contemporary meta-challenges for labor movements

41
1 DECLINE, RESURGENCE, DECLINE, RESURGENCE, OR SURVIVAL?: UNIONS OR SURVIVAL?: UNIONS AMIDST GLOBALIZATION AMIDST GLOBALIZATION AND DEMOCRATIZATION IN AND DEMOCRATIZATION IN MEXICO AND BRAZIL MEXICO AND BRAZIL Scott B. Martin Scott B. Martin The New School The New School

Upload: amandla

Post on 15-Jan-2016

27 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

“DECLINE, RESURGENCE, OR SURVIVAL?: UNIONS AMIDST GLOBALIZATION AND DEMOCRATIZATION IN MEXICO AND BRAZIL ” Scott B. Martin The New School. CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS. Globalization Market reform Decline of class- and labor-based politics. MICRO-STRUCTURAL CHALLENGES. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

11

““DECLINE, RESURGENCE, DECLINE, RESURGENCE, OR SURVIVAL?: UNIONS OR SURVIVAL?: UNIONS AMIDST GLOBALIZATION AMIDST GLOBALIZATION

AND DEMOCRATIZATION IN AND DEMOCRATIZATION IN MEXICO AND BRAZILMEXICO AND BRAZIL””

Scott B. MartinScott B. MartinThe New SchoolThe New School

Page 2: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

22

CONTEMPORARY META-CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR CHALLENGES FOR LABOR

MOVEMENTSMOVEMENTS

GlobalizationGlobalization

Market reformMarket reform

Decline of class- and labor-Decline of class- and labor-based politicsbased politics

Page 3: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

33

MICRO-STRUCTURALMICRO-STRUCTURALCHALLENGESCHALLENGES

DEMOGRAPHICDEMOGRAPHIC

OCCUPATIONALOCCUPATIONAL

PRECARIOUS WORKPRECARIOUS WORK

INFORMALITYINFORMALITY

FRAGMENTED WORK FRAGMENTED WORK IDENTITIES AND SOLIDARITIESIDENTITIES AND SOLIDARITIES

Page 4: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

44

THE COMPARATIVE PUZZLETHE COMPARATIVE PUZZLE

OVER LAST TWO TO TWO AND HALF OVER LAST TWO TO TWO AND HALF DECADESDECADES…..…..

BRAZIL: UNION STRENGTHENING AND BRAZIL: UNION STRENGTHENING AND SURVIVALSURVIVAL

MEXICO: UNION DECLINE AND MEXICO: UNION DECLINE AND WEAKENINGWEAKENING

Page 5: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

55

ARGUMENT IN BRIEFARGUMENT IN BRIEF

WITHIN MORE/LESS FAVORABLE WITHIN MORE/LESS FAVORABLE SEQUENCING OF ECONOMIC AND SEQUENCING OF ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL TRANSITIONS…..POLITICAL TRANSITIONS…..

DIFFERENT STRATEGIES OF DIFFERENT STRATEGIES OF ORGANIZATION, MOBILIZATION, AND ORGANIZATION, MOBILIZATION, AND COOPERATION OF BUSINESS AND COOPERATION OF BUSINESS AND LABORLABOR

Page 6: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

66

BR: Stress on autonomy, direct BR: Stress on autonomy, direct negotiation, and institution building negotiation, and institution building

by business and labor-- by business and labor-- Collective bargainingCollective bargaining

MX:MX: Emphasis on maximizing Emphasis on maximizing advantage within existing advantage within existing

institutions of state mediation--institutions of state mediation--Political bargainingPolitical bargaining

Page 7: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

77

MEXICOMEXICO 19781978 19921992 19941994 19961996 19981998 20002000

% LABOR % LABOR FORCE FORCE (PEA)(PEA)

28.9-28.9-39.839.8

13.613.6 10.410.4 9.19.1 9.39.3 9.89.8

%UNIONI-%UNIONI-ZABLEZABLE

INDUSTRIALINDUSTRIAL-- 22.122.1 14.914.9 15.415.4 15.515.5 15.015.0

BRAZILBRAZIL19781978 19901990

20012001

% LABOR % LABOR FORCEFORCE(PEA)(PEA)

