{"title":"Index to Issues 33-42, Historical Studies in Industrial Relations (2012-2021)","authors":"","doi":"10.3828/hsir.2021.42.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2021.42.9","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45651146","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Between the late seventeenth and mid-nineteenth centuries in England, female workers’ involvement in employment disputes that were summarily adjudicated by Justices of the Peace (magistrates) under master and servant law decreased. Women’s diminishing work opportunities in arable agriculture after the late eighteenth century likely contributed to this downward trend. However, female textile workers were a notable exception, as manufacturers and magistrates used employment law to coerce greater productivity from them. Master and servant prosecutions both reflected changes in women’s occupational patterns and served as a means to exploit a feminized textile labour force that was crucial to industrialization and to our interpretation of its nature and causes.
{"title":"‘A Great Number of … Women’?: The Changing Involvement of Female Workers in Master and Servant Cases in England, 1685-1860","authors":"M. Chartrand","doi":"10.3828/hsir.2020.41.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2020.41.1","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Between the late seventeenth and mid-nineteenth centuries in England, female workers’ involvement in employment disputes that were summarily adjudicated by Justices of the Peace (magistrates) under master and servant law decreased. Women’s diminishing work opportunities in arable agriculture after the late eighteenth century likely contributed to this downward trend. However, female textile workers were a notable exception, as manufacturers and magistrates used employment law to coerce greater productivity from them. Master and servant prosecutions both reflected changes in women’s occupational patterns and served as a means to exploit a feminized textile labour force that was crucial to industrialization and to our interpretation of its nature and causes.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48526121","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The paper presents an auto-ethnographic account of a personal socio-psychological ‘journey’ from work in a modern ‘progressive’ oil company in south-eastern England to the engineering industry in the Coventry district. The role of the association in industrial relations, in which the author was involved, is described in a series of vignettes. The paper presents detailed observations regarding the extant culture of that area and industrial relations in the companies represented by the Coventry and District Engineering Employers’ Association from the point of view of a quasi-independent but participant observer.
{"title":"Backwards in Time? Reflections of an Industrial Relations Officer in the Coventry and District Engineering Employers’ Association, 1977-1979","authors":"Neil H. Ritson","doi":"10.3828/hsir.2020.41.11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2020.41.11","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The paper presents an auto-ethnographic account of a personal socio-psychological ‘journey’ from work in a modern ‘progressive’ oil company in south-eastern England to the engineering industry in the Coventry district. The role of the association in industrial relations, in which the author was involved, is described in a series of vignettes. The paper presents detailed observations regarding the extant culture of that area and industrial relations in the companies represented by the Coventry and District Engineering Employers’ Association from the point of view of a quasi-independent but participant observer.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47149638","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Hugh Clegg's riposte to the 1977 Bullock Report on Industrial Democracy was one of seven papers published from a conference on the subject in April that year. His contribution has to be seen against his long-standing views (expressed, for example, in 1951 and 1960) on industrial democracy which he saw in practical terms as free trade unions conducting collective bargaining. On the Donovan Commission (1965–68), he supported the majority opposition to recommending even voluntary schemes for worker directors. In 1977 he regarded worker directors as irrelevant to the urgent, practical task of reforming British industrial relations. For Clegg, continental versions of industrial democracy worked where there was already a successful prior industrial relations system, developed through workplace and industry institutional practices over decades. One new, top-level initiative could not create that.
{"title":"Reading Hugh Clegg’s ‘The Bullock Report and European Experience’ (1977) in Historical Context","authors":"P. Ackers","doi":"10.3828/hsir.2020.41.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2020.41.8","url":null,"abstract":"Hugh Clegg's riposte to the 1977 Bullock Report on Industrial Democracy was one of seven papers published from a conference on the subject in April that year. His contribution has to be seen against his long-standing views (expressed, for example, in 1951 and 1960) on industrial democracy which he saw in practical terms as free trade unions conducting collective bargaining. On the Donovan Commission (1965–68), he supported the majority opposition to recommending even voluntary schemes for worker directors. In 1977 he regarded worker directors as irrelevant to the urgent, practical task of reforming British industrial relations. For Clegg, continental versions of industrial democracy worked where there was already a successful prior industrial relations system, developed through workplace and industry institutional practices over decades. One new, top-level initiative could not create that.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43975814","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Drawing on Huw Beynon’s paper in HSIR 40 (2019), this article surveys the position of women in the UK labour market over the last fifty years. It suggests that many of the developments Beynon describes are relevant to women’s employment, but with the added twist that women’s position in the labour market and society is structured by their responsibility within the total social organization of labour for reproductive labour. Despite increased women’s employment, gender segregation, both horizontal and vertical, is obstinately persistent, especially in working-class occupations. Two of these occupations, care work and retail, are used to illustrate how increasing precarity of jobs combined with technologies of control have brought about a dehumanization of work. It is concluded that the restructuring of global capitalism on neoliberal principles has negatively affected opportunities for women workers.
