Indirect worker participation in corporate policy decisions is occurring through worker and union representation on boards of directors and supervisory boards in Europe, Australia, and the United States. Evidence suggests that this form of representation is problematic because of the structure of corporate boards, selection and training of worker directors, dual loyalty-role conflict problems, confidentiality constraints, and communication with constituents. In the United States, worker directorships arise at the corporate level because of concession bargaining and employee ownership. However, U.S. corporate and labor laws raise questions over the legal status of union board memberships. Several U.S. cases are compared with foreign experiences. The assessment of the effectiveness of worker directorships as a form of participation varies dramatically based on the orientations of researchers as unitarist, pluralist, or conflict theorists.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ABROMEIT, H.
(1986) British Steel: An Industry Between the State and the Private Sector. New York: St. Martin's.
2.
ANTON, F.
(1977) “Worker directors and company law.”Labour Gazette11 (November): 495-500.
3.
BANK, J.
(1977) “The worker director and role conflict.”Labour Gazette11 (November): 501-504.
4.
BANK, J.
and K. JONES (1977) Worker Directors Speak. Westmead: Gower.
5.
BATSTONE, E.
and P. L. DAVIES (1976) Industrial Democracy: European Experience. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
6.
BATSTONE, E.
, A. FERNER, and M. TERRY (1983) Unions on the Board. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
7.
BENELLI, G.
, C. LODERER, and T. LYS (1987) “Labor participation in corporate policy making decisions: W. Germany's experience with co-determination.”J. of Business60 (October): 353-376.
8.
BERMAN, P.
(1987) “We are still saying hello to each other.”Forbes139 (May 18): 94-102.
9.
BRANNEN, P.
(1983a) “Worker directors—an approach to analysis: the case of the British Steel Corporation,” pp. 121-138 in C. Crouch and F. Heller (eds.) International Yearbook of Organizational Democracy, Vol. 1. Chichester: John Wiley.
10.
BRANNEN, P.
(1983b) Authority and Participation in Industry. New York: St. Martin's.
11.
BRANNEN, P.
, E. BATSTONE, D. FATCHETT, and P. WHITE (1975) The Worker Directors: A Sociology of Participation. London: Hutchinson.
12.
Bureau of National Affairs
(1987) Employee Ownership Plans. Washington, DC: Author.
13.
CHANDURI, K. K.
(1984) “Participation in Indian society.”Int. Social Sci. J.36 (2): 255-270.
14.
CHELL, E.
(1983) “Political perspectives and worker participation at board level: the British experience,” pp. 487-504 in C. Crouch and F. Heller (eds.) International Yearbook of Organizational Democracy, Vol. 1. Chichester: John Wiley.
15.
CHELL, E.
and D. COX (1979) “Worker directors and collective bargaining.”Industrial Relations J.10 (Autumn): 25-31.
16.
CLEGG, S.
(1979) “Employee participation in Australia: the new legitimacy.”Social Alternatives1: 59-65.
17.
CONRAD, A.
(1984) “The supervision of corporate management: a comparison of developments in the European Community and U.S. law.”Michigan Law Rev.82 (5-6): 1459-1488.
18.
COSTELLO, M.
(1983) “Ireland's experiment with worker directors.”Personnel Management15 (October): 54-58.
19.
DACHLER, P.
and B. WILPERT (1978) “Conceptual dimensions and boundaries of participation in organizations: a critical evaluation.”Admin. Sci. Q.23 (March): 1-39.
20.
DUBLER, R.
(1985) Worker Directors in New South Wales Enterprises. Sidney: Department of Industrial Relations, University of Sidney.
21.
ENGELSTAD, P.
and T. QVALE (1977) Understanding and Influence in Board of Directors (T. H. Hammer, trans.).
22.
FAIRLAMB, D.
(1984) “Labor-business battle in the EEC.”Dun's Business Monthly123 (May): 79-89.
23.
FERGUSON, T.
and J. GAAL (1984) “Codetermination: a fad or future in America.”Employee Relations Law J.10 (Autumn): 176-199.
24.
GREENBERG, E. S.
(1975) “The consequences of worker participation: a clarification of the literature.”Social Sci. Q.56 (September): 191-210.