1010 24.924.9 23.623.6

%EMPLOYD%EMPLOYDWORKERSWORKERS

25.825.8 26.026.0

Union Density RatesUnion Density Rates

Page 8: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

88

Pinpointing Union Decline in MXPinpointing Union Decline in MX

ILO in ’97 reports sharp drop in ILO in ’97 reports sharp drop in unionization from 1989-1991 (first three unionization from 1989-1991 (first three years of Salinas gov’t)years of Salinas gov’t)• Minus 42.7% (-23.1 points) for non-agric’l Minus 42.7% (-23.1 points) for non-agric’l

labor forcelabor force• Minus 28.2% (-16.8 points) for all wage and Minus 28.2% (-16.8 points) for all wage and

salary earnerssalary earners

• Base: Federal jurisdiction workers (large and Base: Federal jurisdiction workers (large and medium enterprises, including public sector)medium enterprises, including public sector)

Page 9: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

99

CAVEATS ABOUT CAVEATS ABOUT MEXICAN DATAMEXICAN DATA

SOME CONTEMPORARY ESTIMATES SOME CONTEMPORARY ESTIMATES SUGGEST RATE OF 14-20% (SUGGEST RATE OF 14-20% (ReformaReforma))

PRECISE MAGNITUDE OF DECLINE IN PRECISE MAGNITUDE OF DECLINE IN DOUBT, EXISTENCE OF TREND ISN’TDOUBT, EXISTENCE OF TREND ISN’T

ISSUE OF ISSUE OF SINDICATOSSINDICATOS AND AND CONTRATOS DE PROTECCIONCONTRATOS DE PROTECCION

Page 10: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

1010

Contrast in Larger Regional and Global Contrast in Larger Regional and Global PerspectivePerspective

Rest of Lat Am with Declines from mid 80s to Rest of Lat Am with Declines from mid 80s to mid-90s, exept Chile (ILO, World Employment mid-90s, exept Chile (ILO, World Employment Rpt 97/98)Rpt 97/98)

Major Declines along w/ MX: ARG, COL, CR, CUB, GUA, Major Declines along w/ MX: ARG, COL, CR, CUB, GUA, URU, VENURU, VENSmall Declines: DR, ESSmall Declines: DR, ES

Major=Larger than -20%Major=Larger than -20%Small=-= -5.0 to -19.9%Small=-= -5.0 to -19.9%

Page 11: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

1111

Declining Global Union Density in Declining Global Union Density in “Early Globalization”“Early Globalization”

50 OF 66 COUNTRIES WITH DECLINES OF 50 OF 66 COUNTRIES WITH DECLINES OF 5% OR MORE FROM MID-80s TO MID-90s: 5% OR MORE FROM MID-80s TO MID-90s: ILOILO

35 COUNTRIES WITH MAJOR DECLINES– 35 COUNTRIES WITH MAJOR DECLINES– MEXICO IN GOOD COMPANYMEXICO IN GOOD COMPANY

BRAZIL IN MORE SELECT COMPANYBRAZIL IN MORE SELECT COMPANY

MORE SKETCHY DATA ON MORE RECENT MORE SKETCHY DATA ON MORE RECENT PERIOD OF GLOBALIZATIONPERIOD OF GLOBALIZATION

Page 12: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

1212

EXPLAINING UNION DECLINE/ EXPLAINING UNION DECLINE/ RESURGENCE IN GLOBAL ERA RESURGENCE IN GLOBAL ERA

1)1) STRUCTURAL FACTORSSTRUCTURAL FACTORSLABOR MARKETSLABOR MARKETSLABOR FORCE LABOR FORCE PACE/EXTENT OF GLOBAL INTEGRATIONPACE/EXTENT OF GLOBAL INTEGRATION

2) POLITICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL 2) POLITICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL EXPLANATIONSEXPLANATIONSREGIME CHANGEREGIME CHANGEALLIANCES WITH PARTIESALLIANCES WITH PARTIESLABOR RELATIONS INSTITUTIONS/LEGACIESLABOR RELATIONS INSTITUTIONS/LEGACIESSTATE PREFERENCES/RESOURCESSTATE PREFERENCES/RESOURCES

