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

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

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

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

Labor-Management Cooperation: Antecedents and Impact on Organizational Performance

This study examines the antecedents and outcomes of labor-management cooperation. Data were drawn from 305 branches of a large unionized Australian- based multinational banking organization. The authors find that perceptions of a cooperative labor relations climate were positively influenced by procedural justice, the union’s willingness to adopt an integrative approach to bargaining, and management’s willingness to share information freely with the union. The findings also indicate that a cooperative labor-management relationship contributed to higher productivity and improved customer service. In addition, organizational commitment was found to have a positive effect on branch-level productivity and customer service, and union loyalty was associated with lower absenteeism

Swedish professionals and gender inequalities

The match of ideology and policy regarding gender equality in a corporatist society like Sweden should result in reduced gender inequality in access to supervisory authority and in earnings. The magnitude and form of this inequality is studied for a national sample of 1,359 full-time members of the professional union SACO in 1987–88. We find that Swedish professional women have only 68% of the supervisory positions that men have and 77% of the earnings that men have. These differences are not explained by process differences; human capital, family status, and structural variables generally produce access to authority and earnings similarly for men and women. Although there are mean resource differences in human capital and structural resources that disadvantage women and thus partly explain the gaps, the major factor explaining these gender gaps is occupational segregation. However, even when men and women are equalized on occupation and other explanatory variables, a gap favoring men is still found