This study explores the implications of flexible management practices for organizational wage gaps. It argues that the implementation of high-performance and non-standard employment practices is not only skill but also class-biased, favouring workers in supervisory positions. This argument is examined using matched employer–employee data from the 2011 British Workplace Employment Relations Study (WERS) survey, which uniquely includes detailed information on flexible management practices. Findings from fixed-effects models support the argument. Wage gaps are more pronounced between supervisors and rank-and-file workers in organizations implementing high-performance or non-standard employment practices, compared to those without such practices. Notably, heightened education-based wage gaps are observed in organizations adopting only non-standard practices. The results suggest that purportedly efficiency-oriented changes in organizational practices are not wage-neutral but tend to favour already well-compensated workers.
AbbottA (1988) The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor. Chicago; London: The University of Chicago Press.
2.
AtkinsonJ (1984) Flexibility, Uncertainty and Manpower Management. Brighton: Institute of Manpower Studies, 89.
3.
AutorDH (2014) Skills, education, and the rise of earnings inequality among the “other 99 percent”. Science344(6186): 843–851.
4.
AutorDHHousemanSN (2010) Do temporary-help jobs improve labor market outcomes for low-skilled workers? Evidence from “Work First”. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics2(3): 96–128.
5.
BaileyTBergPSandyC (2001) The effect of high-performance work practices on employee earnings in the steel, apparel, and medical electronics and imaging industries. Industrial and Labor Relations Review54(2): 525–543.
6.
BaileyTRBenhardtAD (1997) In search of the high-road in a low-wage industry. Politics and Society25(2): 179–201.
7.
BarneyJ (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management17(1): 99–120.
8.
BaronJNDobbinFRJenningsPD (1986) War and peace: the evolution of modern personnel administration in U.S. industry. American Journal of Sociology92(2): 350–383.
9.
BattR (2001) Explaining wage inequality in telecommunications services: customer segmentation, human resource practices, and union decline. Industrial and Labor Relations Review54(2): 425–449.
10.
BellaniDBosioG (2021) Knockin’ on heaven’s door? Reframing the debate on temporary employment and wages: evidence from Europe. Socio-Economic Review19(3): 869–907.
11.
BenderSBloomNCardD, et al (2018) Management practices, workforce selection, and productivity. Journal of Labor Economics36(1): 371–409.
12.
BlackSELynchLMKrivelyovaA (2004) How workers fare when employers innovate. Industrial Relations43(1): 44–66.
13.
BlundellRGreenDAJinW (2022) The UK as a technological follower: higher education expansion and the college wage premium. The Review of Economic Studies89(1): 142–180.
14.
BolTWeedenK (2015) Occupational closure and wage inequality in Germany and the United Kingdom. European Sociological Review31(3): 354–369.
15.
BresnahanTBrynjolfssonEHittL (2002) Information technology, workplace organization, and the demand for skilled labor: Firm-level evidence. The Quarterly Journal of Economics117(1): 339–376.
16.
CappelliP (1995) Rethinking employment. British Journal of Industrial Relations33(4): 563–602.
17.
CaroliEVan ReenenJ (2001) Skill biased organization change? Evidence from a panel of British and French establishments. The Quarterly Journal of Economics116(4): 1449–1492.
18.
CastillaE (2008) Gender, race, and meritocracy in organizational careers. American Journal of Sociology113(6): 1479–1526.
19.
CirilloVRicciA (2020) Heterogeneity matters: temporary employment, productivity and wages in Italian firms. Economia Politica39(2): 567–593.
CristiniAErikssonTPozzoliD (2013) High-performance management practices and employee outcomes in Denmark. Scottish Journal of political Economy60(3): 232–266.
22.
DahrendorfR (1957) Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society. Standford, CA: Standford University Press.
23.
DoeringerPBLorenzETerklaDG (2003) The adoption and diffusion of high-performance management: lessons from Japanese multinationals in the west. Cambridge Journal of Economics27: 265–286.
24.
DroletM (2002) Can the workplace explain Canadian gender pay differentials?Canadian Public Policy28: 41–63.
25.
DubeAKaplanE (2010) Does outsourcing reduce wages in the low wage service occupations? Evidence from janitors and guards. Industrial and Labor Relations Review63(2): 287–306.
26.
EdwardsPCollinsonM (2002) Empowerment and managerial labor strategies. Work and Occupations29(3): 272–299.
27.
FindlayPLindsyaCMcQuarrieJ, et al (2016) Employer choice and job quality: Workplace innovation, work redesign, and employee perception of job quality in a complex health-care setting. Work and Occupations44(1): 113–136.
28.
FiedlerF (1986) The contribution of cognitive resources and leader behavior to organizational performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology16(6): 532–548.
29.
FligsteinN (1990) The Transformation of Corporate Control. Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press.
30.
GallieDFlesteadAGreenF (2004) Changing patterns of task discretion in Britain. Work, Employment and Society18(2): 243–266.
31.
GodardJ (2004) A critical assessment of the high-performance paradigm. British Journal of Industrial Relations42(2): 349–378.
32.
GodardJDelaneyJT (2000) Reflections on the high-performance paradigm’s implications for industrial relations as a field. Industrial and Labor Relations Review53(3): 482–502.
33.
GuptaDErikssonT (2006) New workplace practices and the gender wage gap: Can the new economy be the great equalizer? IZA Discussion Paper, No. 2038. Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor.
34.
HandelMGittlemanM (2004) Is there a wage payoff to innovative work practices?Industrial Relations43(1): 67–97.
35.
HunterLWLafkasJJ (2003) Opening the box: Information technology, work practices and wages. Industrial and Labor Relations Review56(2): 224–243.
36.
JanietzCBolT (2020) Occupations, organizations, and the structure of wage inequality in the Netherlands. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility70: 1–16.
