Does labor–management partnership deprive union members of activism toward their unions? Evidence from union members in Korea

Abstract

This study aims to analyze whether partnership ideology really deprives union members of the willingness and passion to act for their union, resulting in union decline, and whether militant unionism, which includes adversarial ideology against employers is more effective for igniting members' activism for their unions rather than labor–management partnership. The survey data were obtained from union members working in Mechanical and Metal Manufacturers Complex, Changwon, Republic of Korea. Judging from the overall results of the data analysis, Kelly's (1996) claim that moderate unionism based on partnership ideology would undermine members' activism for their unions was not supported; on the contrary, partnership ideology had positive effects on both members' activism for their unions and decision-making practices. The difference between partnership and militancy is that militancy had an intensive effect on the narrow focus of union activities, but the impact of partnership achieved a better balance between participation in union activities and in management decision making.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.