Role of Trade Unions in Japan, United States and
Sweden:
Comparative Analysis
Executive Summary
USA,
Japan and Sweden (as an active member of EU) are major economic agents in the
epoch of globalisation. Ever-expanding mutual integration between countries results
in diffusion of ideas, practices and techniques in a great variety of things including
business and society, culture and politics. Industrial relations generally and trade
unions in particular are also subject to transformation as a consequence of
cross-border influences.
Unions in Japan, USA and Sweden albeit having some
traits in common differ notably in their nature, structure, origin, roles, levels of
unionisation, bargaining practices, degree of politicisation and government
interference.
Japanese unions are enterprise-based and thus represent firms to
which they relate. In the US unions at large are of industrial nature hence reflect
relevant industry. In Sweden, unions are organised into three federations which
distinguish between white-collar, blue-collar and professional workers.
Unions in
the US and (to some extent) in Japan are mostly involved in business unionism: wage
negotiations and other workplace matters are their main concerns. Swedish unions are
contrasting in a sense that they are also mindful of improving general working
environment and promoting industrial and economic democracy. Their activities are
described as political unionism.
Comparative analysis of unions reveals that the
role of unions in Swedish employment relations is still pre-eminent. In Japan unions
are reasonably important whilst in America unions are of secondary significance in
determining industrial relations.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
1.0 UNIONS AND EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS IN
JAPAN
1.1 Japan’s Industrial Relations: Overview
1.2 Nature and Role of
Unions
1.3 Unionisation
1.4 Activities and Functions of Unions
Effect of
Unionisation
Collective Bargaining and Wage Determination
1.5 Japanese
Model
1.6 Recent Trends
2.0 UNIONS AND EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
IN THE USA
2.1 US Industrial Relations: Overview
2.2 Nature and Role of
Unions
2.3 Unionisation
2.4 Activities and Functions of
Unions
Collective Bargaining and Wage Determination
Non-Wage Effects
of Unionisation
2.5 Government and Political Involvement of Unions
2.6
Recent Trends
3.0 UNIONS AND EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS IN
SWEDEN
3.1 Sweden’s Industrial Relations: Overview
3.2 Nature and Role
of Unions
LO (Swedish Confederation of Trade Unions)
TCO (Central
Organisation of Salaried Employees)
SACO (Confederation of Professional
Associations)
3.3 Political Unionism
3.4 Activities and Functions of
Unions
Effect of Unionisation
Collective Bargaining and Wage
Determination
3.5 Industrial Democracy
3.6 Recent Trends
4.0 ROLE
OF UNIONS: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
4.1 Nature and Role
4.2 Origin
and Structure
4.3 Centralisation
4.4 Unionisation
4.5 Union
Activities
4.6 Recent
Developments
Conclusion
Bibliography
INTRODUCTION
This paper examines industrial relations in Japan, the
United States and Sweden. These countries were chosen to reflect enormous diversity
of management cultures and practices, labour movements and government activities
in the area of industrial relations in different parts of the world. The United States and
Japan are the two biggest world economies, and Sweden is a participant of another
world’s major economic cluster, the European Union.
Since the US, Japan and
the EU are major agents of globalisation, their activities often influence each other
and the rest of the world through intensifying flows of capital and labour.
Employment relations too turn globally mobile; work practices and industrial
arrangements become transformed as a result of such transnational
co-operation.
The purpose of this paper is to explore nature, roles, structure,
political involvement and recent trends associated with unions in three countries as
well as endeavour to juxtapose in a comparative analysis principal unions’
characteristics.
1.0 UNIONS AND EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
IN JAPAN
1.1 Japan’s Industrial Relations: Overview
Just as
United States and Sweden, Japan is an advanced industrialised nation. Despite
recessions for most of the 90s, Japan still is the second largest economic power in the
world with population of 125 million people.
Industrial relations in Japan can be
typified as relatively co-operative. The IR system is founded on three tiers: enterprise
unionism, lifetime employment and seniority-based wages. It is also distinguished by
the widespread bonus arrangements and promotion almost exclusively from within.
Job security is very high, workers in a firm are guaranteed albeit informally lifelong
employment in exchange for commitment to the company. Even during adverse
business conditions and mounting unemployment, under Japanese law, sacking
people is complex and uneconomical which is seen in Japan very poor for public
relations (Economist: 1998a).
1.2 Nature and Role of Unions
Japan’s union organisation is nearly unique in the world. Unlike in most other
countries it is pivotal around enterprises not industries or crafts. Unions are ordinarily
formed within limits of one firm and called enterprise (company) unions. On the
upper level enterprise unions join industry federations which in turn are constituents
of nation-wide political bodies such as Japanese Trade Union Confederation (Rengo).
