Many recent studies (Danford, Richardson, Stewart, Tailby, & Upchurch, 2005; Eaton, Rubinstein, & Kochnan, 2008; Geary, 2008; Harrisson, Roy, & Haines III, 2009; Jenkins, 2007; Kochan, Eaton, McKersie, & Adler, 2009; McGrath, 1984; Roche, 2009) have investigated the phenomenon “mutual gains” “coalition” or “partnership”, and the most important issue addressed in the literature has been whether the union gains from cooperating with the management or contrary loses their bargaining position.. There are a few thorough case studies describing how close participation can work, but, as Rubinstein (2001) states, there is little theoretical or empirical work devoted to looking-in-depth at the impact of partnership arrangements on local union strategy and leadership. This article will investigate challenges with labor-management partnership in one company operating in two different systems of industrial relations
The empirical material is a single case-study of a Norwegian company operating in a tradition of strong labor-management partnership, as more common in coordinated economies than in liberal economies (Hyman, 2001). The particular company has had union representatives in the board since the 1950ies, and the labor union has a strong position in collective bargaining, negotiation, strategically processes and development projects. In 2002, the company established a plant in Canada with identical technology, market, customers and products as the Norwegian plant. The idea was also to establish similar models of organization, leadership and industrial relations as in Norway. However, the industrial relations in a Canadian context are rather different. The article investigates the challenges, obstacles and mutual learning process when trying to translate a specific practice from one system to another.
Literature
Danford, A., Richardson, M., Stewart, P., Tailby, S., & Upchurch, M. (2005). Workplace Partnership and Employee Voice in the UK: Comparative Case Studies of Union Strategy and Worker Experience. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 26(4), 593-620.
Eaton, A. E., Rubinstein, S., & Kochnan, T. (2008). Balancing Acts: Dynamics of a Union Coalition in a Labor Management Partnership. Industrial Relations, 47(1).
Geary, J. (2008). Do Unions Benefit from Working in Partnership with Employers? Evidence from Ireland. Industrial Relations, 47(4), 530.
Harrisson, D., Roy, M., & Haines III, V. (2009). Union Representatives in Labour-Management Partnerships: Roles and Identities in Flux. British journal of industrial relations.
Hyman, R. (2001). Understanding European trade unionism. . London: Sage Publications.
Jenkins, J. (2007). Gambling partners? The risky outcomes of workplace partnerships. Work Employment Society, 21(4), 635-652.
Kochan, T. A., Eaton, A. E., McKersie, R. B., & Adler, P. S. (2009). Healing Together. The Labor-Management Partnership at Kaiser Permanente. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Eglewood Cliff: NJ: Prentice Hall.
Roche, W. K. (2009). Who gains from workplace partnership? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(1), 1-33.
Rubinstein, S. A. (2001). A different kind of union: Balancing co-management and representation. Industrial Relations, 40(2), 163.