The article gives a micropolitical analysis of the position of German trade unions on voluntary agreements between nongovernmental organisation (NGOs) and corporations, mostly subsumed under the label CSR (corporate social responsibility). In the German system of industrial relations, trade unions have a hybrid character: On the one hand, they are part of the company through their members and especially through unionised works councils and share similar goals with the company. On the other hand, trade unions also merge political positions of society, keep an eye on companies’ actions, and share similar goals with NGOs. The micropolitical analysis of their positions towards voluntary agreements as well as their interaction raises general questions on how cooperation between firms and NGOs can secure decent working conditions and environmental protection.
AlvessonM. (2003). Beyond neopositivists, romantics, and localists: A reflexive approach to interviews in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 28, 13-33.
2.
ArenasD.LozanoJ. M.AlbaredaL. (2009). The role of NGOs in CSR: Mutual perceptions among stakeholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 88, 175-197.
3.
BeckU. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London, England: Sage.
CrozierM.FriedbergE. (1979). Die Zwänge kollektiven Handelns. Über Macht und Organisation [The constraints of collective action. About power and organisation]. Königstein im Taunus, Frankfurt, Germany: Athenäum.
6.
DelbardO. (2011). Social partners or full-fledged stakeholders? Trade unions and CSR in Europe (France, Germany and the UK). Society and Business Review, 6, 260-277. doi:10.1108/17465681111171000
7.
Deutscher Beamtenbund. (2011). Mitteilung: ‘Binnenmärkte: Zwölf Hebel zur Förderung von Wachstum und Vertrauen: Gemeinsam für neues Wachstum [Communication: ‘Internal Markets: Twelve levers to promote growth and trust: Together for a new growth]. Retrieved from http://www.dbb.de/fileadmin/pdfs/stellungnahmen/110413_binnenmarktakte.pdf
Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund. (2011). Energieumstieg: Position des Deutschen Gewerkschaftsbundes (DGB)zur Energiepolitik [Energy transistion: Position of the German Trade Union Confederation towards energy policy]. Retrieved from http://www.dgb.de/themen/++co++f1d58ae0-9730-11e0-6e8a-00188b4dc422
11.
DörrenbächerC.GeppertM. (2009). Micro-political games in the multinational corporation: The case of mandate change. Management Revue, 20, 373-391.
12.
Egels-ZandénN.HyllmanP. (2006). Exploring the effects of union-NGO relationships on corporate responsibility: The case of the Swedish clean clothes campaign. Journal of Business Ethics, 64, 303-316.
13.
Egels-ZandénN.HyllmanP. (2007). Evaluating strategies for negotiating workers’ rights in transnational corporations: The effects of codes of conduct and global agreements on workplace democracy. Journal of Business Ethics, 76, 207-223.
14.
Egels-ZandénN.HyllmanP. (2011). Differences in organizing between unions and NGOs: Conflict and cooperation among Swedish unions and NGOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 101, 249-261.
15.
FernerA.AlmondP.CollingT.EdwardsT. (2005). Policies on union representation in US multinationals in the UK: Between micro-politics and macro-institutions. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 43, 703-728.
16.
FeuchteB. (2009). Positionspapier der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung (HBS): Zu corporate social responsibility (CSR) [Position paper of the Hans-Böckler Foundation: On corporate social responsibility]. Retrieved from http://www.boeckler.de/pdf/mbf_csr_positionspapier_hbs.pdf
17.
FissP. C.ZajacE. J. (2004). The diffusion of ideas over contested terrain: The (non)adoption of a shareholder value orientation among German firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49, 501-534.
HabischA.WegnerM. (2005). Germany: Overcoming the heritage of corporatism. In HabischA.JonkerJ.WegnerM.SchmidpeterR. (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility across Europe (pp. 111-124). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
22.
HallP. A.SoskiceD. (2001). Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
23.
HaunschildA.KrauseF. (2014). Germany: Binding agreements better than voluntary CSR. In PreussL.GoldM.ReesC. (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility and trade unions: Perspectives across Europe (pp. 66-82). London, England: Routledge.
24.
HaunschildA.NienhueserW.WeiskopfR. (2009). Power in organizations: Power of organizations. Management Revue, 20, 320-325.
25.
Hauser-DitzA.WilkeP. (2005). Handlungsfelder für Arbeitnehmervertretungen: Ergebnisse einer Betriebsbefragung [Fields of action for workers’ representatives: Results of an operational survey]. In Corporate social responsibility: Neue Handlungsfelder für Arbeitnehmervertretungen [Corporate social responsibility: New fields of action for workers’ representatives] (pp. 6-11). Berlin, Germany: Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund.
JacobiO. (2003). Renewal of the collective bargaining system? In Mueller-JentschW.WeitbrechtH. (Eds.), The changing contours of German industrial relations (pp. 15-39). Mering, Bavaria, Germany: Rainer Hampp.
29.
JacobiO.KellerB.Müller-JentschW. (1998). Germany: Facing new challenges. In FernerA.HymanR. (Eds.), Changing industrial relations in Europe (2nd ed. pp. 190-238). Oxford, England: Wiley.
30.
KüpperW.FelschA. (2000). Organisation, Macht und Ökonomie [Organisation, power and economics]. Wiesbaden, Hesse, Germany: Westdeutscher.