Page 13: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

1313

STRUCTURAL EXPLANATIONSSTRUCTURAL EXPLANATIONS

RESEARCH ON STRUCTURAL REFORM RESEARCH ON STRUCTURAL REFORM INDICES BY MORLEY ET AL (CEPAL, INDICES BY MORLEY ET AL (CEPAL, PAUNOVIC, ‘00; HUBER & HOLT ‘04):PAUNOVIC, ‘00; HUBER & HOLT ‘04):

BASED ON ’82-’95 REFORMS, BOTH ARE “CAUTIOUS BASED ON ’82-’95 REFORMS, BOTH ARE “CAUTIOUS REFORMERS,” BELOW MEDIAN OF REGION’S GENERAL REFORMERS,” BELOW MEDIAN OF REGION’S GENERAL REFORM INDEX (Huber & Holt)REFORM INDEX (Huber & Holt)

BR SLIGHT LAGGARD IN ONSET (1994 VS. 1988) BUT….BR SLIGHT LAGGARD IN ONSET (1994 VS. 1988) BUT….

BY ’96, BR WITH REFORMS OF EQUAL OR GREATER BY ’96, BR WITH REFORMS OF EQUAL OR GREATER DEPTH THAN MX IN TRADE, PRIVATIZATION & TAXES DEPTH THAN MX IN TRADE, PRIVATIZATION & TAXES (BOTH LAGGARDS ON FIN’CIAL/CAP’L ACC’T)(BOTH LAGGARDS ON FIN’CIAL/CAP’L ACC’T)

Page 14: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

1414

STRUCTURAL (“NEOLIBERAL”) STRUCTURAL (“NEOLIBERAL”) REFORM CONT’DREFORM CONT’D

BY ’98, BR “LOSES” TO MX ONLY IN BY ’98, BR “LOSES” TO MX ONLY IN TRADE & CAP ACCOUNT--“AHEAD” IN TRADE & CAP ACCOUNT--“AHEAD” IN PRIVATIZATION AND “TIED” ON TAX & PRIVATIZATION AND “TIED” ON TAX & CAPITAL ACCOUNT REFORMCAPITAL ACCOUNT REFORM

CONCLUSIONS: BY MID TO LATE 90S, CONCLUSIONS: BY MID TO LATE 90S, BR HAS “CAUGHT” MX BR HAS “CAUGHT” MX BRAZILIAN UNIONS “HOLD THEIR OWN” BRAZILIAN UNIONS “HOLD THEIR OWN”

MUCH BETTER THAN MEXICAN ONESMUCH BETTER THAN MEXICAN ONES

Page 15: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

1515

NO APPARENT ASSOCIATION NO APPARENT ASSOCIATION WITH GROWTH RECORDWITH GROWTH RECORD

ANNUAL GDP PER CAPITA GROWTH AVERAGESANNUAL GDP PER CAPITA GROWTH AVERAGES

1980-901980-90 BR: -0.4%BR: -0.4% MX -0.2%MX -0.2%

1991-981991-98 BR +1.8% BR +1.8%

MX +3.1%MX +3.1%

Page 16: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

1616

STRONG DEMOGRAPHIC AND STRONG DEMOGRAPHIC AND LABOR FORCE STRUCTURE LABOR FORCE STRUCTURE

SIMILARITIES (CEPAL, 1990-05)SIMILARITIES (CEPAL, 1990-05)POPULATION GROWTH RATESPOPULATION GROWTH RATES

AGE STRUCTURE OF POPULATIONAGE STRUCTURE OF POPULATION

MINOR DIFFERENCES IN MINOR DIFFERENCES IN URBANIZATION RATIO (ABOUT 4 URBANIZATION RATIO (ABOUT 4 POINTS HIGHER IN BR)POINTS HIGHER IN BR)

Page 17: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

1717

DIFFERENCES WITH NO CLEAR DIFFERENCES WITH NO CLEAR CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP

CONSISTENTLY HIGHER LABOR FORCE CONSISTENTLY HIGHER LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATE IN BR (56.2% in ’90PARTICIPATION RATE IN BR (56.2% in ’90 est’d 59.1% in ’05) THAN MX (48.9 est’d 59.1% in ’05) THAN MX (48.9 est’d est’d 54.1)54.1) MOSTLY DUE TO CONSISTENTLY HIGHER MOSTLY DUE TO CONSISTENTLY HIGHER