Thus Japanese unionism can be described as a three-tier system. At the bottom
employees organised into enterprise unions which are in charge of negotiating
factory floor issues such as wage rates, promotion, redundancies, workplace safety,
transfers and retirement. Although enterprise unions differ in some aspects, they
have in common such attributes as: i) membership restricted only to regular workers,
ii) both blue and white collar employees belong to the same union, iii) union officers
are regular employees of the particular firm (Blanpain et al: 1983).
Industrial
federations, which comprised of enterprise unions represent a corresponding
industry. They above all focus on such issues as increasing wages across-the-board.
Federations play a key role in determining agenda and decision making in industry
speaking via enterprise unions. In other words the process of negotiating depends on
federations rather than on company unions. It is mainly due to the competitive nature
of enterprise unions since they represent fiercely competing firms of the same
industry. Federations serve as a kind of informal industrial self-regulating body which
creates a similarity of level playing fields. For instance, after informal negotiations
with management and unions across firms in the industry, the federation makes
decision of an average pay increase (Koike: 1988).
Nation-wide organisations
e.g. Rengo, Domei (Japanese Confederation of Labour), Zenmin Rokyo (Japanese
Private Sector Trade Union Council), are responsible for negotiations with
government officials and pursue their own political objectives.
1.3
Unionisation
The level of unionisation is still relatively high despite
continuous decline in membership (largely an international phenomenon). In absolute
terms Japan’s union membership is second in the non-communist world: 12.5 million
in 1996 with total number of unions at 70 700 (Kuwahara: 1998).
In 1995 75.5%
of large firms in manufacturing and 41.5% of medium firms were unionised against
89.3% and 44.9% in 1991 respectively. However, the union density is more or less
stable: in the manufacturing sector 75% in 1995 and 72.8% in 1991 for large firms,
the figures for medium companies are 68.3% and 67.3% respectively (Benson: 1998).
Drop in unionisation is largely attributable to the failure of unions to attract members
from new firms (rather than because of decline in the existing ones) due to
employees’ low expectations of unions. Workers seem not motivated by the ‘voice’
effect alone (Benson: 1998).
The issue is also exacerbated by the fact that a large
and increasing number of part-time and temporary workers do not belong to company
unions making it hard for unions to grow in the era of ‘casualisation’ of labour
markets (Marshall, Briggs: 1989).
1.4 Activities and Functions of
Unions
Effect of Unionisation
Unlike in the US, in
Japan there is practically no wage differential associated with membership in unions.
Unions have to adopt other strategies in order to attract new recruits such as claiming
to be the ‘voice’ of workers. However, belonging to the ‘voice’ per se does not bring
serious tangible benefits for workers, as unions are less likely to defend interests of
most workers. Today, unions are less pro-worker but more a political force on a
federations level. According to Wever (1997), thanks to the fact that unions are
enterprise based, any rise in membership brings little salience for an individual union
compared with other developed nations (Wever: 1997). Ordinary union members do
not have significant involvement in an organisation or influence on senior members
of the union who are motivated by political considerations.
Collective
Bargaining and Wage Determination
Since mid 50s the wage has been
usually determined during spring months in the process known Shunto (‘springtime
offensive’) when unions lobby pay increases. However, on a single firm level any
argument over wage rise is restricted, since membership in enterprise unions assumes
commitment to the firm. Under stiff competition such a clash is constrained because
unilateral rise in the wage bill would undermine financial standing of a firm and
therefore its competitiveness. This forced unions to join in supra-enterprise
organisations which capable of meeting demands of pay rise across the industry.
(Sumiya: 1981). However, in 90s the relative importance of Shunto has diminished,
the bargaining process became more confined to the enterprise level thanks to
widening heterogeneity of companies (varying profitability, turnovers etc.) within
industry (Kuwahara: 1998).
1.5 Japanese Model
Although
Japan has its share of conflicts between management and labour, strikes occurrence
has been very little in recent years. Unions interact with employees on a joint
consultation basis seeking for a consensus rather than pressing on with each other’s
goals (Florida, Kenney: 1991). It along with other factors is referred to the Japanese
Model of industrial relations. The model assumes that a single trade union is
recognised as a party with exclusive bargaining power, negotiations are focused on
eliminating strikes (‘no-strike deal’), all workers have rights to participate in
arbitration while management reserves rights of work organisation (Burchill: 1997).
This model is widely practised in subsidiaries of Japanese companies all over the
world, including US and Europe.