{"title":"Crisis at Work: Gender, Class, and the Dehumanization of Jobs","authors":"H. Bradley","doi":"10.3828/hsir.2020.41.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2020.41.5","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Drawing on Huw Beynon’s paper in HSIR 40 (2019), this article surveys the position of women in the UK labour market over the last fifty years. It suggests that many of the developments Beynon describes are relevant to women’s employment, but with the added twist that women’s position in the labour market and society is structured by their responsibility within the total social organization of labour for reproductive labour. Despite increased women’s employment, gender segregation, both horizontal and vertical, is obstinately persistent, especially in working-class occupations. Two of these occupations, care work and retail, are used to illustrate how increasing precarity of jobs combined with technologies of control have brought about a dehumanization of work. It is concluded that the restructuring of global capitalism on neoliberal principles has negatively affected opportunities for women workers.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47204770","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Book Reviews","authors":"Martin Crawford, A. Campbell, R. Fryer","doi":"10.3828/hsir.2020.41.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2020.41.14","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43634290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Whatever the shortcomings of the Bullock Committee’s terms of reference, the injunction to take account of European experience was not one of them. The volume and scope of the evidence is, however, limited: equal representation for shareholders and workers has been tried only in the German coal and steel industries where it was introduced by the occupation authorities after the Second World War. Most European countries, including France and Italy, have nothing to offer. The Committee relied mainly on West Germany and Sweden, with occasional references to Holland and Denmark. Continental versions of industrial democracy worked where an industrial relations system already existed, developed through workplace and industry institutional practices over decades. Nevertheless, the Committee’s majority report used European evidence to support its three main proposals. Worker directors are irrelevant to the task of reforming British industrial relations. European experience is of limited relevance because Britain is not behind European countries in its problem of industrial relations in the enterprise, but ahead of them in what the late Allan Flanders called ‘the challenge from below’, which is being posed all over the world but more sharply in Britain than anywhere else.
{"title":"The Bullock Report and European Experience (1977)","authors":"H. Clegg","doi":"10.3828/hsir.2020.41.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2020.41.7","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Whatever the shortcomings of the Bullock Committee’s terms of reference, the injunction to take account of European experience was not one of them. The volume and scope of the evidence is, however, limited: equal representation for shareholders and workers has been tried only in the German coal and steel industries where it was introduced by the occupation authorities after the Second World War. Most European countries, including France and Italy, have nothing to offer. The Committee relied mainly on West Germany and Sweden, with occasional references to Holland and Denmark. Continental versions of industrial democracy worked where an industrial relations system already existed, developed through workplace and industry institutional practices over decades. Nevertheless, the Committee’s majority report used European evidence to support its three main proposals. Worker directors are irrelevant to the task of reforming British industrial relations. European experience is of limited relevance because Britain is not behind European countries in its problem of industrial relations in the enterprise, but ahead of them in what the late Allan Flanders called ‘the challenge from below’, which is being posed all over the world but more sharply in Britain than anywhere else.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41632184","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Hugh Clegg’s paper, ‘The Bullock Report and European Experience’, written in 1977, analyses the role of worker directors appointed to the boards of UK companies, a move which formed part of the then Labour government’s Social Contract with the trade unions designed to stem the country’s long-term industrial decline. My commentary argues that three aspects of the paper are likely to strike the contemporary reader most forcibly. Initially it seems alien as it describes a world of collectivist industrial relations that was erased by the Conservative government elected in 1979. Yet on closer reading its main theme - reforming corporate accountability - emerges as all too familiar, as worker exploitation and other corporate scandals have continued largely unchecked to the present. And we may reflect that more recent research into policy transfer has improved our contemporary understanding of the barriers to corporate governance reform since the 1970s. Clegg correctly cautioned against attempting to import institutions from countries such as Germany into the UK, a view that has since been refined by analysis of the contrasts between co-ordinated and liberal market economies. Reforming corporate governance requires tailor-made policies, not those transferred merely on grounds of success in their original host countries.
休·克莱格（Hugh Clegg）于1977年撰写的论文《布洛克报告与欧洲经验》（The Bullock Report and European Experience）分析了被任命为英国公司董事会成员的工人董事的作用，此举是当时工党政府与工会签订的社会合同的一部分，旨在阻止英国长期的工业衰退。我的评论认为，这篇论文的三个方面可能最能打动当代读者。起初，它似乎很陌生，因为它描述了一个被1979年当选的保守党政府抹去的集体主义劳资关系世界。然而，仔细阅读它的主题——改革企业问责制——似乎太熟悉了，因为剥削工人和其他企业丑闻一直持续到现在。我们可能会反思，最近对政策转移的研究提高了我们对20世纪70年代以来公司治理改革障碍的当代理解。克莱格正确地警告不要试图将德国等国的机构进口到英国，这一观点后来通过分析协调和自由市场经济之间的对比而得到了完善。改革公司治理需要量身定制的政策，而不是仅仅因为在原来的东道国取得成功而转移的政策。
{"title":"‘The Bullock Report and European Experience’: What We Can Still Learn about Worker Directors from Hugh Clegg","authors":"Michael Gold","doi":"10.3828/hsir.2020.41.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2020.41.9","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Hugh Clegg’s paper, ‘The Bullock Report and European Experience’, written in 1977, analyses the role of worker directors appointed to the boards of UK companies, a move which formed part of the then Labour government’s Social Contract with the trade unions designed to stem the country’s long-term industrial decline. My commentary argues that three aspects of the paper are likely to strike the contemporary reader most forcibly. Initially it seems alien as it describes a world of collectivist industrial relations that was erased by the Conservative government elected in 1979. Yet on closer reading its main theme - reforming corporate accountability - emerges as all too familiar, as worker exploitation and other corporate scandals have continued largely unchecked to the present. And we may reflect that more recent research into policy transfer has improved our contemporary understanding of the barriers to corporate governance reform since the 1970s. Clegg correctly cautioned against attempting to import institutions from countries such as Germany into the UK, a view that has since been refined by analysis of the contrasts between co-ordinated and liberal market economies. Reforming corporate governance requires tailor-made policies, not those transferred merely on grounds of success in their original host countries.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42838980","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Extended Review","authors":"R. Seifert, T. Sibley","doi":"10.3828/hsir.2020.41.13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2020.41.13","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42331144","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：