FEMALE PARTICIPATION RATE IN BR FEMALE PARTICIPATION RATE IN BR (est’d 43.2% in ’05 vs. est’d 36.4% in MX)(est’d 43.2% in ’05 vs. est’d 36.4% in MX)

MX LABOR FORCE 90-03: MX LABOR FORCE 90-03: ↓↓AGRICULTURE, AGRICULTURE, ↑ ↑ MFG., MFG., ↑↑SERVICESSERVICESBR: STEADY AGRICULTURE, BR: STEADY AGRICULTURE, ↓↓ MFG, MFG, ↑↑ TERTIARYTERTIARY CEPALCEPAL

Page 18: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

1818

LABOR FORCE STRUCTURE IN 2003 IN LABOR FORCE STRUCTURE IN 2003 IN PRINCIPLE SHOULD FAVOR HIGHER DENSITY PRINCIPLE SHOULD FAVOR HIGHER DENSITY IN MXIN MX

PRIMARY SECONDARY TERTIARYPRIMARY SECONDARY TERTIARY

MXMX 16.6% 16.6% 25.725.7 57.757.7

BRBR 19.8% 19.8% 21,621,6 58.658.6

Source: CEPALSource: CEPAL

Page 19: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

1919

HIGHER LEVELS OF URBAN HIGHER LEVELS OF URBAN UNEMPLOYMENT IN BR SHOULD UNEMPLOYMENT IN BR SHOULD

DEPRESS UNION DENSITYDEPRESS UNION DENSITYAve. annual rates for 1995-2003Ave. annual rates for 1995-2003

BR 7.6%BR 7.6%

MX 3.5%MX 3.5%

Higher for each year since 1990 in BR Higher for each year since 1990 in BR except 1995-96except 1995-96

Source:CEPALSource:CEPAL

Page 20: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

2020

INFORMALITY AND UNION INFORMALITY AND UNION DENSITY: UNCLEAR LINKSDENSITY: UNCLEAR LINKS

CONSISTENTLY 2-7 POINTS HIGHER IN CONSISTENTLY 2-7 POINTS HIGHER IN BR THAN MX OVER ’90-’03 (ILO)BR THAN MX OVER ’90-’03 (ILO)2003:2003: BR 44.6%BR 44.6%

MX 41.8%MX 41.8%

STEADY INCREASE IN BOTH STEADY INCREASE IN BOTH COUNTRIES COUNTRIES CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP (AND ARROW) CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP (AND ARROW) TO UNION DENSITY UNCLEARTO UNION DENSITY UNCLEARUPHILL FIGHT FOR BRAZILIAN UNIONSUPHILL FIGHT FOR BRAZILIAN UNIONS

Page 21: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

2121

POLITICS & INSTITUTIONSPOLITICS & INSTITUTIONS

DEMOCRATIZATION’S DOUBTFUL IMPACTDEMOCRATIZATION’S DOUBTFUL IMPACT PRO-LABOR QUALITIES EASILY OVERPLAYED, PRO-LABOR QUALITIES EASILY OVERPLAYED,

ESP. FOR BRAZIL’S ELITIST TRANSITIONESP. FOR BRAZIL’S ELITIST TRANSITION COMPARATIVE EVIDENCE ON LATIN AMERICACOMPARATIVE EVIDENCE ON LATIN AMERICA

BR ONLY NEW DEM’CY WITH BR ONLY NEW DEM’CY WITH ↑ DENSITY FROM ↑ DENSITY FROM MID-80S TO MID-90SMID-80S TO MID-90S

5 NEW DEMOCRACIES WITH ↓ DENSITY (ARG, 5 NEW DEMOCRACIES WITH ↓ DENSITY (ARG, GUAT, URU, ES, DR)GUAT, URU, ES, DR)

3 EST’D DEMOCRACIES WITH ↓ DENSITY: CR, VEN, 3 EST’D DEMOCRACIES WITH ↓ DENSITY: CR, VEN, & COL& COL

Page 22: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

2222

CROSS-REGIONAL EVIDENCE INCONCLUSIVE CROSS-REGIONAL EVIDENCE INCONCLUSIVE (ILO DATA BASE, 2005)(ILO DATA BASE, 2005) FOUR ASIAN COUNTRIES WITH SPAN ON UNION FOUR ASIAN COUNTRIES WITH SPAN ON UNION

