The ‘Oxford School of Industrial Relations’, centred at Nuffield College, was one major instance of academics entering the ‘corridors of power’ and attempting to resolve national problems of unofficial strikes, inflation, and restrictive practices, most notably via the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers’ Associations (Donovan), 1965–68. For historians today, there are two reasons why this mattered. First, because, in effect, they had created a new social-science field of industrial relations. Oxford was not the only industrial relations centre, but during the 1950s and 1960s it was the strongest and most politically influential. Second, and more important at the time, the Oxford School addressed a central policy moment in the development of social-democratic ‘bargained corporatism’ and the role that trade unions might play in this. In many respects, the Oxford School were representative figures of the post-war progressive generation, dedicated to ‘reconstruction’. It had had a powerful impact ...
{"title":"Changing Gender Roles and Public-Policy Perspectives since Donovan: A Trade-Union View","authors":"S. Ferns","doi":"10.3828/HSIR.2016.37.11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/HSIR.2016.37.11","url":null,"abstract":"The ‘Oxford School of Industrial Relations’, centred at Nuffield College, was one major instance of academics entering the ‘corridors of power’ and attempting to resolve national problems of unofficial strikes, inflation, and restrictive practices, most notably via the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers’ Associations (Donovan), 1965–68. For historians today, there are two reasons why this mattered. First, because, in effect, they had created a new social-science field of industrial relations. Oxford was not the only industrial relations centre, but during the 1950s and 1960s it was the strongest and most politically influential. Second, and more important at the time, the Oxford School addressed a central policy moment in the development of social-democratic ‘bargained corporatism’ and the role that trade unions might play in this. In many respects, the Oxford School were representative figures of the post-war progressive generation, dedicated to ‘reconstruction’. It had had a powerful impact ...","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3828/HSIR.2016.37.11","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70518090","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 ‘Oxford School of Industrial Relations’, centred at Nuffield College, was one major instance of academics entering the ‘corridors of power’ and attempting to resolve national problems of unofficial strikes, inflation, and restrictive practices, most notably via the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers’ Associations (Donovan), 1965–68. For historians today, there are two reasons why this mattered. First, because, in effect, they had created a new social-science field of industrial relations. Oxford was not the only industrial relations centre, but during the 1950s and 1960s it was the strongest and most politically influential. Second, and more important at the time, the Oxford School addressed a central policy moment in the development of social-democratic ‘bargained corporatism’ and the role that trade unions might play in this. In many respects, the Oxford School were representative figures of the post-war progressive generation, dedicated to ‘reconstruction’. It had had a powerful impact ...
{"title":"A Canadian’s Reflections on the Oxford School","authors":"G. Bain","doi":"10.3828/HSIR.2016.37.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/HSIR.2016.37.8","url":null,"abstract":"The ‘Oxford School of Industrial Relations’, centred at Nuffield College, was one major instance of academics entering the ‘corridors of power’ and attempting to resolve national problems of unofficial strikes, inflation, and restrictive practices, most notably via the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers’ Associations (Donovan), 1965–68. For historians today, there are two reasons why this mattered. First, because, in effect, they had created a new social-science field of industrial relations. Oxford was not the only industrial relations centre, but during the 1950s and 1960s it was the strongest and most politically influential. Second, and more important at the time, the Oxford School addressed a central policy moment in the development of social-democratic ‘bargained corporatism’ and the role that trade unions might play in this. In many respects, the Oxford School were representative figures of the post-war progressive generation, dedicated to ‘reconstruction’. It had had a powerful impact ...","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70518564","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 diesel engine manufacturer L. Gardner and Sons saw two long strikes in 1968 and late 1972, after which a militant shop-steward leadership emerged. In 1980 a high-profile strike and occupation against mass redundancies at the height of the manufacturing recession won significant concessions. The organization exhibited by the Gardner workforce was remarkable and represented a partial victory in a period when strikes were declining and increasingly difficult to organize. However, a countermobilization by the company led to the erosion of the gains: established practices based on ‘mutuality’ (where working times and work organization were agreed between unions and management) were eroded, with managerial control reasserted through regular redundancies. The erosion of the concessions won by the 1980 strike and occupation demonstrates the fragility of gains achieved through trade-unionism. It also demonstrates the difficulty of maintaining strong workplace organization in the face of recession, deindustrialization and counter-mobilization by employers and the state in Britain in the 1980s.
