IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/brjirl/v28y1990i2p141-164.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Industrial Relations Legislation on British Union Density

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Freeman
  • Jeffrey Pelletier

Abstract

The unionized share of the work force changed markedly in the United Kingdom between the 1970s and 1980s. In the 1970s density rose steadily, making the United Kingdom the most heavily organized large OECD country. In the 1980s, by contrast, density fell by 1.4 percentage points per annum -- a faster drop than in the rapidly de-unionizing U.S. or in Japan. What explains this turnaround - the severe recession of the 1980s? Shifts in the composition of employment from unionized manufacturing to services? The Thatcher government's industrial relations legislation? In this paper we investigate these questions with a quantitative analysis of 1945-1986 changes in British union density. In contrast to studies that concentrate on cyclical determinants of unionism (Bain and Elshiekh, Carruth and Disney, Booth (1983)) we focus on industrial relations legislation. We develop an index of the favorableness of labor laws to unionism and relate it to changes in density in time series regressions that control for inflation, unemployment, and the manufacturing share of employment, among other variables. As a further test, we develop an analogous labor law index for Ireland, whose industrial relations system is similar to the U.K.'s and which experienced a similar severe 1980s recession but which did not pass new laws to weaken unions, and contrast changes in density between the countries with differences in industrial relations law. Our major finding is that the Thatcher government's labor laws caused much of the 1980s fall in British union density. We present the evidence for this claim in three stages. Section 1 lays out the facts of changing union density in the U.K. and Ireland and examines structural explanations of the U.K. changes. Section 2 discusses the 1980s U.K. labor laws and develops an index of their likely impact on unionism. Section 3 presents our econometric analysis of the U.K. time series data.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Freeman & Jeffrey Pelletier, 1990. "The Impact of Industrial Relations Legislation on British Union Density," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 28(2), pages 141-164, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:28:y:1990:i:2:p:141-164
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-8543.1990.tb00360.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Freeman, Richard B, 1986. "The Effect of the Union Wage Differential on Management Opposition and Union Organizing Success," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 92-96, May.
    2. Freeman, Richard B, 1988. "Contraction and Expansion: The Divergence of Private Sector and Public Sector Unionism in the United States," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 63-88, Spring.
    3. Brian Towers, 1989. "Running the Gauntlet: British Trade Unions under Thatcher, 1979–1988," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 42(2), pages 163-188, January.
    4. repec:bla:econom:v:55:y:1988:i:217:p:1-19 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Blanchflower, David G & Oswald, Andrew J, 1988. "Profit-Related Pay: Prose Discovered," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(392), pages 720-730, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. N Millward, 1993. "Uses of the Workplace Industrial Relations Surveys by British Labour Economists," CEP Discussion Papers dp0145, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    2. G L Clark & K Johnston, 1987. "The Geography of US Union Elections 1: The Crisis of US Unions and a Critical Review of the Literature," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 19(1), pages 33-57, January.
    3. Martin Conyon & Richard B. Freeman, 2004. "Shared Modes of Compensation and Firm Performance U.K. Evidence," NBER Chapters, in: Seeking a Premier Economy: The Economic Effects of British Economic Reforms, 1980–2000, pages 109-146, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. repec:zbw:bofrdp:1997_008 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:eee:labchp:v:3:y:1999:i:pc:p:3573-3630 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Vicente Cuñat & Maria Guadalupe, 2005. "How Does Product Market Competition Shape Incentive Contracts?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 3(5), pages 1058-1082, September.
    7. Behroz Baraghoshi & Cihan Bilginsoy, 2013. "Interstate Variations in Private Sector Union Density in the U.S," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 180-202, June.
    8. Blanchflower, David G. & Bryson, Alex, 2008. "Union Decline in Britain," IZA Discussion Papers 3436, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Noélie Delahaie & Richard Duhautois, 2019. "Profit‐Sharing and Wages: An Empirical Analysis Using French Data between 2000 and 2007," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 57(1), pages 107-142, March.
    10. Conyon, M. & Machin, S., 1989. "Profit Determination In U.K. Manufacturing," Economic Research Papers 268364, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    11. Gregory, Robert G. & Borland, Jeff, 1999. "Recent developments in public sector labor markets," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 53, pages 3573-3630, Elsevier.
    12. Leila Baghdadi & Rihab Bellakhal & Marc-Arthur Diaye, 2016. "Financial Participation: Does the Risk Transfer Story Hold in France?," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 54(1), pages 3-29, March.
    13. Dhillon, Amrita & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2001. "Profit-sharing, bertrand competition and monopoly unions : a note," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 612, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    14. Christopher K. Coombs & Richard Cebula, 2011. "The Impact of Union Corruption on Union Membership," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 131-148, January.
    15. Henrys Farber, 2001. "Union Success in Representation Elections: Why Does Unit Size Matter?," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 54(2), pages 329-348, January.
    16. Steve J. Davis & John Haltiwanger, 1991. "Wage Dispersion Between and Within U.S. Manufacturing Plants, 1963-1986," NBER Working Papers 3722, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Dieter Sadowski & Uschi Backes-Gellner & Bernd Frick, 1995. "Works Councils: Barriers or Boosts for the Competitiveness of German Firms?," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 33(3), pages 493-513, September.
    18. Henry S. Farber & Bruce Western, 2000. "Round Up The Usual Suspects: The Decline of Unions in The Private Sector, 1973-1998," Working Papers 816, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    19. Englmaier, Florian & Wambach, Achim, 2010. "Optimal incentive contracts under inequity aversion," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 312-328, July.
    20. Stephen Deery, 1995. "The Demise of the Trade Union as a Representative Body?," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 33(4), pages 537-543, December.
    21. Stephen Drinkwater & Peter Ingram, 2005. "Have Industrial Relations in the UK Really Improved?," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 19(2), pages 373-398, June.
    22. Oesch, Daniel, 2010. "Explaining union growth and decline with flows in and out of membership. An analysis of Swiss union locals," MPRA Paper 24358, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:28:y:1990:i:2:p:141-164. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.