Since both ‘conflict and co-operation are at the heart of employment relations’, unions need to strike a balance between mobilizing workers against employers and ‘social dialogue’ when communicating with members and the public. Drawing on a case study of unions and grassroots communication on Facebook during sector collective bargaining, this article develops a framework of politico-communicative logics that inform the social media strategies of unions and their grassroots: a logic of mobilization and a logic of settlement. These logics are reflected in how unions and grassroots engage with followers, their choice of words and the topics they address. These theoretical developments on politico-communicative logics on Facebook open up the door for further studies of intra-organizational union communication in an increasingly digitalized world.
AndersenSKHansenN WMadsenJS, et al. (2021) Employment relations in Denmark. In: BamberGJCookeFLDoellgastV, et al. (eds) International and Comparative Employment Relations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 213–238.
2.
AndreottaMNugrohoRHurlstoneMJ, et al. (2019) Analyzing social media data: a mixed-methods framework combining computational and qualitative text analysis. Behavior Research Methods51(4): 1766–1781.
3.
ArnholtzJRefslundB (2019) Active enactment and virtuous circles of employment relations: how Danish unions organised the transnationalised Copenhagen Metro Construction Project. Work, Employment and Society33(4): 682–699.
4.
AtzeniM (2009) Searching for injustice and finding solidarity? A contribution to the mobilisation theory debate. Industrial Relations Journal40(1): 5–16.
5.
BarnesABalnaveNThornthwaiteL, et al. (2019) Social media: union communication and member voice. In: HollandPTeicherJDonagheyJ (eds) Employee Voice at Work (Work, Organization, and Employment). Singapore: Springer, 91–111.
6.
BehrensMPekarekA (2020) Divided we stand? Coalition dynamics in the German union movement. British Journal of Industrial Relations59: 503–531.
7.
BélangerJEdwardsP (2007) The conditions promoting compromise in the workplace. British Journal of Industrial Relations45(4): 713–734.
8.
BlodgettBTapiaA (2011) Do avatars dream of electronic picket lines? The blurring of work and play in virtual environments. Information Technology and People24(1): 26–45.
9.
BrayMBuddJMacneilJ (2019) The many meanings of co-operation in the employment relationship. British Journal of Industrial Relations58(1): 114–141.
10.
BrysonAGomezRWillmanP (2010) Online social networking and trade union membership: what the Facebook phenomenon truly means for labor organizers. Labor History51(1): 41–53.
11.
BurgessPSymonG (2013) Collective bargaining unity and fragmentation in Germany: two concepts of trade unionism?Economic and Industrial Democracy34(4): 719–739.
12.
ButtigiegDMDeerySJIversonRD (2008) Union mobilization: a consideration of the factors affecting the willingness of union members to take industrial action. British Journal of Industrial Relations46(2): 248–267.
13.
CarneiroBCostaHA (2020) Digital unionism as a renewal strategy? Social media use by trade union confederations. Journal of Industrial Relations64: 26–51.
14.
CleggH (1976) Trade Unionism Under Collective Bargaining: A Theory Based on Comparisons of Six Countries. Oxford: Blackwell.
15.
CockfieldS (2005) Union renewal, union strategy and technology. Critical Perspectives on International Business 1(2/3):93–108.
16.
DarlingtonR (2001) Union militancy and left-wing leadership on London Underground. Industrial Relations Journal32(1): 2–21.
17.
DiamondWJFreemanRB (2002) Will unionism prosper in cyberspace? The promise of the Internet for employee organisation. British Journal of Industrial Relations40(3): 569–596
DueJMadsenJS (2007) 3F og alle de andre. Urafstemning om OK 2007: FAOS Forskningsnotat 078. København: Forskningscenter for Arbejdsmarkeds- og Organisationsstudier, Sociologisk Institut, Københavns Universitet.
20.
FeulsMFieselerCSuphanA (2014) A social net? Internet and social media use during unemployment. Work, Employment and Society28(4): 551–570.
21.
FlanaganFWalkerM (2020) How can unions use artificial intelligence to build power? The use of AI chatbots for labour organising in the US and Australia. New Technology, Work and Employment36: 159–176.
22.
FlandersA (1970) Management and Union. London: Faber & Faber.
23.
FowlerTHagarD (2013) ‘Liking’ your union: unions and new social media during election campaigns. Labor Studies Journal38(3): 201–228.
24.
FrangiLZhangTHebdonR (2020) Tweeting and retweeting for Fight for $15: unions as dinosaur opinion leaders?British Journal of Industrial Relations58(2): 301–335.
25.
GahanPPekarekA (2013) Social movement theory, collective action frames and union theory: a critique and extension. British Journal of Industrial Relations51(4): 754–776.
26.
GeelanT (2021) Introduction to the Special Issue – the internet, social media and trade union revitalization: still behind the digital curve or catching up?New Technology, Work and Employment36: 123–139.
27.
GeelanTHodderA (2017) Enhancing transnational labour solidarity: the unfulfilled promise of the internet and social media. Industrial Relations Journal48(4): 345–364.
28.
GerbaudoP (2012) Tweets and the Streets: Social Media and Contemporary Activism. London: Pluto Press.
29.
GigliettoFRossiLBennatoD (2012) The open laboratory: limits and possibilities of using Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube as a research data source. Journal of Technology in Human Services30(3–4): 145–159.
30.
GreeneAHoganJGriecoM (2003) Commentary: e-collectivism and distributed discourse – new opportunities for trade union democracy. Industrial Relations Journal34(4): 282–289.
31.
GreijdanusHde Matos FernandesCATurner-ZwinkelsF, et al. (2020) The psychology of online activism and social movements: relations between online and offline collective action. Current Opinion in Psychology35: 49–54.
