This paper, drawing on interviews conducted in 1989 and 1990 with directors nominated by unions to American corporate boards of directors, shows that union choices in the establishment of board representation in the 1980s reflected union strategy and structure. Those choices, in turn, established conditions that affected the ways in which representation influenced governance. The institutional environment strongly militated against the emergence of interest representation in the boardroom; only an unusual constellation of choices was likely to lead to such pluralist deliberation. The strategic choices of unions were more likely to leave undisturbed the board's traditional function as a vehicle for overseeing shareholders' investment. The effectiveness of the oversight depended further on unions' choices in the establishment of board representation plans, selection of directors, and level of support for directors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AronowitzStanley. 1988. “Review of The Transformation of American Industrial Relations.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 41, No. 3, pp. 442–45.
2.
ArthurJeffrey B., and SmithSuzanne Konzelmann. 1994. “The Transformation of Industrial Relations in the American Steel Industry.” Chapter 4 in VoosPaula B., ed., Contemporary Collective Bargaining in the Private Sector. Madison, Wis.: Industrial Relations Research Association, pp. 135–80.
3.
BankJohn, and JonesKen. 1977. Worker Directors Speak. Westmead, England: Gower.
4.
BatstoneEricFernerAnthony, and TerryMichael. 1983. Unions on the Board: An Experiment in Industrial Democracy. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
5.
BeizerMichael H.1994. “The Motor Carrier Industry: Truckers and Teamsters Under Siege.” Chapter 7 in VoosPaula B., ed., Contemporary Collective Bargaining in the Private Sector. Madison, Wis.: Industrial Relations Research Association, pp. 259–302.
6.
BrennerMichael, ed. 1981. Social Method and Social Life. London: Academic Press.
7.
BurrBarry B.1993. “Union Tries for Board Seats.”Pensions and Investments, Vol. 21, No. 8, pp. 2, 38.
8.
CappelliPeter. 1985a. “Theory Construction in IR and Some Implications for Research.”Industrial Relations, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 90–112.
9.
CappelliPeter. 1985b. “Competitive Pressures and Labor Relations in the Airline Industry.”Industrial Relations, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 316–38.
10.
CowanAlison Leigh. 1993. “Board Seat Promised to Steel Union.”New York Times, August 2, p. D1.
11.
FraserSteve. 1983. “Dress Rehearsal for the New Deal: Shop Floor Insurgents, Political Elites, and Industrial Democracy in the Amalgamated Clothing Workers.” In FrischMichael H. and WalkowitzDaniel J., eds., Working-Class America: Essays on Labor, Community, and American Society. Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press, pp. 212–55.
12.
FurlongJames C.1977. Labor in the Boardroom: The Peaceful Revolution. Princeton: Dow Jones.
13.
GoodsteinJerryGautamKanak, and BoekerWarren. 1994. “The Effects of Board Size and Diversity on Strategic Change.”Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 241–50.
14.
HammerTove H.CurrallSteven C., and SternRobert N.. 1991. “Worker Representation on Boards of Directors: A Study of Competing Roles.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 661–80.
15.
HammerTove H., and SternRobert N.. 1986. “A YoYo Model of Cooperation: Union Participation in Management at the Rath Packing Company.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 337–49.
16.
HermanEdward. 1981. Corporate Control, Corporate Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
HoerrJohn P.1988. And The Wolf Finally Came: The Decline of the American Steel Industry. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
18.
JohnsonJonathan L.DailyCatherine M., and EllstrandAlan E.. 1996. “Boards of Directors: A Review and Research Agenda.”Journal of Management, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 409–38.
19.
KochanThomas A.1995. “Using the Dunlop Report to Achieve Mutual Gains.”Industrial Relations, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 350–66.
20.
KochanThomas A.KatzHarry C., and McKersieRobert B.. 1986. The Transformation of American Industrial Relations. New York: Basic Books.
21.
Labor Research Review.1985. “The Hyatt-Clark ESOP: An Interview with Jim May.”Vol. 1, No. 6, pp. 25–33.
22.
LorschJay W., with MacIverElizabeth. 1989. Pawns or Potentates: The Reality of America's Corporate Boards. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
23.
MaceMyles L.1986. Directors: Myth and Reality, 2nd ed.Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
24.
OrtsEric W.1992. “Beyond Shareholders: Interpreting Corporate Constituency Statutes.”George Washington Law Review, Vol. 61, No. 1, pp. 14–135.
25.
PettigrewAndrew, and McNultyTerry. 1995. “Power and Influence in and Around the Boardroom.”Human Relations, Vol. 48, No. 8, pp. 845–73.
26.
SharpRonald M.1989. “Codetermination and Its Application in the United States: A Postmortem.”Labor Law Journal, Vol. 40, No. 6, pp. 323–37.
27.
SilvermanDavid. 1993. Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text, and Interaction. London: Sage.
28.
SmabyBeverly. 1988. “Labor-Management Cooperation at Eastern Air Lines.”Washington, D.C.: U.S. Bureau of Labor-Management Cooperation, U.S. GPO.
29.
SternRobert N.1988. “Participation by Representation: Workers on Boards of Directors in the U.S. and Abroad.”Work and Occupations, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 396–422.
30.
StraussGeorge. 1995. “Is the New Deal System Collapsing? With What Might It Be Replaced?”Industrial Relations, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 329–49.
31.
UseemMichael. 1984. The Inner Circle: Large Corporations and the Rise of Business Political Activity in the U.S. and U.K.New York: Oxford University Press.
32.
UseemMichael. 1993. Executive Defense: Shareholder Power and Corporate Reorganization. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
33.
VermaAnil, and Cutcher-GershenfeldJoel. 1993. “Joint Governance in the Workplace: Beyond Union-Management Cooperation and Worker Participation.” In KaufmanBruce E. and KleinerMorris M., eds., Employee Representation: Alternatives and Future Directions. Madison, Wis.: Industrial Relations Research Association, pp. 197–234.
34.
WeverKirsten R.1989. “Toward a Structural Account of Union Participation in Management: The Case of Western Airlines.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 600–609.
