Although unions in Brazil are marginally effective in defining the employer-employee relationship, confidence in unions is high and exhibits a positive trend over time. A logistic regression model based on the Latinobarometer data series (1996–2009) empirically verifies that unions’ state embeddedness really does matter in explaining confidence in unions in Brazil (i.e., confidence in government, especially during the Lula presidency, has a significant positive effect). Moreover, people who have a negative perception of their personal economic situations and are less trustful of others are more inclined to have confidence in unions.
Não obstante o efeito bem limitado e marginal dos sindicatos na determinação das relações entre o patrão e o empregado, se mantem alto a confiança nos sindiatos e essa confiança mostra uma tendência positiva no decorrer do tempo. Um modelo de regressão logística baseado no série de dados Latinobarómetro (1996–2009) verifica empiricalmente que a integração dos sindicatos no Estado importa para explicar essa confiança neles, dado que a confiança no governo, sobretudo durante a presidência do Lula, tem tido um efeito positivo. Além disso, as pessoas cuja percepção da sua situação econômica pessoal seja negativa e que tenha menos confiança nos outros inclinam mais para confiar nos sindicatos.
AntunesRicardo (ed.). 2007Riqueza e miseria do trabalho no Brasil. São Paulo: Boitempo Editorial.
2.
AvdagicSabina2005 “State-labor relations in East Central Europe: explaining variations in union effectiveness.” Socioeconomic Review3 (1): 25–53.
3.
BachmannReinhardvan WittenlostuijnArjen2006Analyzing Inter-organizational Relationship in the Context of Their Business Systems: A Conceptual Framework for Comparative Research. Vienna: Institute for Advanced Studies.
4.
BarberBernard1983The Logic and Limits of Trust. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
5.
BerggrenNiclasElinderMikaelJordahlHenrik2007Trust and Growth: A Shaky Relationship. IFN Working Paper 705. Stockholm: IFN.
6.
BeugelsdijkSjoerdde GrootHenri L. F.van SchaikAnton B. T. M.2004 “Trust and economic growth: a robustness analysis.” Oxford Economic Papers56: 118–134.
7.
BoitoArmando2007 “Class relations in Brazil’s new neoliberal phase.” Latin American Perspectives34: 115–131.
8.
BoitoArmandoMarcelinoPaula2011 “Decline in unionism? An analysis of new waves of strikes in Brazil.” Latin American Perspectives38: 62–73.
9.
BoothJohn A.Bayer RichardP.1998 “Civil society, political capital, and democratization in Central America.” Journal of Politics60: 780–800.
10.
BoxallPeterHaynesPeter1997 “Strategy and trade union effectiveness in a neo-liberal environment.” British Journal of Industrial Relations35: 576–591.
11.
BradachJeffrey L.EcclesRobert G.1989 “Price, authority, and trust: from ideal types to plural forms.” Annual Review of Sociology15: 97–118.
12.
CardosoAlberto Moreira2003A decada neoliberal e a crise dos sindicatos no Brasil. São Paulo: Boitempo Editorial.
13.
CardosoAlberto M.GindinJulián2009Industrial Relations and Collective Bargaining: Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico Compared. ILO Working Paper 5. Geneva: ILO.
14.
CellaGian Primo1999Il sindacato. Roma: Laterza.
15.
ColemanJohn1990The Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
16.
ColenCélia Mara Ladeia2010 “As covarientes da confiança política na América Latina.” Opinião Pública16 (1): 1–27.
17.
CookMaria Lorena1998 “Toward flexible industrial relations? Neo-liberalism, democracy, and labor reform in Latin America.” Industrial Relations37: 331–336.
18.
CookMaria Lorena2007The Politics of Labor Reform in Latin America: Between Flexibility and Rights. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
19.
CostaArthur Trinidade M.2011 “Violências e conflitos intersubjetivos no Brasil contemporâneo.” Caderno CRH24: 353–365.
20.
DasguptaParthaSergaldinIsmail2000Social Capital: A Multifaceted Perspective. Washington, DC: World Bank.
