This analysis of 1953–81 Department of Labor strike data demonstrates that strike samples selected on the basis of various size criteria (ranging from 25 or more workers involved to 5,000 or more workers involved) are not representative of all U.S. strikes. “Small” strikes are found to differ significantly from “large” strikes, whatever the size criterion, in terms of industry, strike issue, region of the country, and contract status. The authors question the generalizability of findings of strike research using post-1981 Department of Labor data, which have been collected using an inclusion criterion of 1,000 or more workers involved.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AshenfelterOrleyJohnsonGeorge1969“Bargaining Theory, Trade Unions, and Industrial Strike Activity.”American Economic Review, Vol. 59, No. 2, pp. 35–49.
2.
DiltsDavid1986“Strike Activity in the United States: An Analysis of Stocks and Flows.”Journal of Labor Research, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 187–99.
3.
EdwardsP. K.1983“The End of American Strike Statistics.”British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 21, No. 3, p. 39.
4.
FarberHenry S.1978“Bargaining Theory, Wage Outcome, and the Occurrence of Strikes: An Econometric Analysis.”American Economic Review, Vol. 68, No. 3, pp. 262–71.
5.
FlahertySean1983“Contract Status and the Economic Determinants of Strike Activity.”Industrial Relations, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 20–33.
6.
HirschBarry T.AddisonJohn T.1986The Economic Analysis of Unions: New Approaches and Evidence. Boston: Allen & Unwin.
7.
KaufmanBruce1982“The Determinants of Strikes in the United States, 1900–1977.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 473–90.
8.
MaddalaG. S.1977Econometrics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
9.
MauroMartin J.1982“Strikes as a Result of Imperfect Information.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 522–38.
10.
PaldamMartinPedersenPeter J.1982“The Macroeconomic Strike Model: A Study of Seventeen Countries, 1948–75.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 504–20.
11.
RederMelvin W.NeumannGeorge R.1980“Conflict and Contract: The Case of Strikes.”Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 88, No. 5, pp. 867–86.
12.
ShalevMichael1980“Trade Unionism and Economic Analysis: The Case of Industrial Conflict.”Journal of Labor Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 133–73.
13.
SkeelsJack W.1982“The Economic and Organizational Basis of Early United States Strikes, 1900–1948.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 491–503.
14.
SkeelsJack W.1971“Measures of U.S. Strike Activity.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 515–25.
15.
SnyderDavid1977“Early North American Strikes: A Re-interpretation.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 325–40.
16.
SternRobert N.1978“Methodological Issues in Quantitative Strike Analysis.”Industrial Relations, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 32–42.
17.
TracyJoseph S.1986“An Investigation into the Determinants of U.S. Strike Activity.”American Economic Review, Vol. 76, No. 3, pp. 423–36.
18.
TroyLeoSheflinNeil1985Union Sourcebook. West Orange, N.J.: Industrial Relations Data and Information Services.
19.
United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis1984Business Conditions Digest, Vol. 24, No. 12. Washington, D.C.
20.
United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis1955–83Survey of Current Business. Washington, D.C.
21.
United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics1982Work Stoppages Historical File 1953–1981, Private and Public Sector Strikes. Washington, D.C.
22.
United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics1980Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2070. Washington, D.C. December.
