Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

The Irrelevance of Trade Union Recognition? A Comparison of Two Matched Companies

By William Brown and Paul Ryan


Two UK business services companies are compared both to each other and to their common state-owned industry background in order to assess the implications of trade union recognition and changed bargaining structure. Union recognition had been abandoned by one company under the agenda of "individualization" and "personal contracts" but retained by the other under the agenda of "partnership". Changes in the level at which employment relationships are regulated occurred at both companies relative to their ancestral public enterprises. The similarity of the companies in terms of products, technologies and institutional history provides an approximation to a natural experiment. The evidence suggests only secondary effects from union presence upon operational attributes and economic performance, but major effects from the decentralization of employment relations, which formed part of a wider and more radical set of changes in the relevant markets, technologies, ownership structures and labour law

Topics: trade unions, employment contracts, collective bargaining, union recognition, individualisation, payment systems, privatisation, Classification-JEL: J5
Publisher: Faculty of Economics
Year: 2004
OAI identifier:
Provided by: Apollo

Suggested articles


  1. (1996). A.Gosling and S.Machin doi
  2. (1995). and A.B.Krueger doi
  3. (1995). and A.Ferner doi
  4. and D.Parker (1997), The Impact of Privatisation: Ownership and Corporate Performance in the UK, doi
  5. (1998). and D.Wilkinson (2002), Collective Bargaining and Workplace Performance: an Investigation using the WERS doi
  6. and G.Morton (1993), ‘Union exclusion and the decollectivisation of industrial relations in contemporary Britain’, doi
  7. (1998). and G.S.Morris
  8. (1984). and J.Medoff doi
  9. (1995). and R.Harris doi
  10. (1994). and S.McKay (1999a), ‘Developments in trade union recognition and derecognition in Britain, doi
  11. and S.McKay (1999b), ‘Facing ‘Fairness at Work’: employer opposition and response to union recognition’, unpublished paper, doi
  12. and V.Sena (2003), ‘Unions: rent creators or extractors?’, unpublished paper, doi
  13. (1998). C.F.Pratten and P.Ryan
  14. (1993). Centralisation of wage bargaining and macroeconomic performance: a survey', Working Paper number 131, Economics Department, doi
  15. D.Nash and S.Oxenbridge (2000), ‘The employment contract: from collective procedures to individual rights’, doi
  16. (1994). Employer behaviour in certification elections and first-contract campaigns: implications for labour law reform’,
  17. (1999). Exclusion and disarticulation: the Transport and General Workers’ Union in the road haulage industry, 1979-1998’, doi
  18. (1994). From collective bargaining to ‘personal’ contracts: case studies in port transport and electricity supply’, doi
  19. (1993). Industrial relations and economic performance', doi
  20. (2003). Industrial Relations:Theory and Practice, second edition, doi
  21. (1999). Macroeconomic performance and collective bargaining: an international perspective’, doi
  22. (1967). National Board for Prices and Incomes, Pay of Electricity Supply Workers, Report 42,
  23. (1984). National Joint Industrial Committee for the Water Industry, Constitution and Scheme of Wages and Conditions of Service,
  24. (1990). National Joint Industrial Council for the Electricity Supply Industry,
  25. P.Marginson and J.Walsh (2003), ‘The management of pay as the influence of collective bargaining diminishes’,
  26. (1991). Pay determination in Britain in the 1980s : the anatomy of decentralisation', doi
  27. (1999). Peering into the black hole: the downside of the new employment relations in the UK’, doi
  28. (1994). Privatisation and the labour market: facts, theory and evidence,’ in M.Bishop, J.Kay and C.Mayer (eds), Privatisation and Economic Performance,
  29. (1993). Privatisation of the British utilities: regulation, decentralisation and industrial relations’, in T.Clarke and C.Pitelis (eds), The Political Economy of Privatisation,
  30. (1993). Public Enterprise in Transition; doi
  31. (1997). S.Deakin and P.Ryan doi
  32. S.Deakin, M.Hudson, C.F.Pratten and P.Ryan (2001), ‘The limits of statutory trade union recognition’, doi
  33. (1999). S.Woodland, A.O'Reilly and G.Dix doi
  34. (1985). Shifting norms in pay determination’, doi
  35. (1995). The Economics of the Trade Union, doi
  36. (1981). The Nationalised Industries: Policies and Performance since 1968, doi
  37. (1990). Union wage differentials, product market influences and the division of rents’, doi
  38. (2002). Unions and Productivity, Financial Performance and Investment: International Evidence’, Discussion Paper 539, Centre for Economic Performance, doi
  39. (1998). Unions and the economy: what we know; what we should know,’ doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.