NEW WINE IN OLD BOTTLES: REFLECTIONS ON THE CHANGED WORKING OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING IN GREAT BRITAIN*
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.1973.tb00873.x |
| Published date | 01 November 1973 |
| Author | E. H. PHELPS BROWN |
| Date | 01 November 1973 |
NEW WINE
IN
OLD BOTTLES: REFLECTIONS ON
THE
CHANGED
WORKING
OF
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
IN GREAT BRITAIN*
E.
H.
PHELPS
BROWN^
WE are familiar with the changes in the locus and procedures of collective
bargaining in Great Britain that were brought out by the Donovan report.
My subject is the attendant change in the economic function and outcome
of collective bargaining.
To
see how this change has come about, and what
it is
a
change from,
I
would like to set our present problems in their
historical perspective, and begin by going back to the way in which collec-
tive bargaining was working before the First World War.
THE
HISTORICAL
PERSPECTIVE
The scene then was varied,
as
always, and developments were mani-
fest within it to which we must recur; but the dominant factor within the
field of established collective bargaining was the rule of custom. Custom
ruled, in the sense that yesterday’s rate was generally accepted as pres-
cribing what today’s rate should be, subject only to some small adjustment
up
or
down. It was accepted as in the nature of things. The negative side
of
this was important: claims for rises were not generally based on the
principle of
a
social minimum, and there was
no
general expectation
of
annual betterment. Relativities, it is true, were important, but they were
parochial
:
the orbits
of
comparison ran only through adjacent occupations
and neighbouring industries. How narrow horizons were, is shown by the
extent of the differences between the rates prevailing in different regions
for the same occupation in the same industry: for fitters in engineering, or
craftsmen in building, for instance,
a
ratio
of
nearly two to one prevailed
between rates in central London and in Cornwall.
The rule of custom can be expressed in other terms, if one says that pay
was not expected to change much, or to rise progressively. These expecta-
tions were based on experience. The decisive factor here was that most
employers were price-takers not price-makers. Some sectors depended
on
exports, and international competition bore iiicreasingly
on
the home
market, Even in sheltered industries, the bargaining area commonly
covered only part of the industry, and the employers within it would be
chary
of
raising their prices relatively to other parts
of
the industry.
*
A
revised version
of
an address delivered to the meeting
of
the British Universities Industrial
t
Professor
Emeritus
of
the Economics
of
Labour in
the
University
of
London
Relations Association at the University
of
Sussex,
1
July
1973
329
To continue reading
Request your trial