1.6 Recent Trends
As
union membership has been steadily declining in the past decades some changes have
occurred in roles and activities of unions. The number of meetings between
employers and union members has plunged especially in medium size companies,
though trend was observed in large firms too. However, bargaining over management
issues, personnel grievances and job assignments is on the rise suggesting that despite
relative job security, grievances of employees increased. In large firms, managers
report worsening relationships with unions. The number of managers who regard
unions as counter-productive has soared fourfold from 1991 to 1995 (Benson: 1998).
The primary cause of that is general deterioration of economic conditions in 1990s.
Currently, Japan is in recession, the GDP is expected to shrink in 1999 by 2.2%.
Unemployment is at 4.4% and rising, a huge figure for Japan which used to have
jobless rate of average 2.5% in 1980s and below 2% in 1970s (Ross et al: 1998).
Union federations are lobbying government for creating more jobs and
developing more efficient schemes for post-retrenchment adjustment. For instance,
Rengo alongside with Nikkeiren (Japan Federation of Employers’ Association) came
out with such initiatives as using shed labour in municipal cleaning services and
working as instructors and ‘life’ counsellors at schools (Economist: 1999a).
2.0 UNIONS AND EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS IN THE
UNITED STATES
2.1 US Industrial Relations: Overview
The
United States is one of the most developed industrialised nations in the world with
population of 260 million. The US capitalist, competitive market economy is the
main force affecting the country’s system of employment relations. The relationship
between unions and companies is described as adversarial (Miller: 1997) and
anti-unionism is said to be profoundly intrinsic in the culture of American business
(Grosby: 1992). Unions’ goals are primarily economic in nature, exemplifying ‘bread
and butter unionism’. Employer organisations are not very active and never engage in
all manifestations of employment relations (Wheeler: 1998). Currently, the American
labour movement is rapidly changing, and academics forecast various
outcomes.
2.2 Nature and Role of Unions
The American
labour movement is organised rather liberally in contrast with union systems in other
developed countries, for example Sweden or Japan. The American Federation of
Labor - Congress of Industrial Organisations (AFL-CIO) is a central federation that
consists of national unions and unites between 85 and 90 per cent of union members
in the country. ‘The AFL-CIO serves as the chief political and public relations voice
for the American labour movement, settles jurisdictional disputes among its members,
enforces practices and policies against racial and sex discrimination, and is American
labour’s main link to the international labour movement’ 1. Yet national unions are
the most influential players in the country’s labour movement. They have control over
strike funds and the fundamental right of collective bargaining (Wheeler: 1998).
Local unions are in charge of the routine work: they negotiate and bargain terms of
new agreements, carry out strikes and manage social activities between union
members.
Similar to other countries, the place where collective bargaining takes
place is increasingly moving from nation- or industry-wide level to workplace level
(Katz: 1993).
Nowadays, most of collective bargaining is conducted at the firm
level which now became an ordinariness in manufacturing sector. Despite presence of
national agreements (e.g. in the automotive industry) there could be still large space
for divergence on a local level (Wheeler: 1998).
2.3 Unionisation
US union membership is declining, and experts make contradicting forecasts
and find various explanations for such a dramatic change. Presently, total union
membership is only about 15 per cent of the country’s workforce. This constitutes just
around 20 per cent of the union membership figure for 1983. In the private sector,
only 11 per cent of employees are organised in unions and the figure is similar to that
of the 1920s (US BLS: 1997).
According to Voos (1994) there are two basic
reasons for the union density decrease.
First reason is the competitive economic
environment that emphasises importance of labour costs reduction. And the second,
American labour laws (unlike in other countries, say Japan or Sweden) give
employers full rights to resist unionisation.
Therefore, faced with rapidly
changing markets, technological developments and increasing interconnectedness of
the global economy, unions leaders have to deal with numerous issues of company
competitiveness, job security, adequate wages to provide maximum benefits for their
members (Miller: 1997).
2.4 Activities and Functions of Unions
The goals of American unions are said to be ‘pure and simple’, that is most
commonly they debate with employers over higher pays and better hours and
conditions of work. They are not interested in company management. In this regard,
‘treaties with the boss’ are common when unions negotiate and bargain over the
issues that are most important to their members and, in exchange for employer
concessions, they promise not to strike (Wheeler: 1998).
According to a recent
survey, when asked about top priorities of unions’ activity 41% of employees in the
sample have chosen pay rise, 22% reported winning greater respect and fair treatment
and 14% favoured gaining more influence on decisions in workplaces (Voos:
1997).
Collective Bargaining and Wage Determination
Wage determination, improvements in hours and work conditions have always
been and still are the primary activities of American unions. Also, there is a growing
interest of unions to cooperate with management in order to increase ‘worker feelings
of self-worth’ (Perlman: 1970).
