You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
REFRAMING THE REPRESENTATION DEBATE: GOING BEYOND UNION AND NON-UNION OPTIONS
Vol. 63, No. 3 (April 2010), pp. 367-383
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40649708
Page Count: 17
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Employee relations, Labor union representation, Employment, Labor management relations, Workplaces, Employees, Work councils, Workforce, Union contracts, Human resources
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
The author argues for replacing the traditional union/non-union dichotomy with a more dynamic, nuanced typology of employment relationships and for viewing the contemporary workplace as an organization with multiple distinct but interacting employment models. Such a framework has clear potential advantages for the public policy debate as well as for those making a strategic choice of employment relations models. Moreover, the framework benefits researchers who may use it to refine their empirical studies of the diverse forms and combinations of representation and voice in contemporary workplaces in order to determine which perform best in different settings for different work groups. The real alternative to union organization, the author suggests, is not "no unions" or lack of representation, but some innovative form of representation and voice. Whether these alternatives are sustainable and powerful enough to do the job remains an empirical question that the field should be tackling with greater clarity and vigor.
ILR Review © 2010 Sage Publications, Inc.