31.
KüpperW.OrtmannG. (1986). Mikropolitik in Organisationen [Micropolitics in organisations]. Die Betriebswirtschaft [Business Management], 46, 590-602.
32.
KüpperW.OrtmannG. (1992). Mikropolitik: Das Handeln der Akteure und die Zwänge des Systeme (Vorwort) [Micropolitics: Actions of the actors and the constraints of the system (Preface)]. In KüpperW.OrtmannG. (Eds.), Mikropolitik: Rationalität, macht und spiele in organisationen [Micropolitics, rationality, power and games in organisations] (pp. 7-9). Opladen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany: Westdeutscher.
33.
LaasonenS.FougèreM.KourulaA. (2012). Dominant articulations in academic business and society discourse on NGO–business relations: A critical assessment. Journal of Business Ethics, 109, 521-545.
34.
LipschutzR. D. (2004). Sweating it out: NGO campaigns and trade union empowerment. Development in Practice, 14, 197-209.
35.
MansellS. (2013). Capitalism, corporations and the social contract: A critique of stakeholder theory. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
36.
MarsdenD. (1999). A theory of employment Systems: Micro-foundations of societal diversity. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
37.
MarsdenD. (2000). A theory of job regulation, the employment relationship, and the organization of labour institutions. Industrielle Beziehungen, 7, 320-347.
38.
MattenD.MoonJ. (2008). “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33, 404-424.
MitchellR.AgleB. R.WoodD. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22, 853-886.
41.
MutzG.EbringhoffJ. (2006). Das ist immer eine Gratwanderung [This is always a tightrope walk]. Mitbestimmung [Codetermination], 10, 27-29.
42.
OrtmannG. (Ed.). (1995). Formen der Produktion [Forms of Production]. Opladen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany: Westdeutscher.
43.
OrtmannG.WindelerA.BeckerA.SchulzH.-J. (1990). Computer und Macht in Organisationen. Mikropolitische Analysen [Computer and Power in Organisations. Micropolitical Analyses]. Opladen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany: Westdeutscher.
44.
PreussL.GoldM.ReesC. (Eds.). (2014). Corporate social responsibility and trade unions: Perspectives across Europe. New York, NY: Routledge.
45.
PreussL.HaunschildA.MattenD. (2006). Trade unions and CSR: A European research agenda. Journal of Public Affairs, 6, 256-268.
46.
PreussL.HaunschildA.MattenD. (2009). The rise of CSR: Implications for HRM and employee representation. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20, 953-973.
47.
PriegnitzK. (2011). Vorwort [Preface]. In BurckhardtG. (Ed.), Mythos CSR: Unternehmensverantwortung und Regulierungslücken [The myth of CSR: Corporate responsibility and regulatory gaps] (pp. 9-10). Bonn, West Germany, Germany: Horlemann.
48.
RäthzelN.UzzellD. (2013). Trade unions in the green economy: Working for the environment. New York, NY: Routledge.
49.
SaldañaJ. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). London, England: Sage.
SilviaS. (1999). Every which way but loose: German industrial relations since 1980. In MarinA.RossG. (Ed.), The brave new world of European labor: European trade unions at the millennium (pp. 75-124). New York, NY: Berghan.
52.
SinghS. (2011). Verhaltenskodex: Ein echtes Anliegen oder bloß Augenwischerei [Code of conduct: A real concern or just window dressing]? In BurckhardtG. (Ed.), Mythos CSR: Unternehmensverantwortung und Regulierungslücken [The myth of CSR: Corporate responsibility and regulatory gaps] (pp. 114-118). Bonn, West Germany, Germany: Horlemann.
53.
SrinivasN. (2009). Against NGOs? A critical perspective on nongovernmental action. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38, 614-626.
54.
StrangeS. (1996). The retreat of the State: The diffusion of power in the world economy. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
55.
VitolsK. (2011a). Nachhaltigkeit: Unternehmensverantwortung: Mitbestimmung: Ein Literaturbericht zur Debatte über CSR [Sustainability: Corporate responsibility: Codetermination: A literature review on the debate on CSR]. Berlin, Germany: Sigma.
56.
VitolsK. (2011b). Strengthening cooperation between NGOs and trade unions in the interests of sustainability. In VitolsS.KlugeN. (Eds.), The sustainable company: A new approach to corporate governance (pp. 185-199). Brussels, Belgium: ETUI.
57.
WhitleyR. (1992). European business systems: Firms and markets in their national contexts. London, England: Sage.
58.
WindolfP. (2002). Die Zukunft des rheinischen Kapitalismus [The future of rhenisch capitalism]. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie [Cologne Journal for Sociology and Social Psychology], 42, 414-442.
59.
ZimmerS. (2002). Jenseits von Arbeit und Kapital? Unternehmerverbände und Gewerkschaften im Zeitalter der Globalisierung [Beyond labour and capital? Company associations and trane unions in times of globalisation]. Opladen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany: Leske + Budrich.
60.
ZimpelmannB.WassermannD. (2012). Mitbestimmung und Nachhaltigkeit: Widerspruch oder Chance [Codetermination and sustainablilty: Contradiction or opportunity]? Düsseldorf, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany: Sigma.
