Union’s role in the High Performance Work Practices

Author/s Andrea Signoretti
Publishing Year 2018 Issue 2018/151
Language Italian Pages 16 P. 101-116 File size 126 KB
DOI 10.3280/SL2018-151006
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The author analyzes the role played by trade unions in the implementation of the High Performance Work Practices (HPWPs). The analysis takes into account the Italian context, and particularly two medium-sized firms operating in two different areas of the Trentino-Alto Adige region. The empirical evidence shows that trade unions negotiate the quantitative and distributive aspects of the HPWPs. The definition and implementation of the practices related to "how" people work, instead, turns out to be an exclusive managerial prerogative. This limited union action is not able to solve some, although minor, iniquities deriving from the application of these practices and, above all, it can result detrimental for employment conditions in other organizational contexts. The role played by trade unions is explained on the grounds of the interconnections between institutional and normative factors.

Keywords: Trade unions, high performance work practices, institutions, normative orientations

  1. Baglioni G. (2001). Lavoro e decisioni nell’impresa. Bologna: il Mulino.
  2. Batt R., Holman D., Holtgrewe U. (2009). The Globalization of Service Work: Comparative Institutional Perspectives on Call Centers. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 62 (4): 453-488. DOI: 10.1177/001979390906200401
  3. Behrens M., Helfen M. (2015). The Foundations of Social Partnership. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 54 (2): 334-357.
  4. Bonazzi G. (1993). Il tubo di cristallo. Modello giapponese e fabbrica integrata alla Fiat Auto. Bologna: il Mulino. Bubbico D. (2011). Le condizioni di lavoro nella Fiat SATA di Melfi. Inchiesta, 171: 56-64.
  5. Campagna L., Cipriani A., Erlicher L., Neirotti P., Pero L. (2015). Le persone e la fabbrica. Milano: Guerini e Associati.
  6. Carrieri M., Nerozzi P. (2015). Introduzione. Partecipazione e democrazia nelle imprese: un’altra via è possibile. In: Carrieri M., Nerozzi P., Treu T., a cura di, La partecipazione incisiva. Idee e proposte per rilanciare la democrazia nelle imprese. Bologna: il Mulino.
  7. Carrieri M., Nerozzi P., Treu T., a cura di (2015). La partecipazione incisiva. Idee e proposte per rilanciare la democrazia nelle imprese. Bologna: il Mulino.
  8. Cattero B. (2011). Tra diritto e identità. La partecipazione dei lavoratori nel modello sociale europeo. Sociologia del Lavoro, 123: 117-135. DOI: 10.3280/SL2011-123007
  9. Cattero B. (2007). Le trasformazioni dell’impresa e i contesti socio-istituzionali. In: Regini M., a cura di, La sociologia economica contemporanea. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
  10. Chadwick C. (2010). Theoretic insights on the nature of performance synergies in human resource systems: Toward greater precision. Human Resource Management Review, 20(2): 85-101.
  11. Cutcher-Gershenfeld J., Verma A. (1994). Joint Governance in North American Workplaces: A Glimpse of the Future or the End of an Era? International Journal of Human Resource Management, 5 (3): 547-580. DOI: 10.1080/09585199400000048
  12. Danford A., Durbin S., Richardson M., Stewart P., Tailby S. (2014). Workplace partnership and professional workers: ‘about as useful as a chocolate teapot’. International Journal of Human Resource Management. 25 (6): 879-894. DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2013.852606
  13. Fiorito J. (2001). Human Resource Management Practices and Worker Desires for Union Representation. Journal of Labor Research, 22(2): 335-354.
  14. Fortunato V. (2012). La Fiat e il lavoro operaio nella manifattura di classe mondiale. Sociologia del Lavoro, 126: 222-235. DOI: 10.3280/SL2012-126015
  15. Geary J.F., Roche W.K. (2003). Workplace partnership and the displaced activist thesis. Industrial Relations Journal, 34 (1): 32-51. DOI: 10.1111/1468-2338.00257
