of authors, many of whom have been leading New Zealand industrial relations
and labour law scholars. The essays fall into three main categories. Some provide quantitative and qualitative data on the ERA’s performance. Others analyse
how the ERA and institutions created to enforce it have performed. The rest are
assessments of the law from the point of view of its primary author, employers,
unions and industrial relations theory. I would certainly recommend the book
to those interested in industrial relations, the process of law reform and New
Zealand society.
That said, the book unfortunately falls short of its potential. My criticisms go to
missed opportunities here and a hope that there will be a follow up that capitalises
on those opportunities. First, the book suffers from being an edited volume that
does not sufficiently integrate the work into a whole. It also has an overly insular
perspective. Although it tries to provide background in the introduction, this is
probably not sufficient for most readers. The individual essays assume knowledge
about New Zealand people, cases, history, developments and the text and structure of the ERA. North American and European readers, in particular, will not
understand fundamental aspects of New Zealand labour law and history. It is a
shame not to have reached out to a broader audience, and this could easily have
been done by, for example, arranging the essays with an eye to educating the
reader, supplying a glossary or explanatory information within essays, including
a copy of the ERA’s relevant provisions, providing a timeline and taking more
editorial control over the individual essays to fill gaps.
Second, the book is little more than the sum of its parts. The essays do not build
on one another. In addition, some of the essays are only descriptive in content.
The information they provide cries out for context and analysis. As a result, this
book provides data that could be used to shed light on fascinating issues that
matter a great deal: why law reform fails, how legislative drafting can affect law
reform success and what role institutions and judicial interpretation play in law
reform. This is the book I would like to see someone write using the data in this
book and in other work on New Zealand labour laws since 1987.
The results of New Zealand’s experimentation are relevant to labour law reform debates in other countries (including Australia), but I fear they will be left
BOOK REVIEWS
249
unexamined. For example, in the USA, the law provides that collective bargaining
must take place based on job classifications and not based on membership in a
union or by individuals. In recent years, there have been strong proponents of
‘collective’ bargaining based, instead, on ‘individual’ choice. The proponents are
quite sanguine about such a reform as being the way to resolve the decline in US
unions.
But would they be as interested if they knew that this sort of arrangement in
New Zealand has led to the most severe decline in unionisation of any country and
a serious deterioration in workplace conditions? The essays repeatedly return to
the problem this system has had with ‘free riders’ and the ways in which employers
have used minority representation to undermine unions and collective bargaining,
in spite of explicit efforts to graft on ways to prevent this from happening. The New
Zealand experience suggests the problem is inherent in minority representation.
New Zealand’s experiences have much that is valuable, and important parts
of the story are in this book. Unfortunately, the reader has to work harder than
necessary to find and understand them.
WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY (DETROIT)
ELLEN DANNIN
THE FUTURE OF WORKER REPRESENTATION
Edited by Geraldine Healy, Edmund Heery, Phil Taylor and William Brown.
Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, 2004, xvi +325 pp., £55.00 (hardback)
This book is the product of the UK’s Economic and Social Research Council
Future of Work research program which, in total, funded over 100 researchers
across 22 UK universities. The editors are distinguished scholars in the field and
have brought together leading contributors across a range of disciplines to assess
how the representation gap may be filled, examining both union and non-trade
union institutions of worker representation. In chapter 1, Heery, Healy and Taylor
set the scene with a well-articulated review of four theoretical models of union
behaviour and worker representation: societal, institutional, organisational and
agency perspectives. This is not only thorough, but a review of contrasting debates
on each of these models which provides the reader with some very insightful and
analytical linkages to the following 12 chapters.
As with many edited books, its value can be assessed as a total package and
from the contributions in each chapter. In presenting the volume as a package,
the editors structure the chapters around four distinct ‘clusters’, with each cluster
contributing in some way to the theoretical perspectives outlined in chapter 1.
‘Cluster 1’ includes three chapters that report research findings on issues of possible trade union renewal, using data from workers that are seen as ‘emblematic of
the new economy’ (such as software workers, call centre workers and temporary
and sub-contract employees who work across organisational boundaries). ‘Cluster 2’ comprises another three chapters dedicated to union actors and the structures of representation (black and ethnic minority women union activists, union
organising for part-time, agency and freelance workers and union responses to
250
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
life-long learning). Two chapters make up ‘cluster 3’, presenting an assessment of
union–management partnerships. The final ‘cluster’ includes four chapters that
address issues concerned with non-trade union institutions of worker representation (statutory forms of representation such as works councils and the new information and consultation directive, employment agencies, the Citizens’ Advice
Bureaux (CAB) and a community coalition campaign among low-paid workers in
East London).
It is beyond the scope here to provide a detailed account of every chapter, so
I will comment selectively across the themed clusters of the chapters. The first
cluster starts with the chapter by Hyman, Lockyer, Marks and Scholarios looking at the attitudes of software workers. This is a valuable chapter that provides
much needed data about a neglected occupation employed in a ‘new’ sector of the
economy. However, there is a limitation. We are told that the research confirms
‘adherence to individual values’ because software workers perceive collective representation to be ‘an unimportant aspect of their own jobs’ (p. 45). This makes
some sense given the character of software workers, although it also illustrates
the problem of interpretation for the researcher. The conclusion is based on responses to three questions/statements: ‘management have the right to manage’;
‘people have the right to take industrial action’ and ‘independent employee representation is very important’ (abbreviated). On closer examination, it seems the
evidence is less clear about the attachment to individualistic values per se. Almost
half ‘disagree/strongly disagree’ that management have the right to manage, and
over half (58%) ‘agree/strongly agree’ that people have the right to strike for a
fair deal. This is hardly the stuff of wholesale individualism.
Interestingly, the research instruments and questions are again used in chapter 3
by Bain, Taylor, Gilbert and Gall on call centres (both teams were part of the
same related Future of Work research projects). As one might expect, there are
different results (and explanations) for call centre workers than for those employed
in software. For example, higher proportions (68%) of call centre workers feel
people should have the right to strike to get a fair deal. The variability of responses
is important across these sectors and case studies. Both chapters serve to illustrate
that the context of employment, the nature of work and labour market mobility
are powerful explanatory factors.
The next chapter in cluster 1 is from Marchington, Rubery and Lee Cooke assessing worker voice across newer organisational forms—among subcontractors,
temporary and outsourced employee jobs. The data are used to contrast models of
union partnership with union organising from a multi-agency network perspective. For anyone seeking information on worker representation in newer sectors
of the economy, then cluster 1 is of considerable value. The conclusions will be
of little comfort, however, to those who harbour hopes for greater representation
and/or union mobilisation. This exposes the limitations of traditional models of
representation for those workers who are more mobile, feel insecure and subject
to network agencies as part of their employment pattern.
‘Cluster 2’ commences with chapter 5 by Healy, Bradley and Mukherjee on the
role of ethnic minority women activists in four unions. There is a well-argued
case that broadly fits the themes of agency theory in addressing injustice in the
BOOK REVIEWS
251
workplace, with identifiable impacts from the women interviewed. However, it
would have been helpful to have had a clearer ‘measure’ of union revitalisation.
For example, the evidence that two of the women set up union branches in nonunion firms seems significant, yet the size and character of such new membership
are lacking.
Chapter 6 by Heery, Conley, Delbridge, Simms and Stewart reports multiple
sets of data from unions representing non-standard workers. The data are systematic and engage with debates about the role of representatives/full-time officers
as agents of change, along with issues of external labour market casualisation.
