CONVERGENCES AND DIVERGENCES IN EMPLOYMENT SYSTEMS

Öz

This paper argues that a key contributor to the rising income inequality that has emerged over the last 25 years in industrial economies are the variations appearing within employment systems. After reviewing the debate over income inequality the paper highlights the core findings of a research project that analyzed changes in employment relations in Australia, Britain, Germany, Italy, Japan, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States with a special focus on the automobile and telecommunications industries. The research finds much similarity across countries in the various patterns of workplace practices that are spreading and also much that is common in the changes occurring in the processes and structures of labor-management interactions. At the same time, within both the union and non-union sectors the extent of variation in wages, work practices, and other employment conditions has increased. There is no evidence of a simple new international convergence in employment relations. The research summarized within this paper illustrates the virtues of an institutional perspective that takes into account employment systems and shifting power relations as well as economic pressures. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• xx

CONVERGENCES AND DIVERGENCES IN EMPLOYMENT SYSTEMS

Öz

This paper argues that a key contributor to the rising income inequality that has emerged over the last 25 years in industrial economies are the variations appearing within employment systems. After reviewing the debate over income inequality the paper highlights the core findings of a research project that analyzed changes in employment relations in Australia, Britain, Germany, Italy, Japan, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States with a special focus on the automobile and telecommunications industries. The research finds much similarity across countries in the various patterns of workplace practices that are spreading and also much that is common in the changes occurring in the processes and structures of labor-management interactions. At the same time, within both the union and non-union sectors the extent of variation in wages, work practices, and other employment conditions has increased. There is no evidence of a simple new international convergence in employment relations. The research summarized within this paper illustrates the virtues of an institutional perspective that takes into account employment systems and shifting power relations as well as economic pressures.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Convergences, Divergences, Employment Systems

Kaynakça

1. Arthur, Jeffrey B. 1992. “The Link Between Business Strategy and Industrial Relations Systems in American Steel Mini-Mills,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 45, (April): 488-506.
2. Babson, Steve. 1995. “Whose Team? Lean Production at Mazda U.S.A.,” in S. Babson ed., Lean Work: Empowerment and Exploitation in the Global Auto Industry, Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
3. Blau, Francine D. and Lawrence M. Kahn. 1996. “International Differences in Male Wage Inequality: Institutions Versus Market Forces,” Journal of Political Economy , 104, 4 (August): 791-837.
4. Cole, Robert. 1971. Japanese Blue Collar. Berkeley: University of California Press.
5. Dore, Ronald. 1992. “Japan’s Version of Managerial Capitalism,” in Thomas A. Kochan and Michael Useem eds., Transforming Organizations, New York: Oxford University Press: 17-27.
6. …………….. 1973. British Factory-Japanese Factory. Berkeley: University of California Press.
7. Hammer, Michael and James Champy. 1993. Re-engineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution. New York: Harper Business.
8. Freeman, Richard B. and Lawrence F. Katz. 1995. Editors. Differences and Changes in Wage Structures. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

9. Hiwatari, Nobuhiro. Forthcoming. “Economic Adjustment and Japanese Unions,” in R. Locke and K. Thelen eds., The Shifting Boundaries of Labor Politics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10. Katz, Harry C. and Thomas A. Kochan. 1992. An Introduction to Collective Bargaining and Industrial Relations. New York: McGraw-Hill.
11. Kerr, Clark, John T. Dunlop, Frederick Harbison, and Charles Myers. 1964. Industrialism and Industrial Man. New York: Oxford University Press.
12. Kochan, Thomas A., Harry C. Katz, and Robert B. McKersie. 1986. The Transformation of American Industrial Relations. New York: Basic Books.
13. Krugman, Paul. 1996. Pop Internationalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. Locke, Richard M. 1992. “The Decline of the National Union in Italy: Lessons for Comparative Industrial Relations Theory,” ILRR, 45, (January 1992): 229-249.
15. ........................... 1995. Remaking the Italian Economy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
16. Locke, Richard M. and Lucio Bacarro. 1996. “Learning From Past Mistakes? Recent Reform in Italian Industrial Relations,” Sloan School of Management, MIT, working paper 3845-BPS, March.
17. MacDuffie, John Paul. 1996. “International Trends in Work Organization in the International Auto Industry: National-Level vs. Company-Level Perspectives,” in The Comparative Political Economy of Industrial Relations, Kirsten Wever and Lowell Turner eds., Madison, WI: IRRA.
18. Parker, Mike and Jane Slaughter. 1988. Choosing Sides: Unions and the Team Concept, Boston: South End Press.
19. Purcell, John. 1995. “Ideology and the End of Institutional Industrial Relations: Evidence from the UK,” in C. Crouch and F. Traxler eds., Organized Industrial Relations in Europe: What Future?, Hants: Avebury: 101-119.
20. Purcell, John and Bruce Ahlstrand. 1994. Human Resource Management in the Multi- Divisional Company. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21. Streeck, Wolfgang. 1984. Industrial Relations in West Germany: A Case Study of the Car Industry. London: Heinemann.
22. Troy, Leo. 1990. “Is the U.S. Unique in the Decline of Private Sector Unionism,” Journal of Labor Research, Vol. 11, No. 2, (Spring): 111-143.
23. Womack, James P., Daniel T. Jones and Daniel Roos. 1990. The Machine That Changed The World. New York: Rawson Associates.