  16. Godard J. (2004). A Critical Assessment of the High-Performance Paradigm. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 42 (2): 349-378.
  17. Godard J. (2009). Institutional Environments, Work and Human Resource Practices, and Unions: Canada Versus England. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 62 (2): 173-199. DOI: 10.1177/001979390906200203
  18. Leonardi S., a cura di (2010). La partecipazione dei lavoratori nell’impresa. I diritti di informazione e consultazione dopo il d.lgs. 25/2007. Roma: Ediesse. Leoni R. (2012). Workplace design, complementarities among work practices, and the formation of key competencies: Evidence from Italian employees. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 65 (2): 316-349. DOI: 10.1177/001979391206500206
  19. Liu W., Guthrie J.P., Flood P.C., Maccurtain S. (2009). Unions and the Adoption of High Performance Work Systems: Does Employment Security Play a Role? Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 63 (1): 109-127. DOI: 10.1177/001979390906300106
  20. Machin S., Wood S.J. (2005). Human resource management as a substitute for trade unions in British workplaces. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 58 (2): 201-218. DOI: 10.1177/001979390505800202
  21. Martinez Lucio M., Stuart M. (2002). Assessing the principles of partnership: workplace trade union representatives’ attitudes and experiences. Employee Relations, 24 (3): 305-320. DOI: 10.1108/01425450210428462
  22. McLaughlin C. (2013). The role of productivity coalitions in building a ‘high road’ competitive strategy: The case of Denmark and Ireland. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 19 (2): 127-143.
  23. Negrelli S., a cura di (2000). Prato verde, prato rosso. Produzione snella e partecipazione dei lavoratori nella Fiat del Duemila. Soveria Mannelli: Rubbettino.
  24. Negrelli S. (2007). Sociologia del lavoro. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
  25. Perkmann M. (2006). Extraregional Linkages and the Territorial Embeddedness of Multinational Branch Plants: Evidence from the South Tyrol Region in Northeast Italy. Economic Geography, 82 (4): 421-441.
  26. Pero L., Ponzellini A. (2015). Il nuovo lavoro industriale tra innovazione organizzativa e partecipazione diretta. In: Carrieri M., Nerozzi P., Treu T., a cura di, La partecipazione incisiva. Idee e proposte per rilanciare la democrazia nelle imprese. Bologna: il Mulino.
  27. Pini P., a cura di (2008). Innovazione, relazioni industriali e risultati d’impresa. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  28. Pohler D.M., Luchak A.A. (2014). Balancing Efficiency, Equity and Voice: The Impact of Unions and High-Involvement Work Practices on Work Outcomes. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 67 (4): 1063-1094. DOI: 10.1177/0019793914546295
  29. Ponzellini A. (2017). Organizzazione del lavoro e relazioni industriali. Una rassegna degli studi degli ultimi 20 anni in Italia. Economia & Lavoro, 1: 147-164.
  30. Regalia I. (2008). L’azione del sindacato a livello territoriale. Rivista delle Politiche Sociali, 4: 97-124.
  31. Regini M. (1995). Uncertain Boundaries. The Social and Political Construction of European Economies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  32. Rubistein S.A., Kochan T. (2001). Learning from Saturn. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Stewart P., Danford A., Pulignano V. (2006). L’impatto dei sistemi di lavoro ad alta performance sulla qualità della vita di lavoro. Uno studio comparato tra Italia e Gran Bretagna. Sociologia del lavoro, 101: 1-18. DOI: 10.1400/68501
  33. Strauss G. (2006). Worker Participation – Some Under-Considered Issues. Industrial Relations, 45 (4): 778-803.

Andrea Signoretti, Il ruolo del sindacato nella realizzazione delle High Performance Work Practices in "SOCIOLOGIA DEL LAVORO " 151/2018, pp 101-116, DOI: 10.3280/SL2018-151006