21.
DIEESE (Departamento Intersindical de Estatística e Estudos Socioeconômicos)1997 “O impacto recente das transformações do mundo do trabalho sobre as contrataçoes coletivas.” MS, São Paulo.
22.
DruckGraçaFrancoTania (eds.). 2007A preda da ração social do trabalho: Terceirização e precarização. São Paulo: Boitempo Editorial.
23.
ECLAC (Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean)2011Social Panorama of Latin America 2011. Santiago: ECLAC.
24.
FaustoBoris2012 “O Brasil de Lula, segundo Perry Anderson.” Novos Estudos92 (March): 23–33.
25.
FernerAntonyHymanRichard (eds.). 1992Industrial Relations in the New Europe. Oxford: Blackwell.
26.
FlynnPeter2007 “Brasil and Lula, 2005: crisis, corruption. and change in political perspective.” Third World Quarterly26: 1221–1267.
27.
FrangiLorenzo2012 “Variedade de capitalismo e gestão de recursos humanos: o caso das filiais de três multinacionais no Brasil.” Economia Global e Gestão17(1): 83–102.
28.
FrangiLorenzoSilva de JesusSelma Cristina2011 “Jóvenes y mujeres en el mercado de trabajo brasileño: la vivencia desigual de precarización del trabajo.” Nuestramerica1 (1): 105–140.
29.
GalvãoAndreia2007Neoliberalismo e reforma trabalhista no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Revan/FAPESP.
30.
GiddensAnthony1990The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
31.
GlaeserEdwardLaibsonDavidScheinkmanJoséSoutterChristine2000 “Measuring trust.” Quarterly Journal of Economics115: 811–846.
32.
HadeniusAxel2001Institutions and Democratic Citizenship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33.
HarperRosalyn2002The Measurement of Social Capital in the United Kingdom. London: Office for National Statistics.
34.
HoellRobert C.2004 “The effect of interpersonal trust and participativeness on union member commitment.” Journal of Business and Psychology19 (2): 161–167.
35.
HymanRichard2007 “How can trade unions act strategically?” Transfer: European Review of Labor and Research13: 193–210.
JardimMaria A. Chaves2009 “‘Domesticação’ e/ou ‘moralização do capitalismo’ no governo Lula: inclusão social via mercado e via fundos de pensão.” Dados52 (1): 123–159.
38.
KaufmanBruce E.1997 “Labor markets and employment regulation: the view of the ‘old’ institutionalists,” pp. 11–55 in KaufmanBruce E.(ed.), Government Regulation of the Employment Relationship. Madison, WI: Industrial Relations Research Association.
39.
KeeleLuke2007 “Social capital, government performance, and the dynamics of trust in government.” American Journal of Political Science51: 241–254.
40.
KleinbaumDavid G.KleinMitchel2002Logistic Regression. New York: Springer.
41.
LipsetSeymour M.SchneiderWilliam1983The Confidence Gap. New York: The Free Press.
42.
LopesDenise M.2004 “Para pensar a confiança e a cultura política na América Latina.” Opinião Pública10 (1): 162–187.
43.
Machado da SilvaLuiz Antonio2010 “Violência urbana, segurança pública e favelas—O caso do Rio de Janeiro atual.” Caderno CRH23: 283–300.
44.
MarshallAlfred1961Principles of Economics. 9th edition.London: Macmillan.
45.
McKnightHarrison D.CummingsLarry L.ChervanyNorman L.1998 “Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships.” Academy of Management Review23: 473–490.
46.
McNultyPaul J.1980The Origins and Development of Labor Economics: A Chapter in the History of Social Thought. Cambridge: MIT Press.
47.
MemoliVincenzo2013 “Responsiveness,” in MorlinoLeonardoPianaDanielaRanioloFrancesco (eds.), La qualità della democrazia in Italia 1992–2012. p.233-249.Bologna: Il Mulino.
48.
