An Examination of the Factor Structure of Union Commitment in New Zealand

This paper examines the stability of the dimensionality of union commitment as proposed by Gordon, Philpot, Burt, Thompson, and Spillers (1980) in the cultural context of New Zealand. The results based on a sample of 489 academic and ancillary (i.e. technical, library, general, and services) staff using the sophisticated technique of confirmatory factor analysis (LISREL VIII) (Joreskog and Sorbom, 1993) indicate that union commitment is best represented by the four factors of union loyalty, responsibility to the union, willingness to work for the union, and belief in unionism. These factors displayed discriminant validity as evidenced by the differential relationships and explained variances with a co,mmon set of explanatory variables. For example, older members were found to be associated with a willingness to fulfil the day to day obligations of the union (i.e. responsibility). No support was found for any effect of gender, kinship responsibility, membership tenure or rank on union commitment. As expected, having represented or previously held a union position significantly influences staffs responsibility and willingness to work for the union. Surprisingly, academics were more ready to undertake special work for the union (i.e. willingness) than ancillary staff Both union instrumentality and passive participation (for example, voting in union elections) were strong predictors of all four factors of union commitment. Finally, active participation (for example, raising grievances) was observed to increase willingness to work for and belief in unionism. The results provide support for the generalisability of the factor structure of union commitment to New Zealand, where the implications for future research are discusse

An Examination of the Factor Structure of Union Commitment in New Zealand

This paper examines the stability of the dimensionality of union commitment as proposed by Gordon, Philpot, Burt, Thompson, and Spillers (1980) in the cultural context of New Zealand. The results based on a sample of 489 academic and ancillary (i.e. technical, library, general, and services) staff using the sophisticated technique of confirmatory factor analysis (LISREL VIII) (Joreskog and Sorbom, 1993) indicate that union commitment is best represented by the four factors of union loyalty, responsibility to the union, willingness to work for the union, and belief in unionism. These factors displayed discriminant validity as evidenced by the differential relationships and explained variances with a co,mmon set of explanatory variables. For example, older members were found to be associated with a willingness to fulfil the day to day obligations of the union (i.e. responsibility). No support was found for any effect of gender, kinship responsibility, membership tenure or rank on union commitment. As expected, having represented or previously held a union position significantly influences staffs responsibility and willingness to work for the union. Surprisingly, academics were more ready to undertake special work for the union (i.e. willingness) than ancillary staff Both union instrumentality and passive participation (for example, voting in union elections) were strong predictors of all four factors of union commitment. Finally, active participation (for example, raising grievances) was observed to increase willingness to work for and belief in unionism. The results provide support for the generalisability of the factor structure of union commitment to New Zealand, where the implications for future research are discusse

A confirmatory factor analysis of union commitment in Australia

This paper evaluates the applicability of the different factor structures of union commitment identified in previous studies to the Australian case. Confirmatory factor analysis results using LISREL VII suggest that union commitment is best represented by four distinct factors, 'union loyalty; 'responsibility to the union; 'willingness to work for the union', and 'belief in unionism' in this sample of Australian workers. OLS regression results indicate that the four factors are differentially related to a set of common predictor variables. White-collar workers reported higher levels of commit ment than blue-collar workers. Participation in leadership positions and previous ex perience with union handling of grievances significantly increased commitment to the union. The results suggest support for the generalizability of the factor structure of union commitment to Australia. Implications for future research are discussed

Does dual commitment underlie company & union commitment? Evidence from Australia, Sweden, and the US

Using diverse information from union members in Australia, Sweden and the United States, this paper develops a new approach to study the dual commitment construct. Specifically, this paper investigates whether dual commitment (i.e., simultaneous commitment to company and the union) represents a latent second-order factor underlying both Union and Company commitment factors. Accordingly, alternative of the factor structure of union and company commitment are analysed to find the best-fitting first-order models using the confirmatory factor analysis technique of LISREL VII. These best fitting factors are then subjected to second-order confirmatory factor analysis. The results using this sophisticated methodological approach indicates no support for a latent general dual commitment construct. Curiously, the results are similar to those obtained by other researchers who have so far failed to identify a dual commitment construct, but are at odds with the views of practitioners, who continue to pursue human resource management policies that are geared to increasing the dual commitment of employees. The implications for future research are discussed