One study has found that in US wages are
influenced by unions greater than in other developed countries. In other words, US
unionism produces greater union vs. non-union wage differentials than unionism in
other countries especially Japan, where such a gap is almost non-existent. The large
union wage effect in the country gives a very good reason for employers to resist
unionisation. It also is one of possible explanations of why union membership falls
more in the United States than in some nations, notably Sweden (Blanchflower:
1992).
Non-Wage Effects of Unionisation
Congruous with
the large union wage differential in the US, there are some data available which
suggests that unionisation causes a decline in the private sector. This may be
explained by unions playing a great role in raising demand for public services
(Blanchflower: 1992). However, there are several counter-arguments in relation to the
above. Besides, there is evidence to suggest that fringe benefits, especially pension
benefits increase dramatically in unionised settings (Blanchflower:
1992).
2.5 Government and Political Involvement of Unions
American government’s three main functions include regulating terms and
conditions of employment, provision of regulations for organised labour-management
relations, and operating as employer (Wheeler: 1998).
Along with the function of
collective bargaining, American unions join the country’s political arena as well. The
AFL-CIO and other similar organisations often participate actively in political
campaigns by providing substantial financial funds. The purpose of this political
involvement is allied with unions’ economic goals, and attempts to boost efficacy of
collective bargaining by electing officials that favour organised labour movement. In
Japan, and eminently in Sweden, political interests of unions are far more extensive.
For the past ten years, the AFL-CIO has tended to identify itself with the
Democrats political party. However, the union movement has not gone far enough to
create a labour party (Wheeler: 1998).
Additionally, legislation projects on issues
like civil rights, minimum wages, plant-closing notice generally gain support of the
labour movement.
2.6 Recent Trends
According to some,
current decrease in unions’ ability to raise competition will detract members because,
in fact, there is no demand in today’s labour society for organising. However, a
counter-argument is that the labour movement has yet a lot to offer not just in the
sense of employee economic representation, but also by providing other traditional
representation services (Voos: 1997).
Another sign of future unions survival and
development is that the labour market has been relatively tight in the decade, and this
is expected to continue (Grosby: 1992). Miller (1997) predicts that ‘the blending of
traditional, adversarial collective bargaining with participative activities would
produce a significantly different industrial relations system, a system of
co-management. The resulting system , confrontation surrounded by co-operation,
would be far more appealing to the bulk of moderate, white-collar workers than is the
current industrial relations system’ 1. Increased global competition makes the
economic health of the firm of the highest importance to all employees. Maintaining
co-operative environment brings greater job security and more long-term benefits for
workers. This is a momentous transformation in attitude of the US labour movement
(Miller: 1997).
3.0 UNIONS AND EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
IN SWEDEN
3.1 Sweden’s Industrial Relations: Overview
Sweden is an advanced industrialised country, a member of the European Union
and the largest of Scandinavian nations (8.8 million people). Swedish model of
industrial relations belongs to the Scandinavian model which like the Japanese system
can be described co-operative as opposed to the US one.
This country is
identified as the one with extraordinarily strong power of unions which play
dominant role as economic institutions (Marshall, Briggs: 1989). Sweden has
developed what is called industrial democracy and a very profound social welfare
state.
Industrial relations in Sweden have three most distinct traits: the strength
and high influence of trade unions, serious industrial disputes almost non-existent,
industrial relations are carried with little or no participation from government i.e. by
means of negotiations rather than legislation.
Although some analysts regard this
system as a model one, other argue that it hinders economic growth. Today Sweden is
the fifteenth richest country whereas 20 years ago it was fifth. Unemployment now is
much higher (6.9% in 1998, 10% in 1996) than was in 1980s (in 1989 jobless rate
was at 1.6%). In contrast with other developed nations (including US and Japan),
where union membership and importance fade, Sweden still has 90% of all workers in
unions, the highest ratio in the developed world (Economist: 1999b).
3.2 Nature and Role of Unions
Unlike in US where unions are organised
on industrial basis and Japan where they are enterprise based, Swedish unions are
divided into three federations: LO (Swedish Confederation of Trade Unions) a union
of blue-collar and clerical workers in both public and private sectors; TCO (Central
Organisation of Salaried Employees) which unites white-collar employees; and the
professionals’ league SACO (Confederation of Professional Associations). Inside
federations, unions are formed along industrial and occupational lines. Swedish
unionism to the contrary of American’s is highly centralised: collective bargaining
over such issues as wages is conducted on a federation level. However, since recent
years there is a trend of decentralisation and toward greater independence of an
individual union (Kuruvilla et al: 1993). This tendency is a part of a more complex
process of unions restructuring caused by technological change, altering
organisational structure of enterprises and growing dissatisfaction of members over
unions activities (Abrahamsson: 1993).