柴油发动机制造商L. Gardner and Sons公司在1968年和1972年底经历了两次长期罢工，之后出现了一个激进的工会领导。1980年，在制造业衰退最严重的时候，一场反对大规模裁员的高调罢工和占领赢得了重大让步。加德纳公司的员工表现出的组织能力非常出色，在罢工日益减少、组织起来越来越困难的时期，这代表了他们取得的部分胜利。然而，公司的反动员导致了收益的侵蚀:基于“互惠”(工作时间和工作组织由工会和管理层商定)的既定做法被侵蚀，管理控制通过定期裁员重新确立。1980年罢工和占领所赢得的让步遭到侵蚀，表明工会主义所取得的成果是脆弱的。它还表明，在20世纪80年代的英国，面对经济衰退、去工业化和雇主和政府的反动员，维持强大的工作场所组织是困难的。
{"title":"Conflict, mobilization, and deindustrialization: The 1980 Gardner strike and occupation","authors":"S. Mustchin","doi":"10.3828/HSIR.2016.37.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/HSIR.2016.37.5","url":null,"abstract":"The diesel engine manufacturer L. Gardner and Sons saw two long strikes in 1968 and late 1972, after which a militant shop-steward leadership emerged. In 1980 a high-profile strike and occupation against mass redundancies at the height of the manufacturing recession won significant concessions. The organization exhibited by the Gardner workforce was remarkable and represented a partial victory in a period when strikes were declining and increasingly difficult to organize. However, a countermobilization by the company led to the erosion of the gains: established practices based on ‘mutuality’ (where working times and work organization were agreed between unions and management) were eroded, with managerial control reasserted through regular redundancies. The erosion of the concessions won by the 1980 strike and occupation demonstrates the fragility of gains achieved through trade-unionism. It also demonstrates the difficulty of maintaining strong workplace organization in the face of recession, deindustrialization and counter-mobilization by employers and the state in Britain in the 1980s.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70518243","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 ‘Oxford School of Industrial Relations’, centred at Nuffield College, was one major instance of academics entering the ‘corridors of power’ and attempting to resolve national problems of unofficial strikes, inflation, and restrictive practices, most notably via the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers’ Associations (Donovan), 1965–68. For historians today, there are two reasons why this mattered. First, because, in effect, they had created a new social-science field of industrial relations. Oxford was not the only industrial relations centre, but during the 1950s and 1960s it was the strongest and most politically influential. Second, and more important at the time, the Oxford School addressed a central policy moment in the development of social-democratic ‘bargained corporatism’ and the role that trade unions might play in this. In many respects, the Oxford School were representative figures of the post-war progressive generation, dedicated to ‘reconstruction’. It had had a powerful impact ...
{"title":"The Oxford School at Donovan","authors":"W. Brown","doi":"10.3828/HSIR.2016.37.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/HSIR.2016.37.9","url":null,"abstract":"The ‘Oxford School of Industrial Relations’, centred at Nuffield College, was one major instance of academics entering the ‘corridors of power’ and attempting to resolve national problems of unofficial strikes, inflation, and restrictive practices, most notably via the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers’ Associations (Donovan), 1965–68. For historians today, there are two reasons why this mattered. First, because, in effect, they had created a new social-science field of industrial relations. Oxford was not the only industrial relations centre, but during the 1950s and 1960s it was the strongest and most politically influential. Second, and more important at the time, the Oxford School addressed a central policy moment in the development of social-democratic ‘bargained corporatism’ and the role that trade unions might play in this. In many respects, the Oxford School were representative figures of the post-war progressive generation, dedicated to ‘reconstruction’. It had had a powerful impact ...","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70518143","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 ‘Oxford School of Industrial Relations’, centred at Nuffield College, was one major instance of academics entering the ‘corridors of power’ and attempting to resolve national problems of unofficial strikes, inflation, and restrictive practices, most notably via the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers’ Associations (Donovan), 1965–68. For historians today, there are two reasons why this mattered. First, because, in effect, they had created a new social-science field of industrial relations. Oxford was not the only industrial relations centre, but during the 1950s and 1960s it was the strongest and most politically influential. Second, and more important at the time, the Oxford School addressed a central policy moment in the development of social-democratic ‘bargained corporatism’ and the role that trade unions might play in this. In many respects, the Oxford School were representative figures of the post-war progressive generation, dedicated to ‘reconstruction’. It had had a powerful impact on public policy because its pluralist underpinnings were consistent with the needs of social-democratic public policy, sympathetic to trade unions, and could be translated into practical, applied public-policy solutions
