IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/64184.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bargaining agenda in public and private monopoly

Author

Listed:
  • Fanti, Luciano
  • Buccella, Domenico

Abstract

This paper analyses the choice of the bargaining agenda in a public/private unionised monopoly. Both the public and private monopolist always prefers the Right-To-Manage (RTM) to the Efficient Bargaining (EB) agenda. Private monopoly is socially preferred to the public one and conflict of interests on the preferred agenda arises between Government on one side and workers and consumers on the other side. In case of threat of market entry, the public (private) monopolist may strategically commit to RTM (EB) to deter entrance. If RTM is the ex-ante industry practice, a public incumbent company cannot use the EB agenda as a strategic tool to deter entry, while an incumbent private company can use it. An opposite result holds when EB is the established practice in the industry: the incumbent public company can use RTM to deter entry, while the incumbent private company cannot. The social welfare implications are analysed.

Suggested Citation

  • Fanti, Luciano & Buccella, Domenico, 2015. "Bargaining agenda in public and private monopoly," MPRA Paper 64184, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:64184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/64184/1/MPRA_paper_64184.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luciano Fanti, 2014. "When do firms and unions agree on a monopoly union or an efficient bargaining arrangement?," Discussion Papers 2014/181, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    2. Ishida, Junichiro & Matsushima, Noriaki, 2009. "Should civil servants be restricted in wage bargaining? A mixed-duopoly approach," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(3-4), pages 634-646, April.
    3. Brown, James N & Ashenfelter, Orley, 1986. "Testing the Efficiency of Employment Contracts," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 40-87, June.
    4. Fanti, Luciano & Buccella, Domenico, 2015. "Bargaining agenda in a unionised monopoly with network effects," MPRA Paper 64090, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. repec:bla:scandj:v:87:y:1985:i:2:p:197-225 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Fanti, Luciano & Buccella, Domenico, 2015. "Bargaining agenda, timing, and entry," MPRA Paper 64089, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Joaquín Andaluz, 2011. "Validity of the “Principle of Maximum Product Differentiation” in a unionized mixed-duopoly," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 102(2), pages 123-136, March.
    8. repec:bla:econom:v:60:y:1993:i:238:p:161-81 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. De Fraja, Giovanni, 1993. "Unions and Wages in Public and Private Firms: A Game-Theoretic Analysis," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(3), pages 457-469, July.
    10. McDonald, Ian M & Solow, Robert M, 1981. "Wage Bargaining and Employment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(5), pages 896-908, December.
    11. Brcena-Ruiz, Juan Carlos & Garzn, Mara Begoa, 2009. "Relocation and public ownership of firms," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 71-85, March.
    12. John H. Pencavel, 1984. "The Tradeoff Between Wages and Employment in Trade Union Objectives," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 99(2), pages 215-231.
    13. Luciano Fanti, 2015. "Union–firm bargaining agenda: right-to-manage or efficient bargaining?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(2), pages 936-948.
    14. Dowrick, Steve & Spencer, Barbara J, 1994. "Union Attitudes to Labor-Saving Innovation: When Are Unions Luddites?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 12(2), pages 316-344, April.
    15. Kangsik Choi, 2012. "Price And Quantity Competition In A Unionised Mixed Duopoly: The Cases Of Substitutes And Complements," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 1-22, March.
    16. de Fraja, Giovanni & Delbono, Flavio, 1990. "Game Theoretic Models of Mixed Oligopoly," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 1-17.
    17. Luciano Fanti & Domenico Buccella, 2017. "Manager‐Union Bargaining Agenda Under Monopoly and with Network Effects," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(6), pages 717-730, September.
    18. Manning, Alan, 1987. "An Integration of Trade Union Models in a Sequential Bargaining Framework," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(385), pages 121-139, March.
    19. Bughin, Jacques, 1999. "The strategic choice of union-oligopoly bargaining agenda," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(7), pages 1029-1040, October.