LO (Swedish Confederation of
Trade Unions)
LO, a major union conglomerate, encompasses 20 industrial
unions and has membership of over 2 million people (about a quarter of the entire
Sweden’s population). The federation is highly centralised and possesses significant
power over individual unions. It has authority to ensure that a willing worker can join
a union, prescribes structural organisation and boundaries within and between
unions. It is also responsible for dealings with Swedish Employers’ Confederation
(SAF) on broad economic issues (Kennedy: 1980).
TCO (Central
Organisation of Salaried Employees)
This organisation represents salaried
(white-collar) employees in both private and public sectors. It consists of 19 unions
with membership of 1.3 million people. Organisation is substantially less centralised
than LO. Its main activities are centred on training and discussions with government
over a broad socio-economic agenda. Unions within TCO are organised
predominantly (75% of members) on industrial basis (i.e. they comprise all
white-collar employers of a firm). The remainder is organised according to
occupational lines. Collective bargaining on behalf of TCO member unions is
conducted separately for private and public sectors through two specially designed
associations: PTK and TCO-OF respectively (Hammarstrom, Nilsson:
1998).
SACO (Swedish Confederation of Professional
Associations)
SACO represents those professionals with academic degrees
according to which they are split into unions (e.g. doctors, teachers, pharmacists). It
consists of 25 unions and accounts 385,000 members. Like in TCO, collective
bargaining is done via cartels, separately for state and municipal government sectors
(Hammarstrom, Nilsson: 1998).
Since 1973, employees who are members of
SACO in private sector combine their collective bargaining efforts together with TCO
private sector workers in PTK (Private Salaried Employees’ Association) (Kennedy:
1980).
3. 3 Political Unionism
Swedish unions exert
substantial political power. Apart from usual topics of wage determination, work
safety regulations and the like, Swedish unions also participate in activities of a wider
social and political character. For instance, they take responsibility for unemployment
insurance. That partly explains Sweden’s high unionisation figures: both employed
and unemployed are connected to unions (Sussens-Messerer: 1998).
This is a
contrast to unions in US and Japan, which primarily lay stress on business topics, i.e.
exemplify the branch of business unionism, whilst Scandinavian unions often referred
to political unionism. A prominent example of political unionism is Swedish
Municipal Workers’ Union, an affiliate of LO which has over 600,000 members.
Along with involvement in debating issues of income distribution and work practices,
it is vigorously engaged in promoting a ‘life reform’, stressing the importance of
entrenching gender equality not only in workplace, but in all spheres of life. Swedish
unions also fiercely defend welfare state by resisting dissemination of economic
liberalism (Higgins: 1996).
3.4 Activities of Unions
Effect of Unionisation
Known as Clubs, workplace
organisations have a responsibility to ensure operation of national contracts at the
local level. They also deal with disagreements between employers and employees.
Clubs act as agents of workers, they have an exclusive access to company information
and power to delay work if they consider certain practices unsafe (Berggren: 1995).
Since 1970s, unions are increasingly concerned with problems like quality of work
and work environment. They, aided by professionals frequently conduct various
surveys and studies aimed at measuring levels of exhaustion at work and experiences
of strain. Unions, also, initiate different pay systems such as piece-rate and fixed
wages (Korpi: 1981).
Among other union activities, in Sweden the main labour
confederation controls a substantial share of union strike funds. Additionally, unions
play an important role at facilitating plant closures and dealing with redundant
members.
Collective Bargaining and Wage Determination
Wage negotiations often take place between unions and employer organisations.
Unions then attempt to turn negotiated wage settlements into national economic
policies by making arrangements with government and employer confederations
(Blanchflower: 1992).
Wages may be negotiated on any of three levels of the
country’s bargaining system (the confederation level being the most common). In the
wage setting discussion, a substantial amount of attention is given to the very
common in Sweden issue of the wage drift (i.e. the gap between centrally negotiated
wage increases and actual changes in earnings). Several causes of the wage drift
include structural changes occurring in the workplace, rationalisation and increased
productivity (Korpi: 1981). Typically wage drift varied from 25% to 50% of the pay
rise which had been centrally established (Hammarstrom, Nilssen: 1998). Unions
adopt a strategy aimed at reducing wage disparity known as ‘solidaristic bargaining’
(Wallerstein: 1997).
3.5 Industrial Democracy
Sweden has
long been renowned as the country among the first to raise the issue of industrial
democracy. In relation to the issue, there are two main points of discussion: firstly,
work organisation and the power workers have over their jobs. Secondly, the degree
to which unions influence top management through the mechanism of collective
bargaining and representation on company boards (Schmidt: 1976; Brulin: 1995).