{"title":"Symposium: The Oxford School of industrial relations: Fifty years after the 1965–1968 Donovan Commission introduction: Who were the Oxford School and why did they matter?","authors":"P. Ackers","doi":"10.3828/HSIR.2016.37.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/HSIR.2016.37.7","url":null,"abstract":"The ‘Oxford School of Industrial Relations’, centred at Nuffield College, was one major instance of academics entering the ‘corridors of power’ and attempting to resolve national problems of unofficial strikes, inflation, and restrictive practices, most notably via the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers’ Associations (Donovan), 1965–68. For historians today, there are two reasons why this mattered. First, because, in effect, they had created a new social-science field of industrial relations. Oxford was not the only industrial relations centre, but during the 1950s and 1960s it was the strongest and most politically influential. Second, and more important at the time, the Oxford School addressed a central policy moment in the development of social-democratic ‘bargained corporatism’ and the role that trade unions might play in this. In many respects, the Oxford School were representative figures of the post-war progressive generation, dedicated to ‘reconstruction’. It had had a powerful impact on public policy because its pluralist underpinnings were consistent with the needs of social-democratic public policy, sympathetic to trade unions, and could be translated into practical, applied public-policy solutions","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70518512","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}
No paper trail exists in The National Archives to cast light as to how the Trade Disputes Act (TDA) 1906 emerged in its final form. The succession of private members’ bills, many sponsored by the Trades Union Congress, and the Liberal government’s bill, and associated parliamentary debates, are very useful but the process of negotiation within Parliament that produced the finished statute is obscure. The reports of the Parliamentary Committee of the Trades Union Congress are a valuable source, but they are cryptic at times. The documents published here for the first time thus have an importance that belies their brevity in that they provide evidence of Sir Charles Dilke’s position in 1903 on the reform of trade-union law, which came to fruition with the TDA, his radicalism, and that Labour MPs were too modest in their ambitions.
{"title":"The Trade Disputes Bills of 1903: Sir Charles Dilke and Charles Percy Sanger","authors":"Paul M. Smith","doi":"10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.6","url":null,"abstract":"No paper trail exists in The National Archives to cast light as to how the Trade Disputes Act (TDA) 1906 emerged in its final form. The succession of private members’ bills, many sponsored by the Trades Union Congress, and the Liberal government’s bill, and associated parliamentary debates, are very useful but the process of negotiation within Parliament that produced the finished statute is obscure. The reports of the Parliamentary Committee of the Trades Union Congress are a valuable source, but they are cryptic at times. The documents published here for the first time thus have an importance that belies their brevity in that they provide evidence of Sir Charles Dilke’s position in 1903 on the reform of trade-union law, which came to fruition with the TDA, his radicalism, and that Labour MPs were too modest in their ambitions.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.6","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70517322","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 recent books by John Shepherd and Tara Martin Lopez on the Winter of Discontent of 1978–79 provide an opportunity to examine the experience and tactics of several of its strikes and to challenge standard statistical views of its strike record. The main conclusion is to stress the continuity of the local authority and National Health Service disputes of 1979 with their antecedents from 1969 to 1973. Evidence is provided to show that previous instances of mountains of rubbish and unburied corpses did not attract much opprobrium (it is likely that earlier industrial action in the NHS was also generally tolerated). The sensationalization of events by politicians (of both hues) and by some of the media was contingent on a particular set of economic and political circumstances.
约翰·谢泼德(John Shepherd)和塔拉·马丁·洛佩斯(Tara Martin Lopez)最近出版的关于1978-79年不满的冬天的书，提供了一个机会来研究它的几次罢工的经验和策略，并挑战其罢工记录的标准统计观点。主要结论是强调1979年的地方当局和国家保健服务纠纷与其1969年至1973年的前身的连续性。有证据表明，以前堆积如山的垃圾和未埋葬的尸体并没有引起太多的谴责(很可能NHS早期的工业行动也普遍被容忍)。政客(两派)和一些媒体对事件的耸人听闻是取决于特定的经济和政治环境。
{"title":"Striking Facts about the ‘Winter of Discontent’","authors":"Dave Lyddon","doi":"10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.8","url":null,"abstract":"The recent books by John Shepherd and Tara Martin Lopez on the Winter of Discontent of 1978–79 provide an opportunity to examine the experience and tactics of several of its strikes and to challenge standard statistical views of its strike record. The main conclusion is to stress the continuity of the local authority and National Health Service disputes of 1979 with their antecedents from 1969 to 1973. Evidence is provided to show that previous instances of mountains of rubbish and unburied corpses did not attract much opprobrium (it is likely that earlier industrial action in the NHS was also generally tolerated). The sensationalization of events by politicians (of both hues) and by some of the media was contingent on a particular set of economic and political circumstances.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.8","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70517971","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 Trade Unionism under Collective Bargaining was published nearly forty years ago. It is far from being just a work of antiquarian interest, however. Its core argument, that the main influence on trade-union behaviour is the structure of collective bargaining, which depends on the role of employers and their organizations, remains as challenging as it ever was. Its approach, comparative and historical, is a watershed in the theoretical development of industrial relations, paving the way for an emphasis on theory ‘in’ rather than theory ‘of’. It also implicitly raises two questions of enduring significance. The first is the wider contribution of collective bargaining and what its decline means not just for trade-union members but also society as a whole. The other is the conditions necessary for the survival of collective bargaining. The policy implication is that, if society wants to have the benefits of collective bargaining, there will be a need for legislation to boost collective bargaining’...
