IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ilrrev/v70y2017i5p1254-1282.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Unionization on Productivity: Evidence from a Long Panel of Coal Mines

Author

Listed:
  • William M. Boal

Abstract

The author measures the effect of unionization on productivity based on a panel of West Virginia coal mines from 1897 to 1928. Output and inputs are measured in physical terms, and most of the mines in the panel changed union status at least once, though not simultaneously, so the panel is close to ideal for measuring the effect of unionization on productivity. Fixed-effects estimates show that the union had little effect on productivity before 1914, but thereafter it had a negative effect of 5 to 10%. This negative effect was not reversed when mines were later deunionized. The author evaluates a variety of possible explanations for these results. Some evidence points to declining investment at union mines relative to nonunion mines, but the evidence is circumstantial and the direction of causality is unclear. The most plausible explanation is a sharp deterioration in labor relations at union mines after the violent Paint Creek-Cabin Creek strike of 1912–1913.

Suggested Citation

  • William M. Boal, 2017. "The Effect of Unionization on Productivity: Evidence from a Long Panel of Coal Mines," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 70(5), pages 1254-1282, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ilrrev:v:70:y:2017:i:5:p:1254-1282
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ilr.sagepub.com/content/70/5/1254.abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Boal, William M., 2018. "Work intensity and worker safety in early twentieth-century coal mining," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 132-149.

    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:sae:ilrrev:v:70:y:2017:i:5:p:1254-1282. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ilr.cornell.edu .

    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.