37.
KallebergAL (2001) Organizing flexibility: the flexible firm in a new century. British Journal of Industrial Relations39(4): 479–504.
38.
KallebergAL (2003) Flexible firms and labor market segmentation: effects of workplace restructuring on jobs and workers. Work and Occupations30(2): 154–175.
39.
KochanTAKatzHCMcKersieRB (1986) The Transformation of American Industrial Relations. New York: Basic Books.
40.
KretsosLLucioMM (2013) Destandardization of employment in the UK: Issues, politics and policy reinvention. In Non-standard employment in Europe: Paradigms, prevalence and policy responses, 103–116. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
41.
KristalT (2013) The capitalist machine: computerization, workers’ power, and the decline in labor’s share within U.S. industries. American Sociological Review78(3): 361–389.
42.
KristalT (2020) Why has computerization increased wage inequality? Information, occupational structural power, and wage inequality. Work and Occupations47(4): 466–503.
43.
KristalTCohenY (2017) The causes of rising wage inequality: the race between institutions and technology. Socio-Economic Review15: 187–212.
44.
KristalTCohenYNavotE (2020) Workplace compensation practices and the takeoff in benefit inequality. American Sociological Review85: 271–297.
45.
LarochePSalesinaM (2017) The effects of union and nonunion forms of employee representation on high-performance work systems: new evidence from French microdata. Human Resource Management56(1): 173–189.
46.
LarsenHHBrewsterC (2003) Line management responsibility for HRM: what is happening in Europe?Employee Relations25(3): 228–244.
47.
LloydCPayneJ (2006) Goodbye to all that? A critical re-evaluation of the role of the high-performance work organization within the UK skill debate. Work, Employment and Society20(1): 151–165.
48.
MachinS (2011) Changes in U.K. wage inequality over the last forty years. In: GreggPWadsworthJ (eds) The Labour Market in Winter: The State of Working Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 155–169.
49.
MarchingtonMGoodmanJBerridgeJ (2004) Employment relations in Britain. In: BamberGJLansburyRDWailesN (eds) International and Comparative Employment Relations: Globalisation and the Developed Market Economies. Sydney: Allen and Unwin, 36–66.
50.
McGovernPSmeatonDHillS (2004) Bad jobs in Britain: non-standard employment and job quality. Work and Occupations31(2): 225–249.
51.
MizruchiMS (1992) The Structure of Corporate Political Action: Interfirm Relations and Their Consequences. Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press.
52.
OstermanP (1994) How common is workplace transformation and who adopts it?Industrial and Labor Relations Review47(2): 173–188.
53.
OstermanP (2000) Work reorganization in an era of restructuring: trends in diffusion and effects on employee welfare. Industrial and Labor Relations Review53(2): 179–196.
54.
OstermanP (2006) The wage effects of high-performance work organization in manufacturing. Industrial and Labor Relations Review59(2): 187–204.
55.
PfefferJCohenY (1984) Determinants of internal labor markets in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly29(4): 550–572.
56.
PioreMJSabelCF (1984) The Second Industrial Divide: Possibilities For Prosperity. New York, NY: Basic Books.
57.
PollertA (1988) The flexible firm: fixation or fact?Work, Employment and Society2(3): 281–316.
58.
RaineyAMelzerS (2021) The organizational context of supervisory bullying: diversity/equity and work family policies. Work and Occupations48(3): 285–319.
59.
RegoliAD’AgostinoAGrandnerT, et al (2019) Accounting for the permanent vs temporary wage gaps among young adults: three European countries in perspective. International Labor Review158(2): 337–364.
60.
SewellG (1998) The discipline of teams: The control of team-based industrial work through electronic and peer surveillance. Administrative Science Quarterly43(2): 397–428.
61.
ShamsSTomaskovic-Devey (2019) Racial and gender trends and trajectories in access to managerial jobs. Social Science Research80: 15–29.
62.
SmithV (1997) New forms of work organization. Annual Review of Sociology23(1): 315–339.
63.
SmithsonJLewisSCooperC, et al (2004) Flexible working and the gender pay gap in the accountancy profession. Work, Employment and Society18(1): 115–135.
64.
SungJAshtonDN (2005) High Performance Work Practices: Linking Strategy and Skills to Performance Outcomes. London: Department of Trade and Industry.
65.
TaplinI (1995) Flexible production, rigid jobs: lessons from the clothing industry. Work and Occupations22(4): 412–438.
66.
Tomaskovic-DeveyDAvent-HoltD (2019) Relational Inequalities: An Organizational Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
67.
UseemM (1993) Executive Defense: Shareholder Power and Corporate Reorganization. Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press.
68.
WatsonT (1977) The Personnel Managers: A Study in the Sociology of Work and Employment. London: Routledge.
69.
WatsonT (2003) Sociology, Work and Industry. London: Routledge.
70.
WilmersNAeppliC (2021) Consolidated advantage: new organizational dynamics of wage inequality. American Sociological Review86(6): 1100–1130.
71.
WilmersNZhangL (2022) Values and inequality: prosocial jobs and the college wage premium. American Sociological Review87(3): 415–442.
72.
WhitfieldK (2000) High-performance workplaces, training, and the distribution of skills. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society39(1): 1–25.
73.
WodtkeG (2016) Social class and income inequality in the United States: ownership, authority, and personal income distribution from 1980 to 2010. American Journal of Sociology121(5): 1375–1415.
74.
WodtkeG (2017) Social relations, technical divisions, and class stratification in the United States: an empirical test of the death and decomposition of class hypothesis. Social Forces95(4): 1479–1508.
75.
ZeytinogluIUCookeGB (2008) Non-standard employment and promotions: a within genders analysis. Journal of Industrial Relations50(2): 319–337.
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.