{"title":"In praise of collective bargaining : the enduring significance of Hugh Clegg's trade unionism under collective bargaining","authors":"K. Sisson","doi":"10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.5","url":null,"abstract":"Hugh Clegg’s Trade Unionism under Collective Bargaining was published nearly forty years ago. It is far from being just a work of antiquarian interest, however. Its core argument, that the main influence on trade-union behaviour is the structure of collective bargaining, which depends on the role of employers and their organizations, remains as challenging as it ever was. Its approach, comparative and historical, is a watershed in the theoretical development of industrial relations, paving the way for an emphasis on theory ‘in’ rather than theory ‘of’. It also implicitly raises two questions of enduring significance. The first is the wider contribution of collective bargaining and what its decline means not just for trade-union members but also society as a whole. The other is the conditions necessary for the survival of collective bargaining. The policy implication is that, if society wants to have the benefits of collective bargaining, there will be a need for legislation to boost collective bargaining’...","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.5","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70517255","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}
John Shepherd’s chapter on public-sector strikes provides a useful overview of what happened, giving due weight to the plight of both the low-paid manual workers and their trade-union leaders. However, he tends to ignore the sector-by-sector negotiations; he lacks understanding of the politics inside each union; and he ignores the vital role of left groupings (especially the Communist Party) in the strikes. He is over-reliant on accounts by political leaders, with the benefit of hindsight, and fails to appreciate the nature of struggle, in particular the difficulty of striking against the state.
{"title":"Public-Sector Strikes in the ‘Winter of Discontent’","authors":"R. Seifert","doi":"10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.9","url":null,"abstract":"John Shepherd’s chapter on public-sector strikes provides a useful overview of what happened, giving due weight to the plight of both the low-paid manual workers and their trade-union leaders. However, he tends to ignore the sector-by-sector negotiations; he lacks understanding of the politics inside each union; and he ignores the vital role of left groupings (especially the Communist Party) in the strikes. He is over-reliant on accounts by political leaders, with the benefit of hindsight, and fails to appreciate the nature of struggle, in particular the difficulty of striking against the state.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.9","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70518076","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 three books under review all deny that neoliberalism is dead and that it remains pervasive as a comprehensive world view and not just an economic doctrine. Its vitality, notwithstanding premature death-notices, is due its role as a political doctrine serving certain interests which sought to reform society by subordinating it to the market. Support for neoliberal values and policies crosses political boundaries. The role of the state is limited but important: a strong state to create and supervise the market. The response of neoliberals to crisis, some directly of their own making, is additional neoliberal measures. For employment, this entails more privatization, contracting out, anti-union legislation, and deregulation of the labour market (including health and safety, and employment protection). Each of the books reviewed is infused with a generous humanism and offer hopeful approaches to challenging, resisting and overcoming the hydra-headed monster that constitutes neoliberalism.
{"title":"The neoliberal labyrinth","authors":"J. Eldridge","doi":"10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.10","url":null,"abstract":"The three books under review all deny that neoliberalism is dead and that it remains pervasive as a comprehensive world view and not just an economic doctrine. Its vitality, notwithstanding premature death-notices, is due its role as a political doctrine serving certain interests which sought to reform society by subordinating it to the market. Support for neoliberal values and policies crosses political boundaries. The role of the state is limited but important: a strong state to create and supervise the market. The response of neoliberals to crisis, some directly of their own making, is additional neoliberal measures. For employment, this entails more privatization, contracting out, anti-union legislation, and deregulation of the labour market (including health and safety, and employment protection). Each of the books reviewed is infused with a generous humanism and offer hopeful approaches to challenging, resisting and overcoming the hydra-headed monster that constitutes neoliberalism.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3828/HSIR.2015.36.10","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70517397","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：