A Theory of Trade Union Membership Retention
| Author | Paul Lewis,Liam Murphy |
| Date | 01 June 1991 |
| Published date | 01 June 1991 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.1991.tb00241.x |
British
Journal
of
lnrlu~trial
Relatioris
29:2
June
1991
0007-1080 $3.00
ATheory
of
Trade Union Membership
Retent ion
Paul
Lewis*
and
Liam
Murphy**
Fial version accepted
19
December 1990.
Abstract
The
retention rate of unemployed members can vary substantially between
trade unions and may not particularly repect the structure
of
the labour market
within which
a
union operates. This raises the issue of whether retention
of
these members is due to supply-side factors characterised by individuals
or
to
the policy of trade unions towards their unemployed members.
Execution
of
such policy may not be consistent within trade unions, and
nodjceable differences cun occur between branches. The resulting picture
of
differing retention rates can provide an indication
of
the perspective
of
different unions
to
wards unemployed members in both policy and practice.
1.
Introduction
An article that appeared in this journal in 1984 put forward a theory
of
trade
union membership retention (Barker
et al.
1984). This aimed at identifying
factors that were influential in determining whether
or
not a trade union
member retained union membership on becoming unemployed. The
purpose of the present work is to test major parts of that theory.
The theory
took
trade union membership retention rate as the dependent
variable. Retention rate can be defined as that proportion
of
a
trade union’s
members who become unemployed in
a
given period but retain their
union membership. The given period for the purposes of the survey was the
calendar year 1983. An example in the Appendix shows how the calculation
is made. The concept of retention rate is crucial to the research exercise
because
it
is the dependent variable; that is, it is the measure of retention
success with which the specified explanatory variables must be correlated.
It
might be hypothesised that retention rates in unions would be influenced by
the interplay
of
institutional, contextual and individual factors. The first
of
these may be seen
as
related in a broad sense to union policies
or
other
aspects of the institutional character. The
last
may be seen as characteristics
of individual members, which influence retention within a union with policy
**Lecturer
in
Policy
Analysis,
Leeds Polytechnic
*
Lecturer
in
Industrial Relations, University
of
Leeds.
278
and other institutional factors held constant. Contextual factors operate
to
influence either or both individuals and institutions, and might include the
economic and industrial relations characteristics of the industries in which
the members normally work.
The following variables are put forward under each of these headings.
British Journal of Industrial Relations
Institutional Factors
(a)
Constitutional freedom.
By this it is meant that the rulebook permits
retention, and gives it at least the minimum ecnouragement through
reduced or waived subscriptions, and rights to participation.
(b)
Positive retention policy.
An active local retention policy may be a
critical factor.
(c)
Influence over subsequent employment.
The use
of
closed shops,
especially of a pre-entry type, may be an important factor, as may be the
union’s ability to notify
job
vacancies to its members,
or
even allocate
jobs between them.
(d)
Provision of benefits and services.
If significant benefits and services are
provided, and especially if some are aimed specifically at the unem-
ployed, then these may be good reasons for retention. This might
include social facilities for those unemployed members who have retired
early.
(e)
Specialist membership.
A
union with a specialist membership (e.g.
within a profession, industry
or
occupation) might well retain members
because of a professional, industrial
or
occupational identity. This itself
may be related to specific training and skills, illustrating the interplay
referred to earlier between the institutional, contextual and individual
variables. Retention might be greater where the basis of the skills is
threatened, for example by technological change. Moreover, a future
job is likely to fall within the sphere of influence of the same union,
also
encouraging retention, which may be enhanced even by post-entry
closed shops in such circumstances. Where the union is also the
professional body, retention may be a means of keeping up-to-date.
Contextual Factors
(a)
Economic characteristics
of
the industry.
An example here might be the
incidence of unemployment in the industry. Frequent unemployment
may have developed a tradition of retention, especially if that unem-
ployment was usually cyclical rather than structural. A similar effect
might have been encouraged by the development of highly specific skills
within the industry.
(b)
Industrial relations features.
High earnings might be of relevance to
retention
if
this permits relatively high union subscriptions or allows
local branches greater flexibility in responding to the needs of their
unemployed members. The level and spread
of
redundancy payments
To continue reading
Request your trial