DATA FROM 80s TO 00s WITH MARKET REFORM, DATA FROM 80s TO 00s WITH MARKET REFORM, GLOBAL INTEGRATION, AND DEM. TRANSITIONSGLOBAL INTEGRATION, AND DEM. TRANSITIONS

* PHILIPPINES & TAIWAN—STABLE RATES* PHILIPPINES & TAIWAN—STABLE RATES

* S. KOREA WITH MAJOR * S. KOREA WITH MAJOR ↓↓

↓↓FOUNDATIONAL DEMOCRACIES DIFFERENT?FOUNDATIONAL DEMOCRACIES DIFFERENT?- IMPACT OF ECONOMIC GROWTH (H. KONG ALSO IMPACT OF ECONOMIC GROWTH (H. KONG ALSO

WITH WITH ↑)?↑)?- TRANSITION AN INSUFFICIENT CONDITION FOR TRANSITION AN INSUFFICIENT CONDITION FOR

UNION DENSITY RISEUNION DENSITY RISE

Page 23: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

2323

PARTY ALLIANCESPARTY ALLIANCES

GIVEN ABOVE REGIONAL DATA ON GIVEN ABOVE REGIONAL DATA ON ↓ ↓ UNIONIZATION THROUGH MID-90S IN UNIONIZATION THROUGH MID-90S IN LABOR-BACKED GOVT’S AND REGIMES LABOR-BACKED GOVT’S AND REGIMES (MEX, VEN, ARG, ETC.), BENEFITS OF (MEX, VEN, ARG, ETC.), BENEFITS OF “INSIDER STATUS” CLEARLY OVERRATED“INSIDER STATUS” CLEARLY OVERRATED

““SIDE PAYMENTS” AND “DEAL MAKING” ON SIDE PAYMENTS” AND “DEAL MAKING” ON NEOLIBERAL REFORM TO PRESERVE CORE NEOLIBERAL REFORM TO PRESERVE CORE ORGANIZATIONAL RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL RESOURCES OVERRATED IN TERMS OF IMPACT IN OVERRATED IN TERMS OF IMPACT IN FORESTALLING DE-UNIONIZATIONFORESTALLING DE-UNIONIZATION

Page 24: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

2424

Reform of Corporatist Labor Reform of Corporatist Labor Relations Institutions: “Less than Relations Institutions: “Less than

Meets the Eye”Meets the Eye”

MX: NEITHER DEMOCRATIZING NOR MX: NEITHER DEMOCRATIZING NOR FLEXIBILIZING LEGAL REFORMS OF FLEXIBILIZING LEGAL REFORMS OF CORPORATIST INSTITUTIONS (LEY CORPORATIST INSTITUTIONS (LEY FEDERAL DEL TRABAJO, JUNTA, FEDERAL DEL TRABAJO, JUNTA, EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION)EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION) GOOD FOR CORPORATIST UNION GOOD FOR CORPORATIST UNION

ACTIVITY, BAD FOR MODERN, ACTIVITY, BAD FOR MODERN, INDEPENDENT UNIONISM, INDIFFERENT INDEPENDENT UNIONISM, INDIFFERENT FOR UNION DENSITY FOR UNION DENSITY PER SEPER SE

Page 25: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

2525

REGULATORY REFORM IN BR: REGULATORY REFORM IN BR: ONE STEP FORWARD, ONE ONE STEP FORWARD, ONE

STEP BACKSTEP BACK1988 CONSTITUTION AND SARNEY GOV’T: 1988 CONSTITUTION AND SARNEY GOV’T: ↑FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, ↓STATE ↑FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, ↓STATE INTERVENTION IN UNION FORMATION, INTERVENTION IN UNION FORMATION, ↑BENEFITS (MATERNAL, PATERNAL), ↓ ↑BENEFITS (MATERNAL, PATERNAL), ↓ WORKWEEKWORKWEEK

CARDOSO GOV’T: PARTIAL FLEXIBIZING CARDOSO GOV’T: PARTIAL FLEXIBIZING REFORMS (P/T & TEMP CONTRACTS, ↓ REFORMS (P/T & TEMP CONTRACTS, ↓ EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION TO SEVERANCE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION TO SEVERANCE PAY SYSTEM, ETC.) WHILE STILL OTHERS PAY SYSTEM, ETC.) WHILE STILL OTHERS FAILFAIL

