Organising methods and member recruitment in Irish trade unions
| Published date | 16 August 2011 |
| Pages | 516-531 |
| Date | 16 August 2011 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/01425451111153880 |
| Author | Thomas Turner,Michelle O'Sullivan,Daryl D'Art |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
Organising methods and member
recruitment in Irish trade unions
Thomas Turner, Michelle O’Sullivan and Daryl D’Art
Department of Personnel and Employment Relations, Kemmy Business School,
University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
Abstract
Purpose – This paper seeks to explore the recruiting and organising methods used by Irish full-time
union officials to recruit new members in the private sector of the economy.
Design/methodology/approach – The analysis is based on a survey of full-time union officials in
eight Irish trade unions.
Findings – Results indicate that the use of organising techniques by officials had no significant
impact on changes in membership numbers but did have a significant and positive impact on reported
changes in new members. However, the variance explained was extremely modest.
Research limitations/implications – A potential limitation is that the organising model is
assessed solely from the perspective of full-time union officials. An area for future research would be to
capture the attitudes and experiences of local activists involved in organising.
Practical implications – The demands of the organising approach require great commitment in
terms of time and financial resources for unions. Yet the returns from this investment may be slight as
only a relatively weak relationship was found between the number of organising methods used and
changes in membership numbers and the recruitment of new members.
Originality/value – To date there has been little systematic study of either the recruitment methods
used by Irish trade unions or the relative success of different approaches. Based on a survey of Irish
full-time union officials, this paper attempts to address this lacuna.
Keywords Union recruitment,Organising methods, Privatesector, Trade unions, Ireland
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Union recruitment and organising has been high on trade union agendas across
developed countries as unions seek to reverse the decline in unionisation. Like trade
unions in Britain, Australia and the USA, Irish unions have been forced to examine their
operations and future in the context of declining union density. Between 1980 and 2007,
union density in the Irish labour force dropped from approximately 61-31 percent
(Gunnigle et al., 2002; CSO, 2008). While unionisation has remained generally stable and
high in the public sector, it has dropped significantly in the private sector. Private-sector
unionisation is estimated to have fallen to as low as 20 percent (Sheehan, 2008). This
significant decline in unionisation has occurred despite a benign politica l context
compared to that in Britain, Australia and the USA. Irish trade unions influenced
economic and social policy decision making through a series of centralised agreements
with employers and government between 1987 and 2008. It has been suggested that the
centralisation of bargaining neutralises employer opposition and has a positive impact
on union density and growth (Visser, 2002; Corneo, 1995). However, these outcomes have
not been evident in the Irish case (D’Art and Turner, 2005). For Irish trade unions the
outcomes traditionally associated with strong corporatist regimes such as increased
union availability and improved workplace access, have not materialized
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm
ER
33,5
516
Received 5 March 2010
Revised 29 March 2011
Accepted 29 March 2011
Employee Relations
Vol. 33 No. 5, 2011
pp. 516-531
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/01425451111153880
(D’Art and Turner, 2005, 2011). Despite two decades of social partnership the unions
failed to gain any improvement in the legal environment for union recognition in the face
of increasing opposition from employers.
The steep decline in private-sector unionisation levels has prompted many trade
unions to focus on intensive recruitment campaigns targeted at certain groups
(Snape, 1994). For example, SIPTU, the largest Irish union, has attempted to recruit
from specific groups such as young people, women, atypical workers, workers in
multinationals, migrant workers and industries which are considered “ripe” for union
drives (Dobbins, 2003, 2004; Higgins, 1999). To date there has been little systematic
study of either the recruitment methods used by Irish trade unions or the relative
success of different approaches. Based on a survey of Irish full-time union officials and
the methods used to recruit new members this paper attempts to address this lacuna.
Union recruitment and organising
Union recruitment activity has been identified as a key factor in the rise and fall
of union membership and density (Heery et al., 2000a, p. 38; Metcalf, 1991; Kelly, 1998).
Union decline has prompted a shift in the views of unions on issues of recruitment.
Beaumont and Harris (1990) note that unions traditionally believed that union
membership growth and decline was dependant on economic and political factors
(Undy et al., 1981). This view was reflected in the work of union officials. Research
indicated that most of union officials’ time was taken up with negotiation,
administration and servicing of members rather than recruitment (Clegg et al., 1961;
Beaumont and Harris, 1990; Brown and Lawson, 1973; Robertson and Sams, 1976).
More recently, explanations that focus on the inadequacies of union recruitment
policies have been advanced to account for the decline in union membership such as
limited investment in organizing (Voos, 1984), an unwillingness to attempt organising
beyond traditional groups of workers (Beaumont and Harris, 1990; McLoughlin and
Gourlay, 1994, p. 41) and the use of ineffective or poorly developed union recruitment
techniques (Kelly and Heery, 1989; Bronfenbrenner, 1997; Bronfenbrenner and
Juravich, 1998; Waddington and Kerr, 2009; Waddington and Whitston, 1997).
The renewed emphasis on union renewal through recruitment is generally focused on
attempts to make it more strategic and high profile rather than non-specialist, reactive,
decentralised and low profile (Beaumont and Harris, 1990). The emergence of
an increasingly strategic approach to the recruitment of new members has been
subsumed into a more encompassing generic organising model of union recruitment
that seeks to increase membership through workplace activism.
The organising model: theory and practice
The organising model has been defined as an approach that aims to organise workers so
that they are “empowered” to define and pursue their own interests through the medium
of collective organisation (Heery et al., 2000b, p. 38). The term organising model is
essentially a descriptive or heuristic device rather than a model or theory with
explanatory or predictive qualities. Indeed, literature on organising has failed to develop
a definition of it and it is difficult to “pin down” a definitive set of measures of the
organising model. Discussions on the organising model have centred on the practices it
encompasses and the outcomes it is supposed to produce. It is an encompassing label
used to describe an extensive range of union practices ranging from direct recruitment
Irish trade
unions
517
To continue reading
Request your trial