Suchergebnisse

PurposeThis paper presents an historical reconstruction of the radicalisation of Alan Fox, the industrial sociologist and a detailed analysis of his early historical and sociological writing in the classical pluralist phase.Design/methodology/approachAn intellectual history, including detailed discussion of key Fox texts, supported by interviews with Fox and other Biographical sources.FindingsFox's radicalisation was incomplete, as he carried over from his industrial relations (IR) pluralist mentors, Allan Flanders and Hugh Clegg, a suspicion of political Marxism, a sense of historical contingency and an awareness of the fragmented nature of industrial conflict.Originality/valueRecent academic attention has centred on Fox's later radical pluralism with its "structural" approach to the employment relationship. This paper revisits his early, neglected classical pluralist writing. It also illuminates his transition from institutional IR to a broader sociology of work, influenced by AH Halsey, John Goldthorpe and others and the complex nature of his radicalisation.

AbstractSince 2017 the British Labour Party has proposed mandatory sectoral collective bargaining (SCB) as a comprehensive strategy to rebuild the trade union voice across the entire economy. The intellectual roots lie in the Institute of Employment Rights' (IER) Manifesto for Labour Law (2016). First, this article explains the core IER approach, questioning its feasibility given current low levels of union membership and bargaining coverage and whether it would produce the stable and productive economy promised. Second, the article develops four social science objections to this state‐driven approach centred on industrial relations history; political sociology; economics; and political philosophy. The conclusion argues that while stronger voluntary trade unions could help, it is neither practicable nor desirable for the state to impose a trade union, single‐channel approach to employee voice. Instead, a 'mixed economy of voice' is proposed, perhaps including statutory works councils, which speaks directly to all employees—union and non‐union—and wins broader political, employer and public support.

The British educated classes have long worried and fantasized about working-class religious belief and unbelief. Anglican churchmen feared Methodist "enthusiasm" in the eighteenth century, radicalism in the aftermath of the French Revolution, and urban, industrial irreligion after the 1851 Religious Census on churchgoing. In a mirror image of these old anxieties, most labour historians have wished away Christianity in the twentieth century. The long-standing shared socialist teleology of Marxists and Fabians leads to the modern, socialist labour movement. In this Marxian take on secularization theory, a new, more cohesive proletariat or singular "working class" forms, with an anti-capitalist, "socialist" consciousness reflected in the political, trade union, and co-operative institutions of the "labour movement". Suddenly, economic, social, and political history find a single, unified subject. At the level of belief, socialism displaces those old Victorian pretenders for working-class hearts and minds: conservatism, liberalism, and Christianity. Sometime between 1914 and 1918, the Christian religion disappears from ordinary lives, as in Selina Todd's recent, The People, where popular religious faith is barely worth talking about.

AbstractMarcel van der Linden has championed Global Labour History (GLH) as a solution to the decline of Labour History as an academic field. His 2008Workers of the World(and other writing) strives to transcend methodological nationalism and provides a new global framework to study labour through the ages. This British liberal-pluralist critique argues that Van der Linden's version of GLH is essentially a re-packaging of Marxism that narrows the conceptual foundations of the field and overlooks both the full political crisis of state-socialism and its limited historical appeal to working people. The article concludes by defending a national approach centred on civil society institutions, as represented in the 2016 collection edited by P. Ackers and A.J. Reid,Alternatives to State-Socialism in Britain: Other Worlds of Labour in the Twentieth Century.

This article reviews the burgeoning literature on work–life balance and family-friendly policies in European countries, noting the new interdisciplinary dialogue between traditional 'work' and 'family' disciplines. It examines the findings from interviews with economic actors, suggesting that, while work–life balance and family-friendly policies are an issue everywhere, progress is very uneven. Overall, strong traditional family policies have not contributed to work–life balance, since they are predicated on a traditional male breadwinner model. A combination of strong demand for female labour in the service sector and equal opportunities policies is, however, causing employers and government to address the issue.

SummaryThis article challenges the militant and industrial unionist version of British coal mining trade union history, surrounding the Miners' Federation of Great Britain and the National Union of Mineworkers, by considering, for the first time, the case of the colliery deputies' trade union. Their national Federation was formed in 1910, and aimed to represent the three branches of coal mining supervisory management: the deputy (or fireman, or examiner), overman and shotfirer. First, the article discusses the treatment of moderate and craft traditions in British coal mining historiography. Second, it shows how the position of deputy was defined by changes in the underground labour process and the legal regulation of the industry. Third, it traces the history of deputies' union organization up until nationalization in 1947, and the formation of the National Association of Colliery Overmen, Deputies and Shotfirers (NACODS). The article concludes that the deputies represent a mainstream tradition of craft/professional identity and industrial moderation, in both the coal industry and the wider labour movement.

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