Page 26: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

2626

BRAZIL IN 2005BRAZIL IN 2005

• HYBRID CORPORATIST/PLURALIST HYBRID CORPORATIST/PLURALIST LABOR SYSTEM STILL IN PLACE: LABOR SYSTEM STILL IN PLACE: UNION TAXUNION TAX PRINCIPLE OF PRINCIPLE OF UNICIDADEUNICIDADE (MONOPOLY) (MONOPOLY) LABOR COURT SYSTEMLABOR COURT SYSTEM CLT VARGAS-ERA LABOR LAWSCLT VARGAS-ERA LABOR LAWS

Page 27: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

2727

CORPORATIST LABOR REFORM CORPORATIST LABOR REFORM & STATE ELITES: SUMMING UP& STATE ELITES: SUMMING UP

GOVERNING ELITES DON’T GET MOST GOVERNING ELITES DON’T GET MOST OF THE REFORM THEY SEEK IN OF THE REFORM THEY SEEK IN EITHER: LONG LIVE CORPORATISMEITHER: LONG LIVE CORPORATISM

MORE UNIFORM FLEXIBILIZING MORE UNIFORM FLEXIBILIZING REFORM IMPULSE IN MXREFORM IMPULSE IN MX

DIFFICULT TO SEE THESE (NON) DIFFICULT TO SEE THESE (NON) REFORMS AND POLICIES AS DECISIVE REFORMS AND POLICIES AS DECISIVE FOR (DE)UNIONIZATIONFOR (DE)UNIONIZATION

Page 28: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

2828

ARGUMENT IN BRIEFARGUMENT IN BRIEF

WITHIN MORE/LESS FAVORABLE WITHIN MORE/LESS FAVORABLE SEQUENCING OF ECONOMIC AND SEQUENCING OF ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL TRANSITIONS…..POLITICAL TRANSITIONS…..

DIFFERENT STRATEGIES OF DIFFERENT STRATEGIES OF ORGANIZATION, MOBILIZATION, AND ORGANIZATION, MOBILIZATION, AND COOPERATION OF BUSINESS AND COOPERATION OF BUSINESS AND LABORLABOR

Page 29: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

2929

SEQUENCING OF POLITICAL SEQUENCING OF POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC TRANSITIONS AND ECONOMIC TRANSITIONS

((ADAPTED FROM COOK ON LAB REFORMADAPTED FROM COOK ON LAB REFORM))

SEQUENCES SHAPE …SEQUENCES SHAPE …- OPPORTUNITY STRUCTURES - OPPORTUNITY STRUCTURES

FOR FOR UNION ACTION—MORE OR UNION ACTION—MORE OR LESS LESS CLOSEDCLOSED DEGREE OF CONSOLIDATION OF ANTI-DEGREE OF CONSOLIDATION OF ANTI-

LABOR FORCES IN BUSINESS AND STATELABOR FORCES IN BUSINESS AND STATE

Page 30: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

3030

SEQUENCING SCENARIOSSEQUENCING SCENARIOS

1)1) MARKETS FIRST, THEN DEMOCRACY: MXMARKETS FIRST, THEN DEMOCRACY: MX HIGHLY CONSTRAINING ENVIRONMENT FOR UNIONSHIGHLY CONSTRAINING ENVIRONMENT FOR UNIONS

- SIMILARITY (WITH CAVEATS) TO CHILE - SIMILARITY (WITH CAVEATS) TO CHILE FROM PINOCHET TO CONCERTACIONFROM PINOCHET TO CONCERTACION

2) DEMOCRACY FIRST, THEN MARKETS: BR 2) DEMOCRACY FIRST, THEN MARKETS: BR LESS LESS CONSTRAINING ENVIRONMENT FORUNION ACTIVITYCONSTRAINING ENVIRONMENT FORUNION ACTIVITY

- PLAUSIBLE IN ASIAN CASES, BUT WHY DOESN’T - PLAUSIBLE IN ASIAN CASES, BUT WHY DOESN’T WORK IN OTHER POST-TRANSITIONAL WORK IN OTHER POST-TRANSITIONAL SETTINGS IN LAT AM (E.G., ARG, PERU)?SETTINGS IN LAT AM (E.G., ARG, PERU)?