Furthermore, union strategy of industrial democracy stresses such problems as health
and safety at work.
The government responded to union demands by passing Act
On Co-Determination At Work, 1976. The legislation states that management should
be a joint effort by capital and labour, that is managers and union representatives
(Hammarstrom: 1998).
3.6 Recent Trends
In discussing
recent tendencies in the Swedish IR system, the main point of the argument is
decentralisation of the wage setting and the collective bargaining in general.
According to Wallerstein (1997) important changes in the workplace are those of
occupational structure, production and increased economic integration. Also, it is
suggested that decision on levels of bargaining is influenced by the rise of ‘diversified
quality production’ and ‘flexible specialisation’. Most academics agree that although
the level of wage setting differs in every round of bargaining (increasingly
decentralised as strength of worker confederations weakens), issues like advancement
of new technology, health, safety and working time arrangements, are with growing
incidence determined inside firms or factories (Wallerstein: 1997).
4.0
ROLE OF UNIONS: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
4.1 Nature and Role
The nature, structure and role of unions in the US, Sweden and Japan
differ quite remarkably. In United States, with its most liberal approach of three
examined nations toward economic management and industrial relations unions have
relatively little importance and are not highly regarded. Management is the primary
agent of employment relations with unions and government occupying secondary
positions.
To the contrary, unions in Sweden are immensely important and have
strong popular support, not only in employment relations, but also in other aspects of
life. The sophisticated labour political movement is a distinct feature in Sweden.
Unions are also influential in Japan, though not as much as in Sweden. In Japan
unions engage in politics but the process is centred on objectives of unions’ top
officials who use unions as a powerbase of political parties whereas in Sweden unions
are more representative of ordinary members. In the United States, unions retain
relatively low socio-political importance focusing primarily on practical workplace
objectives such as wage determination, amount of working hours etc. Their domain is
business unionism as opposed to Sweden’s political unionism. There are also some
traits of political unionism in Japan, trade unions shift their focus from narrow
traditional questions of workplace organisation (wages, hours) to more general
economic and social issues ranging from influence on financial decisions to strive
towards stronger solidarity amongst unions (Marshall, Briggs: 1989). They also try to
solve problems of unemployment, ageing population and overall economic stagnation
(Economist: 1999a).
4.2 Origin and Structure
In terms of
structure and origin too, unions do not greatly resemble. Japanese employees
organisations are enterprise-based, i.e. represent specific firm within the industry.
Company unions form industry federations which in turn join in nation-wide political
formations. In the United States unions are chiefly industry based (e.g. United
Automotive Workers). Most US unions belong to AFL-CIO and other co-ordinating
associations, which take part in collective bargaining concerning workplace practices.
In Sweden, unions are organised in three federations: LO, TCO and SACO according
whether union encompasses blue-collar (LO), white-collar (TCO) or professional
workers with academic education (SACO). Within each federation unions are
organised either on industrial basis or according to occupational lines.
4.3 Centralisation
Swedish and Japanese unionism is more centralised
compared to American’s. In Japan bargaining is done through industry-wide
federations of unions and in Sweden in specially designed bargaining cartels. In USA,
national unions conduct collective bargaining on major issues whereas day-to-day
management over signing and monitoring agreements with employers is responsibility
of local unions (in some cases national unions).
4.4 Unionisation
In regard to unionisation, Japan and US have relatively similar trends. In
both countries, membership is declining. In the US, membership dropped from half of
the workforce in 1970s to about a third in mid 1990s (Van Der Veen: 1995); density
dropped by 12% in ten years to 1995. In Japan density dipped by even mightier 18 per
cent : from 29 in 1985 to 24 in 1995 (Ross et al: 1998).
The decline is widely
perceived as a global phenomenon. There are different reasons for that. One of them
is the demise of radical left-wing labour movement in the western world associated
with the fall of communism in Europe and introduction of more liberal economic
policies which regard unionism detrimental to the economic growth and the main
cause of high unemployment (Economist: 1997). Other reasons include falling share
of manufacturing in the employment in wealthier nations, application of new
technology, growing ‘casualisation’ of the labour force and diminishing rates of
approval by employees of unions’ work (Worklife Report: 1997).
However, in
Scandinavia, unionism is still the main force. Membership and density are more or
less static: decline is marginal. It is especially true for Sweden where even nowadays
9 out of 10 workers are unionised. From 1985 to 1995 union density slipped by just
2% from 86 to 83 per cent (Ross et al: 1998).
It is largely due to the fact that
unions there adopt a broader agenda and enjoy tradition of popular support. The
sphere of influence is extended to promotion of egalitarianism of all sorts, from
income smoothing to gender equality. Unions administer unemployment insurance,
monitor health and safety issues (ILO: 1998).
4.5 Union Activities
Unions in the US and (to some extent) in Japan are of business nature and
wage negotiations and other workplace- related issues are their main concerns. In
contrast, Swedish unions are also mindful of making general working environment
better and strengthening industrial and economic democracy.
Labour movement
in the United States is characterised by frequent strikes as a major means of attaining
goals by unions. Swedish organised workers practically do not resort to strikes. In
Japan, negotiations between management and industrial federations after
consultations with firms across the industry is a prevailing method of resolving
problem of controversies.
Thus it is consequential to note that the very nature of
relations between labour and management in three countries contrast; in Sweden and
Japan they are co-operative whereas in America they are more
adversarial.
Moreover, settlements made in the course of collective bargaining
receive dissimilar reactions. In Sweden and Japan, industrial peace is valued by all
parties and therefore open disrupting conflicts are shunned. As a result, hours lost to
strikes are amid lowest in the world. In the US, an outcome which falls short of
unions’ expectations is exuberantly contested. Last year’s dragging strikes of GM’s
workers led by UAW and postal workers at UPS are evidence of that.
4.6 Recent Developments
For various reasons, in the United States and
Japan rates of unions approval by workers are bending (albeit with uneven pace)
downwards. Contrariwise, in Sweden unions are still in a more or less robust shape
where they remain essential stakeholders in employment relations.
Notwithstanding dissimilarities, in all presented nations there’s a drift toward
decentralisation of bargaining activities.
Finally, despite overall slide in union
density and membership, there observed an upward inclination for union membership
of employees in the public sector, one of the reasons being the universal contraction
of the public sector in the capitalist world accompanied with mounting sense of job
insecurity, although Sweden (and other Scandinavia) stand at large as an exception.
Conclusion
In this paper, the peculiarities of unions’
position in employment relations across Sweden, the United States and Japan were
discussed. Particular emphasis was placed on examination of activities, roles and
structures of unions and their role in collective bargaining in those nations. The
comparative analysis shows that although there are similarities, unions in places
examined differ remarkably and so do the industrial relations. Particular
dissimilarities are found in nature of unions in three countries, their origin and
structure, place in the national society and economy as well as in tasks and objectives
of their work. Levels of union membership also vary as do methods of organisation
and techniques of bargaining.
However, in the era of globalisation, when
industrial relations, along with capital and labour easily cross national borders,
differences become not that intense.
Collation of unions indicates that the role
of unions in Swedish employment relations is still paramount. In Japan unions are
reasonably important whilst in America unions are of secondary significance in
shaping industrial relations.
Bibliography:
Abrahamsson, B. ‘Union structural change’, Economic & Industrial
Democracy, Vol. 14, No.3, May 1996, pp. 399-421
Benson, J. ‘Labour
management during recessions: Japanese manufacturing enterprise in the 1990s’,
Industrial Relations Journal , vol. 29, No. 3, Sept. 1998 pp.
215-216
Berggren, C. ‘Sweden: A fragile but still innovative system’ in
‘Managing Together: Consultational Participation in the Workplace’, Addison Wesley
Longman, Melbourne, pp.193-205
Blanchflower, D.G. and Freeman, R.B.,
‘Unionism in the United States and Other Advanced OECD Countries’, Industrial
Relations, vol. 31 No. 1, pp.56-79, 1992, Winter
Blanpain, R. et al.
‘Technological Change and Industrial relations: an International symposium’, Bulletin
of Comparative Labour Relations, Bulletin 12 - 1983, Kluwer 1983 Deventer, p.
43
Brulin, G. ‘Sweden: Joint councils under strong unionism’ in Rodgers, J.
& Streek, W. (eds.) Works Councils Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1995
Burchill, F. ‘Labour Relations’, Macmillan 1997, pp.
186-187
Clarke, O. et al ‘Conclusion: toward a synthesis of international
and comparative experience in employment relations’ in ‘International and
Comparative Employment Relations’, Allen & Unwin, Sydney 1998,
Doeringer, P.B. et al. (eds.) ‘Industrial Relations in International
Perspective: Essays on Research and Policy’, The Macmillan Press Ltd
1981
Economist, The ‘Beer, sandwiches and statistics’, The Economist,
Jul. 12, 1997
Economist, The ‘Gang sackings’, The Economist, Nov. 14,
1998a, p. 76
Economist, The ‘Japanese employment agencies: temporary
improvements’, The Economist, Nov. 14, 1998, p. 76
Economist, The
‘Japan’s worry about work’, The Economist, Jan. 23, 1999a
Economist,
The ‘A Survey Of The Nordic Countries’, The Economist, Jan 23 1999b, pp.