The complexity of a long-standing union dilemma is captured very well here:
namely, whether unions should recruit and represent agency labour, or exclude
such groups of workers by protecting core members employed in more stable and
permanent employment. The conclusions advance our understanding of union
action with the authors painting an ‘evolutionary model’ of union behaviour. Although unions have always used similar multiple roles, what stands out here is
the interplay between internal policy choice, labour market contingencies and
institutional regulation. It is suggested that an ‘evolutionary’ pattern of bargaining activity subsumed with legal and political action is replacing previous models
dependent almost exclusively on voluntary collective bargaining.
The final chapter in the second cluster provides a comprehensive analysis of
trade unions and workplace learning, especially the new legally constituted Union
Learning Representative. The broad conclusions drawn from the cluster 2 set of
chapters are quite variable. On the one hand, these chapters are supportive of the
importance of actors in influencing change and organisational behaviour, even
when union activists face an uphill struggle for recognition and legitimisation. In
contrast, I also found the general thrust of the conclusions to be less integrated
with the objectives set out in the introductory chapter. The role of the state
and other institutional bodies is also important in the findings of these chapters,
and there is considerable conceptual and intellectual overlap with other clusters.
‘Cluster 3’ tackles union–management partnerships in Britain in two chapters.
The first, by Danford, Richardson, Stewart, Tailby and Upchurch assesses the
partnership arrangement in a multi-union case study in the aerospace industry.
The case study is defined as a ‘high road/innovative/high performance work system’ (HPWS) organisation (pp. 170–71). The argument is unambiguous: that in
reality, there is no dichotomy between high and low road management strategies
and workers ultimately experience the degradation of increasing flexibility, managerial cost control and the extrapolation of profit maximisation. Here, we have
a Marxist and labour process analysis of a contemporary phenomenon, reinforcing familiar critiques surrounding partnership as a weakness rather than strength
for union revitalisation. This is an important debate in its own right, but some
lingering doubts remain after reading the chapter. I was left wondering whether
this particular case study is in fact a HPWS organisation, as defined in the early
part of the chapter. If it is, then the chapter is highly illustrative of the potential pitfalls unions are likely to face when relying on ideas of mutual gains with
management.
In contrast, Oxenbridge and Brown offer a slightly more optimistic interpretation of partnership, using data gathered across nine case studies in different
252
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
sectors of the economy. They argue that unions that experience ‘robust’ rather
than ‘shallow’ relationships with management, for them partnership seems to provide more stable benefits. One of the conclusions across the chapters in cluster
3 is a variant of the incorporationist thesis: that partnership exposes unions to
possible membership withdrawal and alienation, as members perceive activists as
being too close to management.
The final four chapters in the volume make up cluster 4, concerned with nonunion institutions of worker representation. The contribution from Hall and
Terry is an evaluation of the possible impact on worker representation as a result
of the new European Information and Consultation Directive. The argument here
is the Directive is unlikely to stimulate much union renewal as a single channel
of representation. Of all the chapters in the book, this one does not report any
empirical data, although it draws quite nicely on ‘what we already know’ to present
a coherent and balanced argument.
In their chapter, Drucker and Stanworth provide research on employment
agencies, and assess whether these labour market intermediaries fulfil a representational role for atypical employees. They conclude that they do with regard
to individual grievances. However, collective representation is virtually nonexistent with agencies ultimately driven by a client/commercial motive and not worker
representation. In the following chapter, Abbott provides similar insights from
the CAB as a representational intermediary. If anything, the CAB’s fourfold increase in employment advice is testimony to the extent of the representation gap in
contemporary society. Equally interesting is their potential impact as a representative intermediary. Not only does the CAB have a high success rate representing
clients at Employment Tribunals, but Abbott makes a persuasive argument that,
otherwise, employer actions would remain unchallenged. A key issue is raised
as to whether the CAB ‘competes’ with or ‘complements’ the trade unions. It is
concluded that they complement the unions by filling a vacuum created by union
decline and absence at the workplace.
In the final chapter, Wills evaluates a community-based coalition campaigning
for a real living wage through the East London Communities Organisation. One
impact was the 300% increase (from 61 to 350) in union members, coupled with
new activists and union stewards. The arguments have a resonance with other
chapters in the book: that traditional models of union structure are often illequipped to deal with atypical workers spread across different sites and locations.
This is a valuable and worthwhile book. The various authors provide an unequivocal case for the need to scrutinise the contours of democracy and expose
its absence in the modern workplace. Despite all the headlines testifying that it is
worker engagement that leads to better company performance, this volume shows
that many people are simply not given a voice at work. The findings and implications are extremely relevant in assessing the future of trade union representation
and public policy initiatives. The clustering of chapters could have been cut several ways, but they make sense and provide a platform for debate that should whet
the appetite for those interested in employee voice, union renewal and alternative
forms of worker representation. The volume would certainly have benefited from
a final concluding chapter in which the editors could have presented a case about
BOOK REVIEWS
253
the state of play regarding the future of worker representation. This could have
been used as an opportunity to re-engage with the models and debates considered
in chapter 1.
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY
TONY DUNDON
PUTTING WORK IN ITS PLACE: A QUIET REVOLUTION
By Peter Meiksins and Peter Whalley. Cornell University Press, Ithaca and
London, 2004, xiv +188 pp., US$19.00 (paperback)
Hardly a professional worker in the USA has not experienced the effects of
competing and demanding times in their daily lives. Indeed, most professionals in
the USA have heard various terminologies used to describe this situation. Terms
such as work/family conflict, time squeeze, spillover, balancing work and family,
and even greedy institutions characterise academic and popular press discussions
about time demands professional workers face in their daily lives today. The
scenario these discussions often portray is one of middle-class professional workers
trapped within the jaws of the work-and-family time bind.
Meiksins and Whalley, however, advance the hypothesis that some professionals actually have found a way to ‘customise’ their scheduled work time in order
to relieve the grip of these two opposing forces. They present observations and
testimonials from interviews with 127 professional (technical) workers who have
chosen to scale back their commitment to full-time paid labour. The sample of
scaled-back professional workers includes 65 individuals who worked part-time
and 62 who worked as independent contractors. The workers were employed as
engineers, software developers and information technology specialists. During the
interviews, the 99 women and 28 men enthusiastically told their stories about taking control over their time commitments to employers and families. Importantly,
nearly all respondents had full-time working partners.
However, as Meiksins and Whalley theorise from the stories, these individuals
represent the beginning of a potential social movement, what the authors term ‘a
quiet revolution’, involving professional workers taking control over their daily
lives. The central thrust of the analysis focuses on what some have identified as
the career-versus-job dilemma. This dilemma more often than not is thought to
plague professional women who, after having children, face the decision of finding
a job that offers a flexible schedule with fewer hours. Often, research suggests
that this flexibility comes with fewer opportunities for career advancement. As
Meiksins and Whalley describe this dilemma, it represents potentially a major
change in the life course of women because the opportunities for more flexible
work hours overwhelmingly are found in part-time jobs; jobs that stereotypically
have been dubbed ‘career dead ends’.
What makes the situations of the people interviewed for this book appear different from the stereotype? Meiksins and Whalley implicitly theorise that it has to
do with their professional occupations and the corresponding identification these
individuals have with the technical nature of their professions. For most of these
254
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
individuals, career ladders and internal labour markets of employers appear to be
of little interest, as they rarely mention an aspiration to move up the corporate
chain of command. Rather, practicing the labour process associated with their
technical craft and staying abreast of new developments in their specific field give
meaning and value to most of these individuals.