Gumbrell-McCormickRHymanR (2013) Trade Unions in Western Europe: Hard Times, Hard Choices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34.
HalupkaM (2018) The legitimisation of clicktivism. Australian Journal of Political Science53(1): 130–141.
35.
HardisAMortensenH (2018) Situationens generalstab. Weekendavisen, 6April. Available at: www.weekendavisen.dk/content/item/279 (accessed 8 July 2020).
36.
HauMFSavageO (2022) Building coalitions on Facebook: grassroots ‘social media unionism’ among Danish bike couriers. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Society for the Advancement of Socio-economics, 9-11 July University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
37.
HennebertMAPasquierVLévesqueC (2021) What do unions do . . . with digital technologies? An affordance approach. New Technology, Work and Employment36(2): 177–200.
38.
HodderAHoughtonD (2015) Union use of social media: a study of the university and college union on Twitter. New Technology, Work and Employment30(3): 173–189.
39.
HolgateJSimmsMTapiaM (2018) The limitations of the theory and practice of mobilization in trade union organizing. Economic and Industrial Democracy39(4): 599–616.
40.
HoughtonDHodderA (2021) Understanding trade union usage of social media: a case study of the Public and Commercial Services union on Facebook and Twitter. New Technology, Work and Employment36: 123–139.
41.
HymanR (2001) Understanding European Trade Unionism: Between Market, Class and Society. London: SAGE.
42.
IbsenCL (2016) The role of mediation institutions in Sweden and Denmark after centralized bargaining. British Journal of Industrial Relations54(2): 285–310.
43.
KellyJ (1998) Rethinking Industrial Relations: Mobilisation, Collectivism and Long Waves. London: Routledge.
LaclauE (2006) Why constructing a people is the main task of radical politics. Critical Inquiry 32(4): 646–680.
46.
Las HerasJRodríguezL (2021) Striking to renew: Basque unions’ organizing strategies and use of the strike-fund. British Journal of Industrial Relations59(3): 669–700.
47.
LévesqueCMurrayG (2013) Renewing union narrative resources: how union capabilities make a difference. British Journal of Industrial Relations51(4): 777–796.
48.
ManningP (1998) Spinning for Labour: Trade Unions and the New Media Environment. London: Routledge.
49.
Martínez LucioMWalkerSTrevorrowP (2009) Making networks and (re)making trade union bureaucracy: a European-wide case study of trade union engagement with the internet and networking. New Technology, Work and Employment24(2): 115–130.
50.
MichelR (1968) Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchial Tendencies of Modern Democracy 2nd Edition. New York: The Free Press.
51.
MillsWC (1948) The New Men of Power: America’s Labor Leaders. Urbana, IL; Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press.
52.
MorenoMAGoniuNMorenoPS, et al. (2013) Ethics of social media research: common concerns and practical considerations. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking16(9): 708–713.
53.
MurthyD (2013) Ethnographic research 2.0. Journal of Organizational Ethnography2(1): 23–36.
54.
PanagiotopoulosP (2012) Towards unions 2.0: rethinking the audience of social media engagement. New Technology, Work and Employment27(3): 178–192.
55.
PanagiotopoulosP (2021) Digital audiences of union organising: a social media analysis. New Technology, Work and Employment36(2): 201–218.
56.
PanagiotopoulosPBarnettJ (2015) Social media in union communications: an international study with UNI Global Union affiliates. British Journal of Industrial Relations53(3): 508–532.
57.
PasquierVDaudigeosTBarrosM (2020) Towards a new flashmob unionism: the case of the Fight for 15 movement. British Journal of Industrial Relations58(2): 336–363.
58.
PinnockSR (2005) Organizing virtual environments: national union deployment of the blog and new cyberstrategies. Workingusa8(4): 457–468.
59.
RoyleTRueckertY (2022) McStrike! Framing, (political) opportunity and the development of a collective identity: McDonald’s and the UK Fast-Food Rights Campaign. Work, Employment and Society36(3): 407–426.
60.
SkovsgaardMVan DalenA (2013) Dodging the gatekeepers?Information, Communication & Society16(5): 737–756.
61.
SolbergLB (2010) Data mining on Facebook: a free space for researchers or an IRB nightmare. University of Illinois Journal of Law, Technology and Policy2010(2): 311–344.
62.
StevensCDGreerRD (2005) E-voice, the Internet, and life within unions: riding the learning curve. WorkingUSA: The Journal of Labor and Society8: 439–455.
63.
UpchurchMGrassmanR (2016) Striking with social media: the contested (online) terrain of workplace conflict. Organization23(5): 639–656.
64.
VieS (2014) In defense of ‘slacktivism’: the human rights campaign Facebook logo as digital activism. First Monday19(4): 4961.
65.
WaltonRMcKersieR (1991[1965]) A Behavioural Theory of Labour Negotiations: An Analysis of a Social Interaction System, 2nd Edition.New York: ILR Press.
66.
WardSLusoliW (2003) Dinosaurs in cyberspace? British trade unions and the internet. European Journal of Communication18(2): 147–179.
67.
WilkinsDLivingstoneALevineM (2019) All click, no action? Online action, efficacy perceptions, and prior experience combine to affect future collective action. Computers in Human Behavior91: 97–105.
68.
WillisR (2019) Observations online: finding the ethical boundaries of Facebook research. Research Ethics15(1): 1–17.
69.
WoodAJ (2015) Networks of injustice and worker mobilisation at Walmart. Industrial Relations Journal46(4): 259–274.
70.
WoodAJ (2020) Beyond mobilisation at McDonald’s: towards networked organising. Capital & Class44(4): 1–10.
71.
ZimmerM (2010) ‘But the data is already public’: on the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics and Information Technology12(4): 313–325.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