Menezes-FilhoNaercioZylberstajnHelioChahadJosé P.PazelloElaine2005 “Unions and the economic performance of Brazilian establishment,” in Peter KuhnMarquezGustavo (eds.), What Difference Do Unions Make? Their Impact on the Productivity and Wages in Latin America. p. 77-100.Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank.
49.
MorganAntonySwannCatherine2004Social Capital for Health: Issues of Definition, Measurement, and Links to Health. London: Health Development Agency.
50.
MullerEdward N.SeligsonMitchell A.1994 “Civic culture and democracy: the question of causal relationships.” American Political Science Review88: 635–654.
51.
MurilloMaría VictoriaSchrankAndrew2010 “Labor organizations and their role in the era of political and economic reforms,” pp. 247–268 in ScartasciniCarlosSteinErnestoTommasiMariano (eds.), How Democracy Works: Political Institutions, Actors, and Arenas in Latin American Policymaking. Cambridge: Inter-American Development Bank/David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at Harvard University.
OuchiWilliam G.1980 “Markets, bureaucracies, and clans.” Administrative Science Quarterly25: 129–141.
54.
PaxtonPamela1999 “Is social capital declining in the United States? A multiple indicator assessment.” American Journal of Sociology105: 88–127.
55.
PutnamRobert1993Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
56.
RennóLucio R.2001 “Confinaça interpessoal e comportamento pólitico: microfundamentos da teoria do capital social na América Latina.” Opinião Pública7 (1): 33–59.
57.
RothsteinBoStolleDietlind2008 “The state and social capital: an institutional theory of generalized trust.” Comparative Politics40: 441–459.
58.
RouillardJacques2009L’expérience syndical au Québec: ses rapports avec l’état, la nation et l’opinion publique. Montreal: VLB Editeur.
59.
SantanaMarco Aurelio1999 “Política e história em disputa: o ‘novo sindicalismo’ e a idéia de ruptura com o passado,” in RodriguesI. J.(ed.), O novo sindicalismo: Vinte ános depois. Petrópolis: Vozes/Educ/Unitrabalho.
60.
SchneiderBen Ross2009 “Hierarchical market economies and varieties of capitalism in Latin America.” Journal of Latin American Studies41: 553–578.
61.
SeligsonAmber L.1999 “Civic association and democratic participation in Central America: a test of Putnam’s thesis.” Comparative Political Studies32: 342–362.
62.
SilvaSidney J. da2001 “Companeiros servidores: o vanço do sindicalismo do setor público na CUT.” Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais16 (46): 130–146.
63.
SmildeDavidHellingerDaniel (eds.). 2011Venezuela’s Bolivarian Democracy. Participation, Politics, and Culture under Chavez. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
64.
SorokaStuartWlezienChristophe2010Degrees of Democracy: Politics, Public Opinion, and Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
65.
TarrowSidney1996 “Making social science work across space and time: a critical reflection on Robert Putnam’s Making Democracy Work.” American Political Science Review90: 389–397.
66.
TeixeiraRodrigo AlvesPintoEduardo Costa2012 “A economia política dos governos FHC, Lula e Dilma: dominância financeira, bloco no poder e desenvolvimento econômico.” Economia e Sociedade21: 909–941.
67.
UslanerEric M.1999a “Trust but verify: social capital and moral behavior.” Social Science Information38:29–56.
68.
UslanerEric M.1999b “Morality plays: social capital and moral behavior in Anglo-American democracies,” pp. 197–221 in Van DethJ.MaraffiM.NewtonK.WhiteleyP. (eds.), Social Capital and European Democracy. London: Routledge.
69.
WorchelPhillip1979 “Trust and distrust,” pp. 174–187 in AustinWilliam G.WorchelStephen (eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
70.
YouJong-Sung2005Inequality and Corruption as Correlates of Social Trust: Fairness Matters More Than Similarity. Working Paper 29. Cambridge: Hauser Center and Kennedy School of Government.
71.
ZakPaul J.KnackStephen2001 “Trust and growth.” Economic Journal111 (470): 295–321.