Meanwhile, these quiet revolutionaries are cutting back their work schedules to accommodate the time demands of their family commitments and the
other commitments in their personal lives. The authors offer various testimonials to indicate that these scaled-back professional workers are not pouring all
their surplus time into childcare and grocery shopping. Instead, they are portrayed as striking a balance between those responsibilities and personal activities,
such as volunteer work, dance lessons, graduate school, travel and recording rock
music.
Although both the part-time workers and independent contractors gain flexibility by getting off the cycle of the traditional work week, they, like so many
full-time professional workers, experience a felt need to engage in unpaid work in
order to be effective in their jobs. Frequent references are made by and attributed
to these individuals as needing to work hard or be visibly present to avoid giving
the impression of being less than fully committed to the job site. They maintain
their ‘face time’ largely through the importation of communication technologies,
such as email, cell and land phones and the internet. Communication technologies enable part-time workers and independent contractors to remain ‘visible’
through electronic connectivity to such a degree that several individuals commented in their interviews that co-workers often thought they were full-time
employees.
So, how can these individuals arrange deals with employers that enable them to
customise their work schedules? According to Meiksins and Whalley, employers
are willing to negotiate the flexible work arrangements for valuable employees who
have a positive track record as full-time employees. And this, perhaps, is where the
social movement concept comes into play. The authors state often that the people
they interviewed were eager to tell their stories of successfully customising their
paid work schedules. They tell of individuals who thought such arrangements
were not possible because their employers did not openly support such practices,
but then subsequently tutored other employees how to negotiate such arrangements. Importantly, the last chapter of the book titled ‘Customizing time: obstacles and strategies’ is a primer on how to begin taking control of one’s paid labour
time.
Since 11 September 2001, stories have circulated in the USA about professionals rethinking their lives and seeking to bring more balance between their
professional identities and their personal/family identities. Nationally, however,
we have no clear indication how many professional workers have actually taken
significant steps to realign their paid work schedules to accommodate their personal/family interests. Nor do we know how employers will respond should such
realignment actually have an emergent momentum. Whether the individuals interviewed for this book represent the tip of an emerging social movement, or a
sample of exceptional people, remains to be seen. Nevertheless, from this book
BOOK REVIEWS
255
we do know that highly educated and skilled professionals can scale back their
primary paid working time without sacrificing their professional identities.
PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY
MARK WARDELL
HARD GROUND: UNIONS IN THE PILBARA
By Bradon Ellem. Pilbara Mineworkers Union, Port Hedland, 2004, 78 pp.,
$20.00
Like most of my colleagues, I am uncomfortable with one of the dictionary
definitions of ‘academic’ which is ‘not of practical relevance’. It seems derogatory
and unappreciative of our work. Yet, there is a grain of truth to this pejorative
conceptualisation. We, as academics, research and write for a narrow world of
more-or-less like-minded scholars and analysts. We have our secret terms and
measures of excellence, and our writings seem to those outside our disciplines as
not great scholarship, because we each define scholarship according to our own
discipline’s secret codes and measures. It is even more difficult for those outside
academia to read and understand our work. This is why this monograph by Bradon
Ellem is such a beacon! Here is a publication that is readable, passionate and
rigorous. Hard Ground is only 78 pages in length, with pictures and highlighted
text in sidebars, but it tells a complex and fascinating story in a compelling way
with virtually no loss in scholarly excellence.
In the book, Ellem traces unions’ responses to the deunionisation strategies of
major companies in the iron ore mining region of the Pilbara in north Western
Australia over the last 20 years, finishing in 2004. Chapter 1 sets the questions
and directions of the book, in a way familiar to any scholar, but in clear colloquial
prose. As with the rest of the book, the text is broken up with photographs.
In chapter 2, ‘The Making of the Pilbara’, Ellem traces the development of
unionism from the early mining days of the 1960s when multinational resource
companies were coming to understand that the region was one of the largest iron
ore bodies in the world. Until the 1980s, company–union relationships were rambunctious and irascible, but there was a sense of shared involvement. However,
by the mid-1980s, the environment began to change. Ellem’s depiction of the
change in company strategies is a good example of how this book is both accessible and scholarly. He then proceeds to offer clear descriptions of the Robe River
(1986) and Hamersley Iron (1992) disputes, showing how they were embedded
in the broader context of national opinions and global business imperatives. The
aftermaths of the disputes are also covered well, and are shown in many ways to,
perhaps, be even more damaging to the unions, as the companies pursued ‘patient,
clever and tough’ campaigns to remove unions and unionists. In this, the companies were assisted by governments. As the 1990s progressed, first the Western
Australian (WA) industrial relations legislation, then the national Workplace Relations Act made the environment for trade unions even more difficult. It was not surprising then that by the turn of the century, ‘unionism had withered away at Robe
and pretty much been blown away at Hamersley (so that unions) maintained their
presence at what was now the only other company in the Pilbara, BHP’ (p. 27).
256
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
Chapter 3 describes how the unions responded to BHP’s strategies in the late
1990s to move workers on to individual contracts, taking advantage of the WA
state legislation. The monograph describes with great verve, the nature and timing
of the individual contracts, the ways in which current pressures and the historical
context interacted and the difficulties for workers in deciding whether to sign
or not to sign. Within three months of the company sending out the contracts,
45% had signed. The unions began a series of integrated responses in the federal
courts and arbitration commission, at the workplace and in the local communities.
Inter-union divisions were eliminated, for a time at least, and the focus was back
on what workers wanted.
Ellem’s story of this response is clear and lively, reminding readers in the process
that unions and workers are not faceless entities, but real people with families and
daily pressures beyond the workplace. They included the women who joined the
successful community group ‘Action in Support of Partners’ (ASP). The founder
of ASP is cited as saying they ‘all had concerns about our future in the Pilbara
and worried about our children’s future and the future of working conditions we
were to pass down to them. To unite and join forces with our men, gave us a sense
of pride, worth, and a growing self-confidence . . . participating in the Union
campaign’ (p. 40). By bringing alive the concerns and motives of the workers
and their families, the reader is able to see why the workers and their families
responded as they did.
Chapter 4 then turns to the other big company in the Pilbara, Rio Tinto and
union responses to its efforts in 2001–2002 to replace the state-based individual
contracts with S170LK agreements under the Workplace Relations Act. The LK is
a non-union collective agreement which must be voted on by all the employees in
the company. The major focus in the chapter is on Rio Tinto at Hamersley, where
the workers, much to the surprise of the company, voted strongly against an LK
agreement. This was not so much a pro-union vote, but rather a signal of anticompany attitudes. Over the previous few years, workers had seen the company
move from a cooperative model of management to one in which a churning management team changed processes, shifts and hours of work unilaterally, whereas
at the same time developing new mines where the workers would be separated by
time and place from the local communities. In contrast, as Ellem demonstrates, the
workers were not particularly enamoured of the unions either. In response to these
views, the Australian Co
READER IN GENDER, WORK AND ORGANIZATION
Edited by Robin J. Ely, Erica G. Foldy and Maureen A. Scully. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, Massachussetts, 2003, xiv + 440 pp., US$97.00 (paperback)
Compiled in the USA, this important collection aims to achieve the crucial goal
that was earlier formulated in the UK in the 1990s—by the influential and interdisciplinary British journal, Gender, Work and Organization. A growing dialogue
between feminist theorists of work and scholars in organisation studies spurred
the formation of the journal in 1993 with a charter to emphasise gender as a
central and essential theme of all social science research in the field of work and
organisation. Interestingly, the editors of this Reader in Gender, Work and Organization make no mention of the groundbreaking work of that British journal. Such
omission seems to verify the argument of Patricia Martin and David Collinson
in their 2002 article (Over the pond and across the water: developing the field of
gendered organizations. Gender, Work and Organization 9, 244–65), who puzzled
over the gap in interaction that appears to divide British and American work in this
area. Martin and Collinson observed that in the pages of the journal, European,
Canadian and Australian articles jostled for space alongside British contributions,
yet American articles were few and far between.