25.
HAMER, B.
(1981) “Serving two masters: union representation on corporate boards of directors.”Columbia Law Rev.81 (April): 639-661.
26.
HAMMER, T. H.
and R. N. STERN (1986) “A yo-yo model of union-management cooperation at the Rath Packing Company.”Industrial and Labor Relations Rev.39 (April): 337-349.
27.
Harvard Journal of Legislation (1977) “European codetermination: origins in Germany, present practices in Europe and applicability to the U.S.” Vol. 11: 949-987.
28.
IDE International Research Group
(1981) Industrial Democracy in Europe. Oxford: Clarendon.
29.
JAIN, H.
and A. GILES (1985) “Worker participation in Western Europe: implications for North America.”Relations Industrielles40: 747-772.
30.
KUHN, J.
and I. BERG (1964) “Bargaining and work rule disputes.”Social Research31 (Winter): 466-481.
31.
LEVITAN, S.
and C. JOHNSON (1983) “Labor and management: the illusion of cooperation.”Harvard Business Rev. (September-October): 8-16.
32.
MEEK, C.
, W. WOODWORTH, and W. G. DYER, Jr. (1988) Managing by the Numbers: Absentee Owners and the Decline of American Industry. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
33.
MURPHY, T.
and D. WALSH (1982) The Worker Director and His Impact on the Enterprise in Seven Irish Companies. Dublin: Irish Productivity Centre.
34.
OGDEN, S. G.
(1982) “Trade unions, industrial democracy and collective bargaining.”Sociology16 (November): 544-563.
35.
PASIC, N.
, S. GROZDANIC, and M. REDEVIC (1982) Workers' Management in Yugoslavia: Recent Trends and Developments. Geneva: ILO.
36.
POOLE, M.
(1986) “Participation through representation: a review of constraints and conflicting pressures,” in R. Stern and S. McCarthy (eds.) International Yearbook of Organizational Democracy, Vol. 3. Chichester: John Wiley.
37.
QVALE, T. U.
(1979) “Industrial democracy in Norway: experience from the board room approach.”J. of General Management5 (Autumn): 37-45.
38.
RAMSAY, H.
(1980) “Phantom participation: patterns of power and conflict.”Industrial Relations J.11 (July/August): 46-59.
39.
RONEN, S.
and D. WATARZ (1982) “Who's that knocking on the board room door? Worker participation on boards of directors of U.S. companies—A trend for the future?” Presented at the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, New York.
40.
SCHULLER, T.
(1985) Democracy at Work. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
41.
SILVERMAN, D.
(1970) The Theory of Organizations. London: Heinemann.
42.
STERN, R. N.
and T. H. HAMMER (1978) “Buying your job: factors affecting the success or failure of employee acquisition attempts.”Human Relations31 (December): 1101-1117.
43.
STEUER, R.
(1977) “Employee representation on the board: industrial democracy or interlocking directorate?”Columbia J. of Transnational Law16: 253-294.
44.
STONE, K.
(1988) “Labor and the corporate structure: changing conceptions and emerging possibilities.”University of Chicago Law Rev.55 (Winter): 73-173.
45.
STRAUSS, G.
(1982) “Worker participation in management: an international perspective,” pp. 173-265 in B. Staw and L. Cummings (eds.) Research in Organizational Behavior. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
46.
TAYLOR, D.
and M. W. SNELL (1986) “The post office experiment: an analysis of industrial democracy meetings,” pp. 75-102 in R. Stern and S. McCarthy (eds.) International Yearbook of Industrial Democracy, Vol. 3. Chichester: John Wiley.
47.
University of Pennsylvania Law Review
(1982) “An economic and legal analysis of union representation on corporate boards of directors.” Vol. 130: 919-956.
48.
WILPERT, B.
(1984) “Participation in organizations: evidence from international comparative research.”Int. Social Sci. J.36 (2): 355-366.
49.
WOODWORTH, W.
(1986) “The blue collar boardroom: worker directors and corporate governance.”New Management3 (Winter): 53-57.
50.
Yale Law Journal (1982) “Labor unions in the boardroom: an antitrust dilemma.”92 (November): 106-127.