    20. de Fraja, Giovanni & Delbono, Flavio, 1989. "Alternative Strategies of a Public Enterprise in Oligopoly," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(2), pages 302-311, April.
    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. Fanti Luciano & Buccella Domenico, 2016. "Privatisation or State Ownership When Labour Market is Unionised?," Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia, Sciendo, vol. 16(1), pages 21-36, December.
    2. Fanti, Luciano & Buccella, Domenico, 2015. "Bargaining agenda, timing, and entry," MPRA Paper 64089, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Luciano Fanti & Domenico Buccella, 2019. "When unionisation is profitable for firms in network industries," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(4), pages 711-722, November.
    4. Luciano Fanti & Domenico Buccella, 2018. "Union–Firm Bargaining Agenda Revisited: When Unions Have Distinct Preferences," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(1), pages 35-50, January.
    5. Buccella, Domenico & Fanti, Luciano, 2020. "Do labour union recognition and bargaining deter entry in a network industry? A sequential game model," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    6. Luciano Fanti & Domenico Buccella, 2017. "Manager‐Union Bargaining Agenda Under Monopoly and with Network Effects," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(6), pages 717-730, September.
    7. Luciano Fanti, 2015. "Union–firm bargaining agenda: right-to-manage or efficient bargaining?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(2), pages 936-948.
    8. Luciano Fanti, 2014. "Union-Firm Bargaining agenda: Right-to manage or Efficient Bargaining?," Discussion Papers 2014/182, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    9. Fanti, Luciano & Buccella, Domenico, 2015. "Bargaining agenda in a unionised monopoly with network effects," MPRA Paper 64090, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Luciano Fanti & Domenico Buccella, 2016. "Bargaining Agenda and Entry in a Unionised Model with Network Effects," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 2(1), pages 91-121, March.
    11. Domenico Buccella & Luciano Fanti, 2017. "A game-theoretic approach to the choice of union-oligopoly baargaining agenda," Discussion Papers 2017/214, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    12. Luciano Fanti & Domenico Buccella, 2017. "Bargaining agenda in a unionised monopoly with network effects: when corporate social responsibility may be welfare-reducing," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 34(3), pages 471-489, December.
    13. Choi, Kangsik, 2010. "Strategic Budget Constraints of Public Firm under Bertrand Competition of Unionized Mixed Duopoly," MPRA Paper 19969, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Liu, Yi & Lahiri, Sajal & Liu, Tianqi, 2018. "Optimal Partial Privatization in the Presence of Foreign Competition: The Role of Efficiency Differentials and Unemployment," MPRA Paper 91471, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 23 Jan 2019.
    15. Luciano Fanti, 2011. "When do firms prefer either monopolistic unions or an efficient bargaining?," Discussion Papers 2011/130, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    16. Nicholas Lawson, 2011. "Is Collective Bargaining Pareto Efficient? A Survey of the Literature," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 282-304, September.
    17. Choi, Kangsik, 2009. "Government's Preference and Timing of Endogenous Wage Setting: Perspectives on Privatization and Mixed Duopoly," MPRA Paper 17221, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Chica Páez, Yolanda & Espinosa Alejos, María Paz, 2005. "Union Formation and Bargaining Rules in the Labor Market," DFAEII Working Papers 1988-088X, University of the Basque Country - Department of Foundations of Economic Analysis II.
    19. Leonard Wang & Chu Hsu & Jen Lee, 2014. "Do Partial Cross Ownership and Budget Constraints Matter for Privatization Policy?," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 519-529, December.
    20. Luciano Fanti, 2011. "When an efficient bargaining is more "efficient" than a competitive labour market," Discussion Papers 2011/131, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public and private monopoly; Efficient Bargaining; Right-to-manage; Entry; Firm-union bargaining agenda;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H44 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Publicly Provided Goods: Mixed Markets
    • J51 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining - - - Trade Unions: Objectives, Structure, and Effects
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pra:mprapa:64184. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.