The decline in trade union membership in a number of countries has led to concerns over a ‘representation gap’, where workers are deprived of a voice not only in regard to their workplace grievances, but also in regard to their contributions to productivity and the quality of working life. While a number of alternatives have been raised, including joint consultation and works councils, there are concerns that these alternatives may further weaken union organization by establishing rival forms of organization. This article examines the interwar experience with three types of workplace non-union employee representation in Canada, Germany, the US and the UK. Where management recognizes unions and unions actively ensure that they dominate these representation mechanisms, they can enhance union organization.
AckersP(2010) An industrial relations perspective on employee participation. In: WilkinsonAGollanPJMarchingtonM (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Participation in Organisations, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 52–75.
2.
AddisonJTSchnabelCWagnerC(2000) Nonunion representation in Germany. In: KaufmanBETarasDG (eds) Non-union Employee Representation: History, Contemporary Practice and Policy, Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, pp. 365–385.
3.
American Federation of Labour (1919) Report of the Proceedings of the 39th Annual Convention. Washington: American Federation of Labor.
4.
ArcherR(2010) Freedom, democracy and capitalism: Ethics and employee participation. In: WilkinsonAGollanPJMarchingtonM (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Participation in Organisations, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 590–608.
5.
BagwellP (1963) The Railwaymen: The History of the National Union of Railwaymen, London: George Allen and Unwin.
6.
BainGSElsheikhF (1976) Union Growth and the Business Cycle: An Econometric Analysis, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
7.
BainGSPriceR (1980) Profiles of Union Growth: A Comparative Statistical Portrait of Eight Countries, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
8.
BernsteinE (1921) The German Works Councils Act and its significance. International Labour Review1(2): 25–37.
9.
BrodyD (2001) Why no shop committees in America: A narrative history. Industrial Relations40(3): 356–376.
10.
BrodyD (2005) Labor Embattled: History, Power, Rights, Urbana/Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press.
11.
CharlesR (1973) The Development of Industrial Relations in Britain 1911–1939, London: Hutchinson.
12.
CleggHA (1961) A New Approach to Industrial Democracy, Oxford: Blackwell.
13.
CleggHA (1979) The Changing System of Industrial Relations in Great Britain, London: Basil Blackwell.
14.
CleggHA (1985) A History of British Trade Unions Since 1889, Volume II: 1911–1933, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
15.
Fairris D (1995) From Exit to Voice in Shopfloor Governance: The Case of Company Unions. Business History Review 69(4): 493–529.
16.
FoxA (1985) History and Heritage: The Social Origins of the British Industrial Relations System, London: Allen & Unwin.
17.
GodardJ(2008) Union formation. In: BlytonPBaconNFioritoJ (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Industrial Relations, London: SAGE, pp. 377–405.
18.
GollanPJPatmoreG (2006) Transporting the European social partnership model to Australia. Journal of Industrial Relations48(2): 217–257.
19.
GreenW (1925) Company unions not enough. American Federationist32(10): 873–874.
20.
GuillebaudCW (1928) The Works Council: A German Experiment in Industrial Democracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21.
HomburgH(1983) Scientific management and personnel policy in the modern German enterprise 1918–1939: The case of Siemens. In: GospelHFLittlerCR (eds) Managerial Strategies and Industrial Relations, Aldershot: Gower, pp. 137–156.
22.
JacobyS (1997) Modern Manors: Welfare Capitalism since the New Deal, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
23.
JenkinsJBlytonP(2008) Works councils. In: BlytonPBaconNFioritoJ (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Industrial Relations, London: SAGE, pp. 346–373.
24.
KaufmanBE (2000) The case for the company union. Labor History41(3): 321–351.
25.
KaufmanBE (2004) The Global Evolution of Industrial Relations: Events, Ideas and the IIRA, Geneva: ILO.
26.
KaufmanBETarasDG(2000) Introduction. In: KaufmanBETarasDG (eds) Non-union Employee Representation: History, Contemporary Practice and Policy, Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, pp. 3–18.
27.
MacEachernG (1985) An Autobiography: The Story of a Cape Breton Radical, Sydney, Nova Scotia: University College of Cape Breton Press.
28.
McPherson WH (1935) Collaboration between management and employees in German factories. PhD thesis, The University of Chicago, USA.
29.
MizrahiS (2002) Workers’ participation in decision-making process and firm stability. British Journal of Industrial Relations40(4): 689–708.
30.
MosesJA (1982a) Trade Unionism in Germany from Bismark to Hitler 1869–1933, Volume One: 1869–1918, London: George Prior Publishers.
31.
MosesJA (1982b) Trade Unionism in Germany from Bismark to Hitler 1869–1933, Volume One: 1919–1939, London: George Prior Publishers.
32.
NelsonD(2000) The AFL and the challenge of company unionism, 1915–1937. In: KaufmanBETarasDG (eds) Non-union Employee Representation: History, Contemporary Practice and Policy, Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, pp. 61–75.
33.
PatmoreG (2006) Employee representation plans in the United States, Canada and Australia. Labor3(2): 41–65.
34.
PatmoreG (2007) Employee representation plans at the Minnequa Steelworks, Pueblo, Colorado, 1915–1942. Business History49(6): 844–847.
35.
PatmoreGReesJ (2008) Employee publications and employee representation plans: The case of Colorado Fuel and Iron, 1915–1942. Management & Organizational History3(3/4): 257–272.
36.
ReesJ (2010) Representation and Rebellion: The Rockefeller Plan at the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company, 1914–1942, Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Press.
37.
SchneiderM (1989) Klein Geschichte der Gewerkschaften: Ihre Entwicklung in Deutschland von den Anfängen bis Heute, Bonn: Dietz.
38.
UK Ministry of Labour (1923) Report on the Establishment and Progress of Joint Industrial Councils, London: HMSO.
39.
WebbS (1923) The British labour movement and the Industrial Depression. International Labour Review7(2/3): 209–229.