* *

Page 31: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

3131

Central Role for Agency and Central Role for Agency and Strategy within SequencingStrategy within Sequencing

Focus on labor and business actors and Focus on labor and business actors and strategic interplaystrategic interplay

Builds on historical literature on how nascent Builds on historical literature on how nascent labor movements in now advanced countries labor movements in now advanced countries achieve initial major growth spurtsachieve initial major growth spurts Ratcheting up of unionization and collective Ratcheting up of unionization and collective

bargaining through initial impulse from below of bargaining through initial impulse from below of “social movement unionism,” followed by its “social movement unionism,” followed by its institutionalization into reformist “social institutionalization into reformist “social democratic unionism”democratic unionism”

Page 32: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

3232

Responses to CUT’s Responses to CUT’s Novo Novo SindicalismoSindicalismo: Focus on Autonomy, : Focus on Autonomy,

Mobilization, and NegotiationMobilization, and Negotiation

BUSINESS: DEFENSIVE AND THEN BUSINESS: DEFENSIVE AND THEN PROACTIVE RESPONSES PROACTIVE RESPONSES REVITALIZATION OF BUSINESS REVITALIZATION OF BUSINESS

ASSOCIATIONS AND EMPLOYER ASSOCIATIONS AND EMPLOYER SINDICATOSSINDICATOS

PROFESSIONALIZATION AND PROFESSIONALIZATION AND VALORIZATION OF HUMAN RESOURCES VALORIZATION OF HUMAN RESOURCES AND NEGOTIATIONAND NEGOTIATION

ACCEPTANCE OF NEW FORMS OF ACCEPTANCE OF NEW FORMS OF AUTONOMOUS, DIRECT BARGAINING AUTONOMOUS, DIRECT BARGAINING

Page 33: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

3333

Reaction of Rest of Union Reaction of Rest of Union Movement to CUT’s Oppositional Movement to CUT’s Oppositional

MilitancyMilitancy

ImitationImitation

DifferentiationDifferentiation

Reorganization Reorganization

CompetitionCompetition

Page 34: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

3434

From 2 independent labor centrals in 1983 From 2 independent labor centrals in 1983 to seven today to seven today Even with a 43% jump in number of unions Even with a 43% jump in number of unions

nationwide, increased from 30 to 38% in nationwide, increased from 30 to 38% in sindicatos affiliated with (independent) labor sindicatos affiliated with (independent) labor centrals (’91-’01)centrals (’91-’01)

52% of all unionized workers are in centrals 52% of all unionized workers are in centrals (of which 71% are in CUT, 9% in Forca (of which 71% are in CUT, 9% in Forca Sindical, and rest in other 5)Sindical, and rest in other 5)

Page 35: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

3535

Revitalization of Collective Revitalization of Collective BargainingBargaining

INCREASE IN AUTONOMY, INCREASE IN AUTONOMY, FREQUENCY, LEVELS, AND SUBJECT FREQUENCY, LEVELS, AND SUBJECT MATTERMATTER HALF OF ALL URBAN UNIONS FOUND TO TAKE HALF OF ALL URBAN UNIONS FOUND TO TAKE

PART IN COLLECTIVE BARGAINING IN BOTH PART IN COLLECTIVE BARGAINING IN BOTH 1991 AND 20011991 AND 2001

↓ ↓ ROLE OF LABOR COURTS: FROM ROLE OF LABOR COURTS: FROM INVOLVEMENT IN 33% OF ALL SETTLEMENTS IN INVOLVEMENT IN 33% OF ALL SETTLEMENTS IN ’91 TO ONLY 12% IN 2001’91 TO ONLY 12% IN 2001

81% OF ALL CONTRACTS REACHED THROUGH 81% OF ALL CONTRACTS REACHED THROUGH COLLECTIVE BARGAININGCOLLECTIVE BARGAINING

Page 36: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

3636

IN HIGHLY ORGANIZED IN HIGHLY ORGANIZED SECTORS, CONSIDERABLE SECTORS, CONSIDERABLE UNION INFLUENCE OVER UNION INFLUENCE OVER PRODUCTIVE RESTRUCTURING PRODUCTIVE RESTRUCTURING (WORK RULES, PARTICIPATION (WORK RULES, PARTICIPATION PROGRAMS, OUTSOURCING, PROGRAMS, OUTSOURCING, TRAINING, REDEPLOYMENT, TRAINING, REDEPLOYMENT, ETC.)ETC.)3636