However, the Reader in Gender, Work and Organization gives the lie to any idea
that—at least in this sector of the US tradition—theory is viewed as less important
than empiricism. The book draws on 31 previously published theoretical articles
(most of them from North American writers) to provide the background to the
editors’ own theory of organisational intervention. That theory, developed as
a basis for gaining organisational support for gender equity by the Center for
Gender in Organizations (CGO) at Simmons College in Boston, argues that if one
is to successfully challenge the inequalities which continue to produce ineffective
workplaces, then one needs a gender lens to surface and combat the assumptions
that privilege the middle-class white men who run them. The CGO is renowned
for using that theory as a basis for its interventionist work with organisations.
This book is designed to explain and interrogate that theory by showing its links
with the growing canon of feminist ideas on work and organisations. Based around
seven sections, the collection takes the reader through a journey of discovery.
It begins by demonstrating how a gender lens can illuminate the gendering of
organisations, then goes on to assess how other dimensions of difference can
complement, but also unsettle their own theoretical approach. The first section
should be required reading not only for students, but also for all who work in
industrial relations and human resource management (HRM). It sets the scene
for the book by introducing the reader to the concept of gender, and in so doing
demonstrates four different ‘frames’ for understanding gender in organisations.
THE JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, VOL. 47, NO. 2, JUNE 2005, 242--258
BOOK REVIEWS
243
The editors begin with three articles, all of which the introductory overview
critiques as inadequate in some sense. The section then turns the reader’s attention
to the CGO’s preferred ‘fourth frame’ approach, based on the theory of gendered
organisation developed by Acker, and complemented by ideas of ‘doing gender’
(West and Zimmerman), theories of men and masculinities (Collinson and Hearn)
and the complications that race and class add to a gender analysis (Holvino). This
section also includes an overview that sets out the CGO framework for promoting
gender equity in organisations.
The later sections of the book deepen and complicate the analysis of gendered
organisations by emphasising key topics in management: negotiation, leadership,
organisational change and intervention, diversity, HRM and globalisation. Although the book as a whole would make a strong text for an interdisciplinary
postgraduate program, teachers will also find it useful for introducing a gender
segment to general courses on those topics. To this end, Fletcher’s chapter on
post-heroic models in the leadership section, Meyerson and Scully’s chapter on
‘tempered radicals’ in the organisational change area, Hochschild’s ‘nanny chain’
in the globalisation section and Thomas and Ely’s chapter on diversity make lucid
and telling reading. For areas more directly recognisable as industrial relations,
the sections on negotiation and HRM provide much room for reflection.
I recommend this book as a useful contribution to one’s shelves, first, as a
teaching resource for drawing together much of the recent writing in the field, and
second, for showing how practical interventionist work, despite its vulnerabilities
and uncertainties, can be solidly based on theoretical innovation.
UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
JOAN EVELINE
EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS AND HRM IN SOUTH KOREA
By Dong-One Kim and Johngseok Bae. Ashgate, Aldershot, 2004, xviii +238 pp.,
£55 (hardback)
The book provides an historical and highly detailed overview of industrial relations and human resource management (HRM) practices in South Korea, with a
particular focus on key developments such as the ‘Great Labour Struggle’ of 1987
and the aftermath of the Asian Economic crisis from late 1997. The introduction
discusses the factors underpinning Korea’s rapid industrialisation. It emphasises
the significance of external factors, such as Japanese investment in the electronics
industry and US economic aid, alongside internal factors, such as the role of the
state in providing the impetus for late industrialisation and the actions of Korean
firms. A general model is outlined that explores the impact of such environmental factors on employment relations and HRM practices and on ‘organisational
architecture’ (strategy, structure, culture and leadership). This model is derived
from Dunlop’s systems model and in a similar vein to Dunlop’s model, it provides
a largely static framework within which to explore the often dynamic and fluid
nature of Korean industrial relations.
244
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
Korea’s rapid economic development is examined in chapter 2. The economy
grew by approximately 10% per year in the 1970s and 1980s and by some 7% a year
up to the financial crisis of 1997. Such high growth rates culminated in per capita
income rising from US$240.00 in 1970 to US$11380.00 in 1996. Nevertheless,
the authors note that ‘the labour market also has a dark side, epitomized by long
working hours and a high incidence of industrial accidents’ (p. 27). There was a
considerable rise in fatalities at work, from 1660 in 1986 to 2528 in 1998, and a
concomitant jump in occupational injuries over the same period.
In chapter 3, the authors provide a detailed overview of the cultural influences
that permeate Korean society and that have had an important bearing on workplace relationships. These cultural influences include Korea’s Confucian heritage
and neo-Confucianism which takes into account the impact of Western values and
Christianity on Korean society. A further cultural influence is that of ‘dynamic
collectivism’ which involves maintaining a strong degree of harmony among the
‘in-group’, an optimistic outlook towards the future, and the demonstration of a
‘can do’ approach to achieving difficult goals. Nevertheless, the authors suggest
that there is also a downside to such single mindedness: ‘Some negative implications include neglect of due process, sacrifice of personal and family life and loss
of health’ (p. 43). A further cultural trait is that of Yongoism whereby people are
connected by virtue of their blood relationships, education or as a result of coming
from the same birthplace. Blood relatives receive strong preferential treatment in
promotion decisions to senior managerial positions. Coming from the same high
school or university is also very important to career progression within political
parties, managerial hierarchies and Korean universities. For example, in 2001,
some 96% of the academic staff employed by Seoul National University were
former graduates of that university.
An excellent review of the history of Korean industrial relations is provided in
chapter 4. It documents the formation of the first unions in seafaring and mining
communities in the 1890s, repression of labour unrest and harsh working conditions for much of the Japanese occupation from 1910 to 1945, the outlawing of the
left leading union movement Chun Pyung by the American Military Government
in the post World War II period, and the widespread suppression of labour unrest
by the military dictatorship of Park Chung-hee from 1961 to 1979. The chapter
also emphasises the role of the Korean Central Intelligence Agency in manipulating union elections and the role of ‘disguised workers’, mainly student activists,
who entered industrial estates in the early 1980s to organise factory workers.
In chapter 5, the ‘Great Labour Struggle’ from 1987 to 1989 that such union
organising facilitated is explored. In June 1987, mounting civic discontent against
the authoritarian military rule and rising inequality erupted into nationwide
street demonstrations. This was followed by some 3000 strikes involving 1.2
million workers. In the aftermath of the ‘Great Labour Struggle’, the state experimented with a form of laissez-faire pluralism, and from 1987 to 1989, the
police and intelligence agencies declined from interfering in private sector industrial relations. This relaxation in the level of state intervention into workplace industrial relations facilitated the growth of Korean unions, whose density
reached almost 19% in 1989, or an increase of over 50% from the 1987 figure.
BOOK REVIEWS
245
Union membership also changed dramatically from predominantly femaledominated unions in light industries to male-dominated unions in heavy industries, and white-collar employees in the banking, insurance and communications
industries. In addition, collective bargaining became widely established and a
labour movement independent from employers and the state emerged. Nevertheless, the authors note that this beneficial period for independent union organisation ended in 1989 when the state and employers resumed their traditional
approach of union suppression and avoidance. For example, the police resumed
their former practice of intervening on the side of employers in industrial disputes.
