THE U. S. AUTOMOBILE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING SYSTEM IN TRANSITION
| Published date | 01 July 1984 |
| Author | Harry C. Katz |
| Date | 01 July 1984 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.1984.tb00163.x |
THE
U.S.
AUTOMOBILE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING SYSTEM
IN TRANSITION
HARRY
C.
KATZ*
INTRODUCTION
A
number of recent events in
U.S.
auto labour relations have received wide
attention in the popular press. These events include the early contracts signed at
General Motors (GM) and Ford, local work rule changes at plants threatened with
outsourcing, and the bargaining at Chrysler dominated by the spectre
of
possible
corporate bankruptcy. In academic circles (Mitchell,
1982),
recent bargaining in the
auto industry has been viewed as part
of
the concessionary bargaining that typifies
many industries in the
1982
collective bargaining round. These discussions, however,
have paid insufficient attention to the interrelationship between all
of
the various
events occurring within auto labour relations and have also failed to clarify how recent
practices differ from past labour relations behaviour in the industry.
To more fully understand the implications
of
recent labour relations conduct in the
auto industry, it is first necessary to compare these events to the labour relations
system
which has characterised bargaining in the
U.S.
automobile industry over the
post World War
I1
period. This paper argues that bargaining in the auto industry
historically has been structured by a labour relations system which is comprised
of
three central features. These features are: the determination
of
wages through
formula-like ‘wage rules’ in multi-year national agreements; a ‘connective’ bargaining
structure which defined the relationship between national and plant level bargaining;
and a ‘job control’ focus premised on the contractual resolution
of
disagreements that
operates at both national and local levels.
A
first objective
of
this paper is to illustrate
how each of these key features operated over the post war period. Part
of
this
description entails clarifying the interaction and reinforcement that occurred across
the three features. The linkages that exist across these three features make it possible
to speak
of
the existence of a ‘labour relations system’ within auto bargaining.
In the face
of
severe economic pressure, this system has begun to erode
dramatically. Recent events in bargaining can then be understood as part
of
the
weakening
of
this old labour relations system. Evidence in support
of
this ‘systems’
view comes from the fact that revisions to each
of
the three key features first occurred
through amendments and supplements that preserved the structure
of
the old system.
Only belatedly, in the face
of
severe economic pressures, have labour and
management taken steps that signal the systematic erosion
of
the
old
labour relations
system.
The systems view
of
bargaining highlights the value
of
analysing the interaction
between all levels and features
of
a labour relations system. This systems view has
some similarities to the perspective suggested by Dunlop
(1958).
However, in contrast
to Dunlop, here emphasis is placed on understanding the key features which structure
collective bargaining in the auto industry (and other industrial relations systems) and
not the particular terms
of
work place rules.
In the next three sections
of
the paper the three key features
of
the auto labour
relations system are defined and the linkages that bind these features into a labour
*
Associated Professor
of
Industrial Relations at the Sloan School
of
Management, M.I.T.
205
To continue reading
Request your trial