Page 37: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

3737

CONTRAST WITH STRATEGIES CONTRAST WITH STRATEGIES OF MEXICAN LABOR AND OF MEXICAN LABOR AND

BUSINESSBUSINESSUNIONS: LITTLE BREAK FROM UNIONS: LITTLE BREAK FROM CORPORATIST ORGANIZATIONS AND CORPORATIST ORGANIZATIONS AND PRACTICES, EVEN AMONG PRACTICES, EVEN AMONG DISSIDENTS AND INDEPENDENTSDISSIDENTS AND INDEPENDENTSBUSINESS: RELIANCE ON BUSINESS: RELIANCE ON CORPORATIST CONTROLS FOR CORPORATIST CONTROLS FOR LABOR PEACE, NO COALITION-LABOR PEACE, NO COALITION-BUILDING WITH LABOR, RETOGRADE BUILDING WITH LABOR, RETOGRADE POSITION ON LEGAL REFORMPOSITION ON LEGAL REFORM

Page 38: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

3838

BR: Stress on autonomy, directBR: Stress on autonomy, directengagement, and institution engagement, and institution

building by business and labor-- building by business and labor-- Collective bargainingCollective bargaining

MX:MX: Emphasis on maximizing Emphasis on maximizing advantage within existing advantage within existing

institutions of state mediation--institutions of state mediation--Political bargainingPolitical bargaining

Page 39: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

3939

CONCLUSIONCONCLUSION

GLOBALIZATION AND MARKET REFORM GLOBALIZATION AND MARKET REFORM DON’T DETERMINE A SWEEPING AWAY OF DON’T DETERMINE A SWEEPING AWAY OF UNIONS UNIONS NOR DOES DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION NOR DOES DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION FOLLOWING LASTING AUTHORITARIAN FOLLOWING LASTING AUTHORITARIAN RULE ENTAIL AN INEXORABLE RULE ENTAIL AN INEXORABLE STRENGTHENING OF UNIONS, THOUGH STRENGTHENING OF UNIONS, THOUGH CAN OPEN OPPORTUNITIES FOR CAN OPEN OPPORTUNITIES FOR INNOVATIVE LABOR AND BUS. ACTIONSINNOVATIVE LABOR AND BUS. ACTIONSCONSTRAINED BUT CONTINGENT PROCESS CONSTRAINED BUT CONTINGENT PROCESS WHERE AGENCY AND STRATEGY OF WHERE AGENCY AND STRATEGY OF ORGANIZED INTERESTS MATTERORGANIZED INTERESTS MATTER

Page 40: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

4040

WHY SHOULD WE CARE ABOUT WHY SHOULD WE CARE ABOUT UNIONS’ FATE?UNIONS’ FATE?

DIFFERENT SET OF QUALITATIVE DIFFERENT SET OF QUALITATIVE WORKPLACE TRENDS DOCUMENTED IN WORKPLACE TRENDS DOCUMENTED IN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS LITERATURE….EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS LITERATURE….

HISTORICALLY IN ADVANCED AND LATIN HISTORICALLY IN ADVANCED AND LATIN COUNTRIES, CLOSE CORRELATION WITH COUNTRIES, CLOSE CORRELATION WITH DEGREE OF WELFARISMDEGREE OF WELFARISM

MAY HELP EXPLAIN GREATER AND MORE MAY HELP EXPLAIN GREATER AND MORE INCLUSIVE SOCIAL POLICY EFFORT IN BR INCLUSIVE SOCIAL POLICY EFFORT IN BR THAN MX AND ALSO MORE ENERGETIC THAN MX AND ALSO MORE ENERGETIC LABOR MARKET POLICIES…..LABOR MARKET POLICIES…..

Page 41: CONTEMPORARY META-CHALLENGES FOR LABOR MOVEMENTS

4141

GREATER DYNAMISM IN BR IN REAL GREATER DYNAMISM IN BR IN REAL MFG WAGES AND REAL URBAN MFG WAGES AND REAL URBAN MINIMUM WAGESMINIMUM WAGES