Globalization, growth of high-tech industries not principal culprits in trade union woes
A new study suggests national politics has played a more significant role in the decline of unions in North America than either globalization or technology.
Researchers at the U.S.-based Centre for Economic Policy Research looked at unionization rates in 21 industrialized countries over the past 50 years.
They found that although high-tech advances and the growth of international trade and are often blamed for crumbling union density, government policy is actually a more important determinant.
Co-author John Schmitt says it’s easy to point the finger at cheaper off-shore labour and better technology, especially in manufacturing, which is more traditionally unionized.
However, he says other countries, particularly those with social democratic parties — Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland — have faced the same issues, yet seen small increases in union coverage and only a minimal drop in union membership since 1980.
“Their default position is that their workers will be organized and it’s not just unions that are on board,” Schmitt says. “Employers are also receptive to unions and organizing because they don’t want to be out-competed locally.”
By comparison, so-called “liberal market economies” — such as Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand — have generally seen sharp drops in union coverage and membership.
Countries referred to as the “continental market economies” — Germany, Austria, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, France and Switzerland — typically have been somewhere in the middle, with small drops in union coverage and moderate declines in union membership.
Aside from globalization and technology, declining unionization rates have also been blamed on a decreased appetite for union representation, a shrinking supply of union jobs, and weak legal protection for workers’ rights to unionize.
Schmitt says the one factor that hasn’t been given enough credit is the broad national political environment in these countries.
In North America, for example, he says labour law has seen few substantial reforms favouring workers over the past five decades and that has had more of an effect on unionization than any of the other factors.
This, he suggests, means the death of unions “is not an inevitable process” as some have predicted.
Jim Stanford, CAW economist, is not surprised by the study’s findings.
“Globalization and technology makes it more challenging for unions,” he says. “But often it’s just used as an excuse by employers who don’t want to do collective bargaining anyway. It’s used as a threat to frighten workers.”
Stanford says globalization reflects choices made by political parties based on attitudes in society that reflect the influence of lobby groups, think tanks, etc.
“In other countries, there’s recognition of a union’s role in its economic and social development, rather than unions being public enemy number one,” he says. “The real challenge for us is to find ways of rebuilding our image, prestige and legitimacy of what we do.”
Neils Veldhuis, vice-president of Canadian Policy Research and Senior Economist at the Fraser Institute, is not surprised by the study either.
He says research has consistently shown that labour laws have a material impact on union membership.
For example, in U.S. states where workers can opt out of unions the majority do, according to Veldhuis, and when allowed a secret ballot they’re less likely to unionize.
“There’s certainly a role for unions but when given the choice people join in smaller numbers,” he says.
He says the study supports the view that higher unionization rates lead to lower economic performance.
“If you look at the most successful countries in the world, the Nordic countries are not among them,” he says.
Stanford counters that countries with higher unionization rates invest more strongly in innovative, high value-added industries and boast better trained workforces.
“You can’t look at one country and see unions as doing badly,” he says. “In Canada, our productivity performance is lousy, our foreign investment in Canada is lousy outside of natural resources and our labour market is lousy. If union-busting is a solution, then why isn’t it working?”
