Understanding the positions taken by moderate union confederations and centre-left parties during labour market reforms in Portugal and Spain: Why the configuration of left parties and trade union confederations matters?

IF 2.6 3区 管理学 Q2 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR European Journal of Industrial Relations Pub Date : 2021-05-07 DOI:10.1177/09596801211005765
Paulo Marques, Dora Fonseca
{"title":"Understanding the positions taken by moderate union confederations and centre-left parties during labour market reforms in Portugal and Spain: Why the configuration of left parties and trade union confederations matters?","authors":"Paulo Marques, Dora Fonseca","doi":"10.1177/09596801211005765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The insider-outsider politics approach conjectures that moderate unions and centre-left parties safeguard the interests of insiders and neglect outsiders in labour market reforms. This article challenges this hypothesis. By comparing the positions taken by centre-left parties and moderate union confederations during labour market reforms in Portugal and Spain (1975–2019), it shows that while they may indeed protect insiders, they sometimes do the opposite. To explain this, the article argues that more attention must be paid to the configuration of left parties and confederations. In Portugal, where communist and radical left parties were strong, the centre-left was afraid of losing outsiders’ electoral support, and thus it did not follow a pro-insider strategy. This was reinforced by the fact that the centre-left had to face the opposition of a strong class-oriented confederation that was not willing to commit to two-tier reforms. This was not what happened in Spain. The centre-left, supported by a union confederation, undertook a two-tier reform in 1984 because there was a different configuration of left parties and confederations. Notwithstanding, this was not a stable equilibrium because this confederation changed its position over time when it realized the negative consequences of these reforms. Henceforth, their strategy became more pro-outsider.","PeriodicalId":47034,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Industrial Relations","volume":"28 1","pages":"65 - 84"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/09596801211005765","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Industrial Relations","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09596801211005765","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The insider-outsider politics approach conjectures that moderate unions and centre-left parties safeguard the interests of insiders and neglect outsiders in labour market reforms. This article challenges this hypothesis. By comparing the positions taken by centre-left parties and moderate union confederations during labour market reforms in Portugal and Spain (1975–2019), it shows that while they may indeed protect insiders, they sometimes do the opposite. To explain this, the article argues that more attention must be paid to the configuration of left parties and confederations. In Portugal, where communist and radical left parties were strong, the centre-left was afraid of losing outsiders’ electoral support, and thus it did not follow a pro-insider strategy. This was reinforced by the fact that the centre-left had to face the opposition of a strong class-oriented confederation that was not willing to commit to two-tier reforms. This was not what happened in Spain. The centre-left, supported by a union confederation, undertook a two-tier reform in 1984 because there was a different configuration of left parties and confederations. Notwithstanding, this was not a stable equilibrium because this confederation changed its position over time when it realized the negative consequences of these reforms. Henceforth, their strategy became more pro-outsider.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
了解葡萄牙和西班牙劳动力市场改革期间温和派工会联合会和中左翼政党的立场:为什么左翼政党和工会联合会的配置很重要?
内部人-外部人政治方法推测,在劳动力市场改革中,温和的工会和中左翼政党会保护内部人的利益,而忽视外部人。本文对这一假设提出了挑战。通过比较葡萄牙和西班牙(1975-2019)劳动力市场改革期间中左翼政党和温和工会联盟的立场,结果表明,尽管它们可能确实保护了内部人士,但有时却适得其反。为了解释这一点,文章认为必须更多地关注左翼政党和联盟的配置。在葡萄牙,共产主义和激进左翼政党都很强大,中左翼害怕失去局外人的选举支持,因此没有遵循亲局内人的策略。中左翼不得不面对一个强大的以阶级为导向的联盟的反对,而这个联盟不愿意致力于两级改革,这一事实进一步强化了这一点。西班牙的情况并非如此。1984年,由于左翼政党和联盟的结构不同,在工会联盟的支持下,中左翼进行了两级改革。尽管如此,这并不是一个稳定的平衡,因为随着时间的推移,当这个联邦意识到这些改革的负面后果时,它改变了自己的立场。从此以后,他们的策略变得更加亲外。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Industrial Relations
European Journal of Industrial Relations INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR-
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
11.50%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: It embraces a broad definition of industrial relations and includes articles which relate to any aspect of work and employment. It publishes rigorous and innovative work on and from all European countries, from the Atlantic to the Urals. All social science disciplines are relevant to its remit, and interdisciplinary approaches are particulary encouraged. A major objective is to foster cross-national comparative analysis; and in this context, work which relates European developments to broader global experience is welcome.
期刊最新文献
Job quality and institutional investors: Evidence in 17 OECD countries, 1993-2017 Job mobility, reallocation and wage growth: A tale of two countries Changing labour migration flows after Brexit: An analysis of UK survey and administrative data Job tenure in Western Europe, 1993–2021: Decline or stability? Strategic labour inspection in fissured workplaces and transnational employment relations: Lessons from co-enforcement approaches and transgovernmental cooperation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1