Skip to main content

Participation and Partnership in the UK: Progress and Prospects

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Developing Positive Employment Relations

Abstract

This chapter provides an overview of the evolution of participation and partnership in the institutional context of the UK. The central argument is that while partnership at work only became government policy in 1997 as part of New Labour’s attempt to ‘modernise’ employment relations (Martinez-Lucio and Stuart 2005), it builds upon a long history of experiments and policies concerning employee participation. It suggests that identifying the antecedents of partnership depends very much upon how we define partnership. If we use loose definitions such as workforce cooperation, partnership can be traced at least as far back as the practices of ‘enlightened’ employers in the early twentieth century (Marchington 1998). Progressive employers recognised some of the basic principles which lie at the heart of the partnership debate, such as the view that it can be ethically responsible and good business sense to consider issues of both organisational efficiency and employee welfare. If we define partnership in terms of participation practices, however, then partnership can be traced to pluralist concerns around industrial democracy (Webb and Webb 1897) and the development of institutions of trade unions, collective bargaining and joint regulation of the employment relationship. It was generally assumed that trade unions were a natural part of organisational life, and that bargaining activity would occur in a conflict-oriented system of ‘arms-length adversarialism’ (Johnstone and Ackers 2015). However, there have also been various attempts at encouraging greater cooperation between unions and employers, especially around issues of productivity and efficiency, and often in response to particular political and economic challenges. However, it was when state support for unions was removed in the 1980s that union attempts to build legitimacy in the eyes of employers and notions of working together to support business success really began to take hold, and was to become official government policy in 1997.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ACAS. (1999). „Towards better employment relations: using the ACAS advisory service”. ACAS: London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackers, P. (2014). Rethinking the employment relationship: A neo-pluralist critique of British industrial relations orthodoxy. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(18), 2608–2625.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackers, P., & Payne, J. (1998). British trade unions and social partnership: Rhetoric, reality and strategy. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 9(3), 529–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacon, N., & Samuel, P. (2009). Partnership agreement adoption and survival in the British private and public sectors. Work, Employment and Society, 23(2), 231–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacon, N., & Storey, J. (2000). New employee relations strategies in Britain: Towards individualism or partnership? British Journal of Industrial Relations, 38(3), 407–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basset, P. (1986). Strike free: New industrial relations in Britain. London: Macmillan Publishers Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beardwell, I. (1992). How do we know how it really is? An analysis of the New Industrial Relations. In contemporary industrial relations: A critical analysis (pp. 1–10). OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaumont, P. (1996). Trade unions and human resource management. In B. Towers (Ed.), The handbook of human resource management (pp. 115–130). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2011). Strategy and human resource management. London: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brannen, P. (1983). Authority and participation in industry. London: Batsford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullock, A. (1977). Report of the Committee of Inquiry on Industrial Democracy, CMND, 6706.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, P., Lavelle, J., Gunnigle, P., & O’ Sullivan, M. (2015). Skating on thin ice? A critical evaluation of a decade of research on the British Information and Consultation Regulations, Economic and Industrial Democracy, forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casey, B., & Gold, M. (2000). Social partnership and economic performance: The case of Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • CIPD (2015). http://www.cipd.co.uk/pm/peoplemanagement/b/weblog/archive/2015/09/09/trade-union-reforms-are-outdated-response-warns-cipd.aspx

  • Clark, J., & Winchester, D. (1994). Management and trade unions. In K. Sisson (Ed.), Personnel Management (pp. 694–723). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clegg, H. A. (1951). Industrial democracy and nationalisation. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danford, A., Durbin, S., Richardson, M., Stewart, P., & Tailby, S. (2014). Workplace partnership and professional workers: ‘about as useful as a chocolate teapot’? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(6), 879–894.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaghey, J. Carley, M. Purcell, J. Hall, M. 2014 National practices of information and consultation in Europe, Eurofound, Dublin.

    Google Scholar 

  • DTI (1998). Fairness at work, Cmnd 3968. London: DTI.

    Google Scholar 

  • DTI (2002). High performance workplaces : A discussion paper. London: DTI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earls, J. (2002), From adversarial to aspirational: A new agenda for trade unions? Unions 21 Discussion Document, November.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emmott, M. (2015). Employment relations over the last 50 years: confrontation, consensus or neglect?. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 37(6).

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, C., Harvey, G., & Turnbull, P. (2012). When partnerships don’t ‘match‐up’: An evaluation of labour–management partnerships in the automotive components and civil aviation industries. Human Resource Management Journal, 22(1), 60–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flanders, A. D. (1966). The Fawley productivity agreements: A case study of management and collective bargaining. London: Faber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, A. (1966). Industrial sociology and industrial relations, Research Paper 3, Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers’ Associations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gall, G., 2008. Labour unionism in the financial services sector: fighting for rights and representation. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glover, L., Tregaskis, O., & Butler, P. (2014). Mutual gains? The workers’ verdict: A longitudinal study. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(6), 895–914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GMB (1998). Winning together working together. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • GMB/CWU. (1991). The new agenda. London: GMB/CWU.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M., & Purcell, J. (2011). Consultation at work: Regulation and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heery, E. J. (2015). Frames of reference and worker participation. In S. Johnstone & P. Ackers (Eds.), Finding a voice at work: New perspectives on employment relations (pp. 21–43). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • IPA. (1992). Towards industrial partnership. London: IPA.