This authoritarian approach continued under the presidency of Kim Young-sam
from 1993 to 1998.
The impact of the financial crisis is considered in chapter 6. Unemployment
rose from 2.1% in 1997 to 8.6% in 1999 and ‘has become a more chronic, entrenched social problem than previously’ (p. 121). Concession bargaining and a
concern for job security dominated wage negotiations and real wages fell by 9.3%
in 1999. There was also a significant rise in the use of contingent workers by employers, up from 46% of the overall workforce to 53% by 2000. Nevertheless, the
authors contend that the crisis has made trade unions more active and dynamic
in the long run. It increased the level of union organising among employees in
small and medium-sized firms, with non-unionised workers bearing the brunt of
job shedding. It also led to increased competition between the conservative union
body, the Federation of Korean Trade Unions, and the more militant and independent Korean Confederation of Trade Unions for members. This resulted in
both union bodies initiating waves of strikes in opposition to employers’ downsizing initiatives. In addition, the fallout from the financial crisis facilitated a move
from an enterprise-based to an industry-based union structure.
Given the wealth of empirical evidence to the contrary, it is difficult to concur
with the authors’ optimistic conclusions that Korean industrial relations have
shifted from state corporatism (1890–1986) to ‘exploratory pluralism’ (1987–
1997), to societal corporatism (post-1997). Much of the book points instead to
a return to a more authoritarian approach by the state after 1989, albeit under
greater scrutiny by the international community, and a return to union avoidance
by many employers. The authors do, however, demonstrate a convincing need
for stronger institutions to enable the parties to negotiate and settle industrial
disputes. The lack of an adequate institutional structure is linked to the excessively narrow scope for taking legal industrial action and the subsequent high rate
of imprisonment experienced by trade union activists. The authors encourage
the Korean government to revise the legal framework for industrial relations so
that it complies with international labour standards. Overall, the book is strongly
recommended because of its exhaustive account of Korean industrial relations
supported by a wealth of tables and statistical data. Such detailed analysis will
prove an invaluable resource to those interested in comparative industrial relations and to those with an interest in the turbulent evolution of Korean industrial
relations.
AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
MICHAEL O’DONNELL
246
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
THE PARADOX OF AMERICAN UNIONISM: WHY AMERICANS LIKE
UNIONS MORE THAN CANADIANS DO BUT JOIN MUCH LESS
By Seymour Martin Lipset and Noah M. Meltz. Cornell University Press, Ithaca
and London, 2004, xii +226 pp., US$32.50 (hardback)
Industrial relations and labour studies researchers on the North American
continent have long been fascinated by the sharply different trajectories of the
US and Canadian labour movements since the mid-1960s. Before 1965, union
density in the two countries was very similar, but since that time union density in the USA went into freefall (from about 25% to about 14% in 2001),
whereas the Canadian rate rose to about 35% and then fell back to 30%. What
makes this divergence between the two countries so fascinating is that in many
other respects the two countries are so similar. They have a massive unguarded
border, quite similar and thoroughly integrated economies, the same language
(with the exception of the French-speaking province of Quebec) and broadly
similar cultural and entertainment industries. What could possibly explain the
difference in the fate of the labour movement in these two roughly similar
counties?
To deepen the paradox, polls show that citizens of the USA approve of unions
more strongly than do Canadian citizens. A poll conducted by the authors found
that 91% of union members in the USA approve of unions versus 84% in Canada,
whereas 66% of nonmembers in the USA share that opinion as opposed to 55%
in Canada. A number of similar sentiments, such as tending to side with unions
in the event of a dispute, or believing that unions are good for the country as a
whole show consistently more favourable attitudes among US citizens, member
and non-member alike.
How can we explain the difference? The authors provide evidence that some
frequently stated explanations are not sound. For example, Canadian employers
(according to the book’s poll) are more hostile to unions than are their US counterparts, not less. It must be noted that the results of their poll on the US side are
almost impossible to believe, because they show employer attitudes strongly at
variance with employer behaviour. According to the poll, 15% of US employers
would actually welcome a union, whereas 44% would do nothing to oppose one.
The supposed 59%, who would in no way oppose unionisation are contrary to
private sector employer behaviour, where close to all private employers oppose
unionisation, many of them strongly and some of them viciously. Clearly, US
employers are not being candid when they answer polls in this manner. Be that
as it may, the authors make a good point that the difference between the two
countries seems to be that in the US employer opposition, including intimidating
and conflict-ridden forms of opposition, is allowed to a much greater degree, thus
making it much more effective.
The evidence, from the poll in this book and from others, is that there is an
enormous frustrated demand for unions in the USA that is not duplicated in
Canada. What explains this unmet desire for union representation in one country, but not in the other? The authors clearly point in the right direction when
they state that the answer seems to lie in the political arena. The political system in the USA has provided a relatively unfavourable climate for unions, aside
BOOK REVIEWS
247
from the depression and World War II years. Their case is quite convincing that
strength of political support (or opposition) is the key to organised labour’s overall
well-being.
So, why is the Canadian political climate so much more supportive of unions
than that of the USA, especially given that both countries are democracies and
that public approval of unions is higher in the latter? An obvious answer is the
absence of a labour party or social democratic (or socialist) party in the USA,
whereas Canada’s New Democratic Party (NDP) is firmly rooted in unions
and plays that role. The authors accept this answer as being the key to the
difference.
However, they attempt to go deeper by providing an explanation for why no
labour or social democratic party exists in the USA. This constitutes the controversial part of their book. They argue that positive attitudes towards unions in the
USA are actually at variance with much more deeply held values that are quite
harmful to unions. They claim that the USA has always been an individualistic and
hyper-capitalistic society, whereas Canada has always held more communitarian
(‘Tory-social democratic’) values at the core of its value structure. Thus, an infertile value structure prevents the USA from having a labour or labour-oriented
political party. No such obstacle exists in Canada, and thus the NDP is able to
push the ‘terms of debate’ sufficiently in a pro-labour direction and sees more
favourable labour law is enacted federally and in most provinces.
This is an intriguing hypothesis, and the authors produce much survey evidence
that US citizens tend to think in less collective terms. But this ‘values culture’ argument is quite debatable. Rather than some inherent ‘culture’ difference between
the two societies, it might simply be the fact that the USA, lacking a parliamentary
system like Canada’s, has a winner-takes-all political system that narrows political representation to two parties. Canada’s NDP originated as a third party—a
viable option in the Canadian parliamentary context, but a recipe for isolation
in the USA under any circumstances apart from the total breakdown of at least
one of the two major political parties. With only two political parties, it is next
to impossible to build a strong and ideologically labour-oriented electoral party
in the USA. This would not be a problem if the USA had a parliamentary system
such as the one that exists in Canada.
The authors’ cultural argument may be correct, but I am suspicious of arguments that explain differences by something as abstract as ‘values’ and ‘culture’.
A perfectly good explanation can be had by simply pointing to the differences in
the political systems of the two countries, differences that allow business interests
to dominate both parties and most political discourse in the USA to a degree not
possible in Canada. In any case, this is an interesting and provocative book. It is
well argued and the authors marshal their evidence well. This reviewer remains
unconvinced, but the authors have done us a favour by entering the debate of
North American unionism.
FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY
BRUCE NISSEN
248
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS: NEW ZEALAND’S EMPLOYMENT
RELATIONS ACT
Edited by Erling Rasmussen. Auckland University Press, Auckland, 2004, 210
pp., NZ$50.00 (paperback)
Over the past two decades, New Zealand workers have lived under four different
labour laws. Each of these has attempted to remake the law of the workplace in
order to achieve a broad set of goals. These laws have ranged from modernising
industrial relations and supporting collective bargaining to putting into effect
various economic theories, improving productivity and the economy in general,
and promoting the appropriate balance of workplace power. Clearly, labour law
in New Zealand bears a heavy burden.
This edited volume examines the performance of the most recent of these laws,
the Employment Relations Act (ERA), 2000. The book includes work from a number
of authors, many of whom have been leading New Zealand industrial relations
and labour law scholars. The essays fall into three main categories. Some provide quantitative and qualitative data on the ERA’s performance. Others analyse
how the ERA and institutions created to enforce it have performed. The rest are
assessments of the law from the point of view of its primary author, employers,
unions and industrial relations theory. I would certainly recommend the book
to those interested in industrial relations, the process of law reform and New
Zealand society.
That said, the book unfortunately falls short of its potential. My criticisms go to
missed opportunities here and a hope that there will be a follow up that capitalises
on those opportunities. First, the book suffers from being an edited volume that
does not sufficiently integrate the work into a whole. It also has an overly insular
perspective. Although it tries to provide background in the introduction, this is
probably not sufficient for most readers. The individual essays assume knowledge
about New Zealand people, cases, history, developments and the text and structure of the ERA. North American and European readers, in particular, will not
understand fundamental aspects of New Zealand labour law and history. It is a
shame not to have reached out to a broader audience, and this could easily have
been done by, for example, arranging the essays with an eye to educating the
reader, supplying a glossary or explanatory information within essays, including
a copy of the ERA’s relevant provisions, providing a timeline and taking more
editorial control over the individual essays to fill gaps.
Second, the book is little more than the sum of its parts. The essays do not build
on one another. In addition, some of the essays are only descriptive in content.
The information they provide cries out for context and analysis. As a result, this
book provides data that could be used to shed light on fascinating issues that
matter a great deal: why law reform fails, how legislative drafting can affect law
reform success and what role institutions and judicial interpretation play in law
reform. This is the book I would like to see someone write using the data in this
book and in other work on New Zealand labour laws since 1987.
The results of New Zealand’s experimentation are relevant to labour law reform debates in other countries (including Australia), but I fear they will be left
BOOK REVIEWS
249
unexamined. For example, in the USA, the law provides that collective bargaining
must take place based on job classifications and not based on membership in a
union or by individuals. In recent years, there have been strong proponents of
‘collective’ bargaining based, instead, on ‘individual’ choice. The proponents are
quite sanguine about such a reform as being the way to resolve the decline in US
unions.
But would they be as interested if they knew that this sort of arrangement in
New Zealand has led to the most severe decline in unionisation of any country and
a serious deterioration in workplace conditions? The essays repeatedly return to
the problem this system has had with ‘free riders’ and the ways in which employers
have used minority representation to undermine unions and collective bargaining,
in spite of explicit efforts to graft on ways to prevent this from happening. The New
Zealand experience suggests the problem is inherent in minority representation.
New Zealand’s experiences have much that is valuable, and important parts
of the story are in this book. Unfortunately, the reader has to work harder than
necessary to find and understand them.
WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY (DETROIT)
ELLEN DANNIN
THE FUTURE OF WORKER REPRESENTATION
Edited by Geraldine Healy, Edmund Heery, Phil Taylor and William Brown.
Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, 2004, xvi +325 pp., £55.00 (hardback)
This book is the product of the UK’s Economic and Social Research Council
Future of Work research program which, in total, funded over 100 researchers
across 22 UK universities. The editors are distinguished scholars in the field and
have brought together leading contributors across a range of disciplines to assess
how the representation gap may be filled, examining both union and non-trade
union institutions of worker representation. In chapter 1, Heery, Healy and Taylor
set the scene with a well-articulated review of four theoretical models of union
behaviour and worker representation: societal, institutional, organisational and
agency perspectives. This is not only thorough, but a review of contrasting debates
on each of these models which provides the reader with some very insightful and
analytical linkages to the following 12 chapters.
As with many edited books, its value can be assessed as a total package and
from the contributions in each chapter. In presenting the volume as a package,
the editors structure the chapters around four distinct ‘clusters’, with each cluster
contributing in some way to the theoretical perspectives outlined in chapter 1.
‘Cluster 1’ includes three chapters that report research findings on issues of possible trade union renewal, using data from workers that are seen as ‘emblematic of
the new economy’ (such as software workers, call centre workers and temporary
and sub-contract employees who work across organisational boundaries). ‘Cluster 2’ comprises another three chapters dedicated to union actors and the structures of representation (black and ethnic minority women union activists, union
organising for part-time, agency and freelance workers and union responses to
250
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
life-long learning). Two chapters make up ‘cluster 3’, presenting an assessment of
union–management partnerships. The final ‘cluster’ includes four chapters that
address issues concerned with non-trade union institutions of worker representation (statutory forms of representation such as works councils and the new information and consultation directive, employment agencies, the Citizens’ Advice
Bureaux (CAB) and a community coalition campaign among low-paid workers in
East London).
It is beyond the scope here to provide a detailed account of every chapter, so
I will comment selectively across the themed clusters of the chapters. The first
cluster starts with the chapter by Hyman, Lockyer, Marks and Scholarios looking at the attitudes of software workers. This is a valuable chapter that provides
much needed data about a neglected occupation employed in a ‘new’ sector of the
economy. However, there is a limitation. We are told that the research confirms
‘adherence to individual values’ because software workers perceive collective representation to be ‘an unimportant aspect of their own jobs’ (p. 45). This makes
some sense given the character of software workers, although it also illustrates
the problem of interpretation for the researcher. The conclusion is based on responses to three questions/statements: ‘management have the right to manage’;
‘people have the right to take industrial action’ and ‘independent employee representation is very important’ (abbreviated). On closer examination, it seems the
evidence is less clear about the attachment to individualistic values per se. Almost
half ‘disagree/strongly disagree’ that management have the right to manage, and
over half (58%) ‘agree/strongly agree’ that people have the right to strike for a
fair deal. This is hardly the stuff of wholesale individualism.
Interestingly, the research instruments and questions are again used in chapter 3
by Bain, Taylor, Gilbert and Gall on call centres (both teams were part of the
same related Future of Work research projects). As one might expect, there are
different results (and explanations) for call centre workers than for those employed
in software. For example, higher proportions (68%) of call centre workers feel
people should have the right to strike to get a fair deal. The variability of responses
is important across these sectors and case studies. Both chapters serve to illustrate
that the context of employment, the nature of work and labour market mobility
are powerful explanatory factors.
The next chapter in cluster 1 is from Marchington, Rubery and Lee Cooke assessing worker voice across newer organisational forms—among subcontractors,
temporary and outsourced employee jobs. The data are used to contrast models of
union partnership with union organising from a multi-agency network perspective. For anyone seeking information on worker representation in newer sectors
of the economy, then cluster 1 is of considerable value. The conclusions will be
of little comfort, however, to those who harbour hopes for greater representation
and/or union mobilisation. This exposes the limitations of traditional models of
representation for those workers who are more mobile, feel insecure and subject
to network agencies as part of their employment pattern.
‘Cluster 2’ commences with chapter 5 by Healy, Bradley and Mukherjee on the
role of ethnic minority women activists in four unions. There is a well-argued
case that broadly fits the themes of agency theory in addressing injustice in the
BOOK REVIEWS
251
workplace, with identifiable impacts from the women interviewed. However, it
would have been helpful to have had a clearer ‘measure’ of union revitalisation.
For example, the evidence that two of the women set up union branches in nonunion firms seems significant, yet the size and character of such new membership
are lacking.
Chapter 6 by Heery, Conley, Delbridge, Simms and Stewart reports multiple
sets of data from unions representing non-standard workers. The data are systematic and engage with debates about the role of representatives/full-time officers
as agents of change, along with issues of external labour market casualisation.
The complexity of a long-standing union dilemma is captured very well here:
namely, whether unions should recruit and represent agency labour, or exclude
such groups of workers by protecting core members employed in more stable and
permanent employment. The conclusions advance our understanding of union
action with the authors painting an ‘evolutionary model’ of union behaviour. Although unions have always used similar multiple roles, what stands out here is
the interplay between internal policy choice, labour market contingencies and
institutional regulation. It is suggested that an ‘evolutionary’ pattern of bargaining activity subsumed with legal and political action is replacing previous models
dependent almost exclusively on voluntary collective bargaining.
The final chapter in the second cluster provides a comprehensive analysis of
trade unions and workplace learning, especially the new legally constituted Union
Learning Representative. The broad conclusions drawn from the cluster 2 set of
chapters are quite variable. On the one hand, these chapters are supportive of the
importance of actors in influencing change and organisational behaviour, even
when union activists face an uphill struggle for recognition and legitimisation. In
contrast, I also found the general thrust of the conclusions to be less integrated
with the objectives set out in the introductory chapter. The role of the state
and other institutional bodies is also important in the findings of these chapters,
and there is considerable conceptual and intellectual overlap with other clusters.
‘Cluster 3’ tackles union–management partnerships in Britain in two chapters.
The first, by Danford, Richardson, Stewart, Tailby and Upchurch assesses the
partnership arrangement in a multi-union case study in the aerospace industry.
The case study is defined as a ‘high road/innovative/high performance work system’ (HPWS) organisation (pp. 170–71). The argument is unambiguous: that in
reality, there is no dichotomy between high and low road management strategies
and workers ultimately experience the degradation of increasing flexibility, managerial cost control and the extrapolation of profit maximisation. Here, we have
a Marxist and labour process analysis of a contemporary phenomenon, reinforcing familiar critiques surrounding partnership as a weakness rather than strength
for union revitalisation. This is an important debate in its own right, but some
lingering doubts remain after reading the chapter. I was left wondering whether
this particular case study is in fact a HPWS organisation, as defined in the early
part of the chapter. If it is, then the chapter is highly illustrative of the potential pitfalls unions are likely to face when relying on ideas of mutual gains with
management.
In contrast, Oxenbridge and Brown offer a slightly more optimistic interpretation of partnership, using data gathered across nine case studies in different
252
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
sectors of the economy. They argue that unions that experience ‘robust’ rather
than ‘shallow’ relationships with management, for them partnership seems to provide more stable benefits. One of the conclusions across the chapters in cluster
3 is a variant of the incorporationist thesis: that partnership exposes unions to
possible membership withdrawal and alienation, as members perceive activists as
being too close to management.
The final four chapters in the volume make up cluster 4, concerned with nonunion institutions of worker representation. The contribution from Hall and
Terry is an evaluation of the possible impact on worker representation as a result
of the new European Information and Consultation Directive. The argument here
is the Directive is unlikely to stimulate much union renewal as a single channel
of representation. Of all the chapters in the book, this one does not report any
empirical data, although it draws quite nicely on ‘what we already know’ to present
a coherent and balanced argument.
In their chapter, Drucker and Stanworth provide research on employment
agencies, and assess whether these labour market intermediaries fulfil a representational role for atypical employees. They conclude that they do with regard
to individual grievances. However, collective representation is virtually nonexistent with agencies ultimately driven by a client/commercial motive and not worker
representation. In the following chapter, Abbott provides similar insights from
the CAB as a representational intermediary. If anything, the CAB’s fourfold increase in employment advice is testimony to the extent of the representation gap in
contemporary society. Equally interesting is their potential impact as a representative intermediary. Not only does the CAB have a high success rate representing
clients at Employment Tribunals, but Abbott makes a persuasive argument that,
otherwise, employer actions would remain unchallenged. A key issue is raised
as to whether the CAB ‘competes’ with or ‘complements’ the trade unions. It is
concluded that they complement the unions by filling a vacuum created by union
decline and absence at the workplace.
In the final chapter, Wills evaluates a community-based coalition campaigning
for a real living wage through the East London Communities Organisation. One
impact was the 300% increase (from 61 to 350) in union members, coupled with
new activists and union stewards. The arguments have a resonance with other
chapters in the book: that traditional models of union structure are often illequipped to deal with atypical workers spread across different sites and locations.
This is a valuable and worthwhile book. The various authors provide an unequivocal case for the need to scrutinise the contours of democracy and expose
its absence in the modern workplace. Despite all the headlines testifying that it is
worker engagement that leads to better company performance, this volume shows
that many people are simply not given a voice at work. The findings and implications are extremely relevant in assessing the future of trade union representation
and public policy initiatives. The clustering of chapters could have been cut several ways, but they make sense and provide a platform for debate that should whet
the appetite for those interested in employee voice, union renewal and alternative
forms of worker representation. The volume would certainly have benefited from
a final concluding chapter in which the editors could have presented a case about
BOOK REVIEWS
253
the state of play regarding the future of worker representation. This could have
been used as an opportunity to re-engage with the models and debates considered
in chapter 1.
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY
TONY DUNDON
PUTTING WORK IN ITS PLACE: A QUIET REVOLUTION
By Peter Meiksins and Peter Whalley. Cornell University Press, Ithaca and
London, 2004, xiv +188 pp., US$19.00 (paperback)
Hardly a professional worker in the USA has not experienced the effects of
competing and demanding times in their daily lives. Indeed, most professionals in
the USA have heard various terminologies used to describe this situation. Terms
such as work/family conflict, time squeeze, spillover, balancing work and family,
and even greedy institutions characterise academic and popular press discussions
about time demands professional workers face in their daily lives today. The
scenario these discussions often portray is one of middle-class professional workers
trapped within the jaws of the work-and-family time bind.
Meiksins and Whalley, however, advance the hypothesis that some professionals actually have found a way to ‘customise’ their scheduled work time in order
to relieve the grip of these two opposing forces. They present observations and
testimonials from interviews with 127 professional (technical) workers who have
chosen to scale back their commitment to full-time paid labour. The sample of
scaled-back professional workers includes 65 individuals who worked part-time
and 62 who worked as independent contractors. The workers were employed as
engineers, software developers and information technology specialists. During the
interviews, the 99 women and 28 men enthusiastically told their stories about taking control over their time commitments to employers and families. Importantly,
nearly all respondents had full-time working partners.
However, as Meiksins and Whalley theorise from the stories, these individuals
represent the beginning of a potential social movement, what the authors term ‘a
quiet revolution’, involving professional workers taking control over their daily
lives. The central thrust of the analysis focuses on what some have identified as
the career-versus-job dilemma. This dilemma more often than not is thought to
plague professional women who, after having children, face the decision of finding
a job that offers a flexible schedule with fewer hours. Often, research suggests
that this flexibility comes with fewer opportunities for career advancement. As
Meiksins and Whalley describe this dilemma, it represents potentially a major
change in the life course of women because the opportunities for more flexible
work hours overwhelmingly are found in part-time jobs; jobs that stereotypically
have been dubbed ‘career dead ends’.
What makes the situations of the people interviewed for this book appear different from the stereotype? Meiksins and Whalley implicitly theorise that it has to
do with their professional occupations and the corresponding identification these
individuals have with the technical nature of their professions. For most of these
254
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
individuals, career ladders and internal labour markets of employers appear to be
of little interest, as they rarely mention an aspiration to move up the corporate
chain of command. Rather, practicing the labour process associated with their
technical craft and staying abreast of new developments in their specific field give
meaning and value to most of these individuals.
Meanwhile, these quiet revolutionaries are cutting back their work schedules to accommodate the time demands of their family commitments and the
other commitments in their personal lives. The authors offer various testimonials to indicate that these scaled-back professional workers are not pouring all
their surplus time into childcare and grocery shopping. Instead, they are portrayed as striking a balance between those responsibilities and personal activities,
such as volunteer work, dance lessons, graduate school, travel and recording rock
music.
Although both the part-time workers and independent contractors gain flexibility by getting off the cycle of the traditional work week, they, like so many
full-time professional workers, experience a felt need to engage in unpaid work in
order to be effective in their jobs. Frequent references are made by and attributed
to these individuals as needing to work hard or be visibly present to avoid giving
the impression of being less than fully committed to the job site. They maintain
their ‘face time’ largely through the importation of communication technologies,
such as email, cell and land phones and the internet. Communication technologies enable part-time workers and independent contractors to remain ‘visible’
through electronic connectivity to such a degree that several individuals commented in their interviews that co-workers often thought they were full-time
employees.
So, how can these individuals arrange deals with employers that enable them to
customise their work schedules? According to Meiksins and Whalley, employers
are willing to negotiate the flexible work arrangements for valuable employees who
have a positive track record as full-time employees. And this, perhaps, is where the
social movement concept comes into play. The authors state often that the people
they interviewed were eager to tell their stories of successfully customising their
paid work schedules. They tell of individuals who thought such arrangements
were not possible because their employers did not openly support such practices,
but then subsequently tutored other employees how to negotiate such arrangements. Importantly, the last chapter of the book titled ‘Customizing time: obstacles and strategies’ is a primer on how to begin taking control of one’s paid labour
time.
Since 11 September 2001, stories have circulated in the USA about professionals rethinking their lives and seeking to bring more balance between their
professional identities and their personal/family identities. Nationally, however,
we have no clear indication how many professional workers have actually taken
significant steps to realign their paid work schedules to accommodate their personal/family interests. Nor do we know how employers will respond should such
realignment actually have an emergent momentum. Whether the individuals interviewed for this book represent the tip of an emerging social movement, or a
sample of exceptional people, remains to be seen. Nevertheless, from this book
BOOK REVIEWS
255
we do know that highly educated and skilled professionals can scale back their
primary paid working time without sacrificing their professional identities.
PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY
MARK WARDELL
HARD GROUND: UNIONS IN THE PILBARA
By Bradon Ellem. Pilbara Mineworkers Union, Port Hedland, 2004, 78 pp.,
$20.00
Like most of my colleagues, I am uncomfortable with one of the dictionary
definitions of ‘academic’ which is ‘not of practical relevance’. It seems derogatory
and unappreciative of our work. Yet, there is a grain of truth to this pejorative
conceptualisation. We, as academics, research and write for a narrow world of
more-or-less like-minded scholars and analysts. We have our secret terms and
measures of excellence, and our writings seem to those outside our disciplines as
not great scholarship, because we each define scholarship according to our own
discipline’s secret codes and measures. It is even more difficult for those outside
academia to read and understand our work. This is why this monograph by Bradon
Ellem is such a beacon! Here is a publication that is readable, passionate and
rigorous. Hard Ground is only 78 pages in length, with pictures and highlighted
text in sidebars, but it tells a complex and fascinating story in a compelling way
with virtually no loss in scholarly excellence.
In the book, Ellem traces unions’ responses to the deunionisation strategies of
major companies in the iron ore mining region of the Pilbara in north Western
Australia over the last 20 years, finishing in 2004. Chapter 1 sets the questions
and directions of the book, in a way familiar to any scholar, but in clear colloquial
prose. As with the rest of the book, the text is broken up with photographs.
In chapter 2, ‘The Making of the Pilbara’, Ellem traces the development of
unionism from the early mining days of the 1960s when multinational resource
companies were coming to understand that the region was one of the largest iron
ore bodies in the world. Until the 1980s, company–union relationships were rambunctious and irascible, but there was a sense of shared involvement. However,
by the mid-1980s, the environment began to change. Ellem’s depiction of the
change in company strategies is a good example of how this book is both accessible and scholarly. He then proceeds to offer clear descriptions of the Robe River
(1986) and Hamersley Iron (1992) disputes, showing how they were embedded
in the broader context of national opinions and global business imperatives. The
aftermaths of the disputes are also covered well, and are shown in many ways to,
perhaps, be even more damaging to the unions, as the companies pursued ‘patient,
clever and tough’ campaigns to remove unions and unionists. In this, the companies were assisted by governments. As the 1990s progressed, first the Western
Australian (WA) industrial relations legislation, then the national Workplace Relations Act made the environment for trade unions even more difficult. It was not surprising then that by the turn of the century, ‘unionism had withered away at Robe
and pretty much been blown away at Hamersley (so that unions) maintained their
presence at what was now the only other company in the Pilbara, BHP’ (p. 27).
256
THE JOURNAL
OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
June 2005
Chapter 3 describes how the unions responded to BHP’s strategies in the late
1990s to move workers on to individual contracts, taking advantage of the WA
state legislation. The monograph describes with great verve, the nature and timing
of the individual contracts, the ways in which current pressures and the historical
context interacted and the difficulties for workers in deciding whether to sign
or not to sign. Within three months of the company sending out the contracts,
45% had signed. The unions began a series of integrated responses in the federal
courts and arbitration commission, at the workplace and in the local communities.
Inter-union divisions were eliminated, for a time at least, and the focus was back
on what workers wanted.
Ellem’s story of this response is clear and lively, reminding readers in the process
that unions and workers are not faceless entities, but real people with families and
daily pressures beyond the workplace. They included the women who joined the
successful community group ‘Action in Support of Partners’ (ASP). The founder
of ASP is cited as saying they ‘all had concerns about our future in the Pilbara
and worried about our children’s future and the future of working conditions we
were to pass down to them. To unite and join forces with our men, gave us a sense
of pride, worth, and a growing self-confidence . . . participating in the Union
campaign’ (p. 40). By bringing alive the concerns and motives of the workers
and their families, the reader is able to see why the workers and their families
responded as they did.
Chapter 4 then turns to the other big company in the Pilbara, Rio Tinto and
union responses to its efforts in 2001–2002 to replace the state-based individual
contracts with S170LK agreements under the Workplace Relations Act. The LK is
a non-union collective agreement which must be voted on by all the employees in
the company. The major focus in the chapter is on Rio Tinto at Hamersley, where
the workers, much to the surprise of the company, voted strongly against an LK
agreement. This was not so much a pro-union vote, but rather a signal of anticompany attitudes. Over the previous few years, workers had seen the company
move from a cooperative model of management to one in which a churning management team changed processes, shifts and hours of work unilaterally, whereas
at the same time developing new mines where the workers would be separated by
time and place from the local communities. In contrast, as Ellem demonstrates, the
workers were not particularly enamoured of the unions either. In response to these
views, the Australian Co