9-10
Florida, R., Kenney, M. ‘Organization vs. culture: Japanese automotive
transplants in the US’, Industrial Relations Journal, No. 3, Vol. 22, 1991 pp.
184-187
Grosby, M and Easson, M (eds) ‘What Should Unions Do?’, Pluto
Press, Sydney 1992
Hammarstrom, O. Nillson, T. ‘Employment Relations in
Sweden’ in Bamber, G. et al in ‘International and Comparative Employment
Relations’, Allen & Unwin, Sydney 1998, pp. 229-231
Higgins, W.
‘Swedish Municipal Workers’ Union - A study in the new political unionism’,
Economic & Industrial Democracy, Vol. 17, No. 2, May 1996, pp.
167-197
ILO, ‘Latest Issue (Vol. 137 No.3 1998)’, International Labor
Review, WWW edition @ http://www.ilo.org/public/english/180revue/index.htm, pp.
3-5
Katz, H.C. ‘The decentralisation of collective bargaining : A literature
review and comparative analysis’, Industrial and Labor Relations Review vol. 47 No.
1, 1993 pp.3-22.
Kennedy, Th. ‘Labour Relations in Sweden’ in ‘European
Labor Relations’, Lexington 1980, Toronto, pp. 234-237
Koike, K.
‘Understanding Industrial Relations in Modern Japan’, Macmillan 1988, pp.
226-229
Korpi, W. ‘Sweden: Conflict, Power and Politics in Industrial
Relations’ in Doeringer, P. et al (ed.) ‘Industrial Relations in International
Perspective’, Macmillan 1981
Kuruvilla, S. et al ‘The development of
members’ attitudes toward their unions: Sweden and Canada’, Industrial & Labor
Relations Review, vol. 46 No. 3, 1993 Apr., pp. 503-509
Kuwahara, Y.
‘Employment relations in Japan’ in Bamber, G. et al ‘International and Comparative
Employment Relations’, Allen & Unwin, Sydney 1998, pp.
252-253
Marshall, R. Briggs, V. ‘Labor Economics’, Irwin, Homewood
1989, pp. 419-422
Miller,R.L., ‘Employee participation and contemporary
labor law in the US’, ‘Industrial Relations Journal’, 1997
Perlman, S. ‘The
Theory of the Labor Movement’ Augustus M. Kelly, New York: , 1970
Ross, P. et al ‘Appendix: Employment, economics and industrial relations:
comparative statistics’ in Barber, G. et al ‘International and Comparative
Employment Relations’, Allen & Unwin, Sydney 1998, p. 337
Schmidt, F.
‘The Democratisation of Working Life in Sweden: A Survey of Agreements,
Legislation, Experimental Activities, Research and Development Stockholm’
Tjanstemannens Centralorganisation (TCO) , 1976
Sumiya, M. ‘The
Japanese system of industrial relations’ in Doeringer, P. et al (ed.) ‘Industrial
Relations in International Perspective’, Macmillan 1981, pp.
307-308
Sussens-Messerer, V. ‘Trades union membership in decline’,
Finance Week, vol.76 No. 31, 1998 Aug 6-12, p. 22
Van Der Veen, G.
‘Union Commitment’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 16, 1995, pp.
503-504
Voos, P. ‘An economic perspective on contemporary trends in
collective bargaining’ in Voos, Paula (ed). ‘Contemporary Collective Bargaining
Madison’, Wisconsin: Industrial Relations Research Association, 1994
Voos,
P.B., ‘Economic and social justice through collective bargaining: the USA in the
coming century’, ‘Industrial Relations Journal’, 1996
Wallerstein, M. et al
‘Unions, employers’ associations, and wage-setting institutions in northern and
central Europe, 1950-1992, Industrial & Labor Relations Review, Vol. 50, No. 3,
1997 Apr. pp. 379-401
Wever, K. ‘Unions adding value: Addressing market
and social failures in the advanced industrialised countries’, International Labor
Review, vol. 136 (4), 1997 Winter
Wheeler,H.N. and McClendon,J.A.,
‘Employment relations in the United States’ Bamber, G. et al ‘International and
Comparative Employment Relations’, Allen & Unwin, Sydney 1998,
Worklife Report, ‘The global challenge to trade unions’, Worklife Report,
vol. 11, No. 1, 1997, pp. 2-4
(C) 1999 Andrei Sidorenko, Alla Sklyarenko, University of Technology, Sydney