    Google Scholar 

  • IPD. (1998). Employment relations in the 21st century: An IPD positon paper, Institute of Personnel and Development, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, K. (2002) Union heralds a new partnership between employer and worker, Personnel Today.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, S. (2014). Workplace partnership. In A. Wilkinson, J. Donaghey,T. Dundon, & R. B. Freeman (Eds.), Handbook of research on employee voice.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, S. (2015). The case for partnership at work. In S. Johnstone & P. Ackers (Eds.), Finding a voice at work: New perspectives on employment relations (pp. 153–176). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, S., & Ackers, P. (2015). Finding a voice at work: New perspectives on employment relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, S., Ackers, P., & Wilkinson, A. (2009). The British partnership phenomenon: A ten year review. Human Resource Management Journal, 19(3), 260–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, S., Wilkinson, A., & Ackers, P. (2004). Partnership paradoxes: A case study of an energy company. Employee Relations, 26(4), 353–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, S., Wilkinson, A., & Ackers, P. (2010). Critical incidents of partnership: Five years’ experience at NatBank. Industrial Relations Journal, 41(4), 382–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, J. (1996). Union militancy and social partnership. In P. Ackers, C. Smith, & P. Smith (Eds.), The New Workplace and Trade Unionism (pp. 79–109). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, J. (2004). Social partnership agreements in Britain: Labour cooperation and compliance. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 43(1), 267–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kochan, T., & Osterman, P. (1994). The mutual gains enterprise: Forging a winning partnership among labour, management and government. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labour Association (1884). What is co-partnership? Co-partnership, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod, D. and Clarke, N., 2009. Engaging for success: enhancing performance through employee engagement: a report to government. Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchington, M. (1998). Partnership in contest: Towards a European model. In P. Sparrow & M. Marchington (Eds.), Human resource management: The new agenda (pp. 208–222). London: FT Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchington, M. (2015). Analysing the forces shaping employee involvement and participation (EIP) at organisation level in liberal market economies (LMEs). Human Resource Management Journal, 25(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marchington, M., Goodman, J., Wilkinson, A., & Ackers, P. (1992). New developments in employee involvement, Sheffield, Employment Department Research 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez Lucio, M., & Weston, S. (1992). Human resource management and trade union responses. In P. Blyton & P. Turnbull (Eds.), Reassessing human resource management (pp. 215–233). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Lucio, M., & Stuart, M. (2005). Partnership and modernisation in employment relations. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Monks, J. (1997). Restore the dignity of labour. New Statesman, 126, 52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monks, J. (1998). Trade unions, enterprise and the future. In P. Sparrow & M. Marchington (Eds.), Human resource management: The new agenda (pp. 171–179). London: FT Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morton, C. (1992). Becoming world class. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, A. (1999). Adding value or cutting costs, New Statesman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxenbridge, S., & Brown, W. (2004). Developing partnership relationships: A case of leveraging power. In M. Stuart & M. Martinez-Lucio (Eds.), Partnership and modernisation in employment relations. Routledge: London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pateman, C. (1970). Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Philpott, J. (2007). Is good work productive work? In S. Bolton (Ed.), Dimensions of dignity at work (pp. 71–87). London: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Podro, S. (2010). Riding out the storm: Managing conflict in recession and beyond, ACAS Discussion Papers, London, Acas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Procter, S., & Rowlinson, M. (2011). From the British worker question to the impact of HRM: understanding the relationship between employment relations and economic performance. Industrial Relations Journal, 43(1), 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purcell, J., & Sisson, K. (1983). Strategies and practice in the management of industrial relations. In G. S. Bain (Ed.), Industrial relations in Britain. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, H. (1977). Cycles of control? Sociology, 11(3), 481–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuel, P. J. (2014). Financial service partnerships: Labor management dynamics. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Storey, J. (1992). Developments in the management of human resources. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Storey, J., Cressey, P., Morris, T., & Wilkinson, A. (1997). Changing employment practices in UK banking. Personnel Review, 26(1), 24–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, R. (2001). The TUC: From the general strike to new unionism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terry, M. (2003). Can partnership reverse the decline of british trade unions? Work, Employment and Society, 17(3), 459–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terry, M., & Smith, J. (2003). Evaluation of the partnership at work fund. London: Department of Trade and Industry.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, C., & Wallis, B. (1998). Dwr Cymru/Welsh water: A case study in partnership. In P. Sparrow & M. Marchington (Eds.), Human resource management: The new agenda (pp. 160–170). London: FT Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • TUC. (1994). HRM: A trade union response. London: TUC.

    Google Scholar 

  • TUC. (2002a). Partnership works. London: TUC.

    Google Scholar 

  • TUC 2003 Partnership Institute pamphlet, TUC, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Upchurch, M., Danford, A., Tailby, S., & Richardson, M. (2008). The realities of partnership at work. Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • USDAW (1998). „Social partnership: Executive Council statement to the 1998 annual delegate meeting”. USDAW: Manchester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, S., & Webb, B. (1897). Industrial democracy. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whyman, P.B. and Petrescu, A.I., 2014. Partnership, flexible workplace practices and the realisation of mutual gains: evidence from the British WERS 2004 dataset. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(6), pp.829–851.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, A., & Ackers, P. (1995). When two cultures meet: New industrial relations at Japanco. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 6(4), 849–871.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, A., Gollan, P.J., Marchington, M. and Lewin, D. eds., 2010. The Oxford handbook of participation in organizations. OUP Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, A., Dundon, T., Donaghey, J., & Townsend, K. (2014). Partnership, collaboration and mutual gains: Evaluating context, interests and legitimacy. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(6), 737–747.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Stephen Procter and Adrian Wilkinson for comments on an earlier draft of this chapter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Johnstone, S. (2016). Participation and Partnership in the UK: Progress and Prospects. In: Johnstone, S., Wilkinson, A. (eds) Developing Positive Employment Relations. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-42772-4_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics