The Rise of Single Table Bargaining in Britain
| Published date | 01 June 1994 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/01425459410066292 |
| Pages | 62-71 |
| Date | 01 June 1994 |
| Author | Gregor Gall |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
Employee
Relations
16,4
62
The Rise of
Single Table Bargaining
in Britain
Gregor Gall
University of Stirling, Scotland
In the last four years, over 80 reported cases exist of companies and organizations,
including many major ones, substantially changing their collective bargaining
arrangements to introduce “single table bargaining”. Among these are some of
the newly privatized water companies, Leyland-Daf, Her Majesty’s Stationery
Office, British Aerospace Defence, NHS hospital trusts, Rover Cars and Powergen.
Other companies such as Rockware Glass, Associated Octel, Castrol, National
Power and Nuclear Electric are, or have been, contemplating such a move. This
sharp and rapid rise follows from some 35 reported cases of companies introducing
this change in bargaining throughout the whole of the 1980s[1,2]. These include
Coca-Cola, Schweppes, Alcan Aluminium and Shell Carrington.
Under single table bargaining (STB) all the different unions and grades of
workers, including manual and non-manual workers, in the same company or
organization, who had previously bargained separately, are brought together into
one bargaining unit. The coverage of employees under STB can extend upwards
to include professional and lower managerial staffs, but this is by no means
always the case (as at British Aerospace Defence and the HMSO). Linked to the
introduction of STB are usually changes in payment structures, work practices
and conditions of work. Examples of these are single status, integrated pay
schemes, multiskilling and teamwork.
This article seeks first to examine the reasons for, and context of, the growth
in STB. This entails examining the general and specific reasons for the adoption
of STB, a consideration of why not all employers favour STB and what other
measures they may take to introduce workplace changes. Second, the potential
benefits and disadvantages to the trade unions and their members from the
changes arising from STB, both in terms of the new bargaining structures and
the results of bargaining, are reviewed. Last, the future prospects for STB are
considered.
The article draws on research from two sources; secondary data and interviews
with trade union officers. The secondary data comprises information derived
from industrial relations research bodies such as Income Data Services and
Industrial Relations Services, and from the industrial relations press like the
Financial Times. Thus, this material reports only recorded cases of STB, i.e. those
that have come to the attention of these organizations, and therefore does not
necessarily constitute all existing cases of STB. The research with full-time trade
union officers comprised short, semi-structured interviews with research officers,
Employee Relations, Vol. 16 No. 4,
1994, pp. 62-71. © MCBUniversity
Press, 0142-5455
To continue reading
Request your trial