Advertisement

Journal of Labor Research

, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp 237–249 | Cite as

Workplace hazards and workers’ desires for union representation

  • James C. Robinson
Articles

Abstract

This paper investigates “voice” responses to hazardous and otherwise disagreeable working conditions in the form of workers’ expressed desires for union representation. Using data from three surveys conducted between 1977 and 1982, workers exposed to significant health and safety risks on the job are found to be substantially more likely to report a willingness to vote pro-union than are comparable workers not similarly exposed. This finding is obtained using both subjective and objective measures of hazard and both union and nonunion workers. Management resistance, however, appears to play a strong role in determining the actual extent of unionization. Between 41 and 48 percent of workers in hazardous jobs desire union representation but have not achieved it.

Keywords

Union Representation Collective Bargaining National Longitudinal Survey Nonunion Worker Hazard Exposure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Dickens, William and Brian Ross. “Consistent Estimation Using Data from More than One Sample.” National Bureau of Economic ResearchTechnical Working Paper 33 (March 1984).Google Scholar
  2. Duncan, Greg and Frank Stafford. “Do Union Members Earn Compensating Wage Differentials?”American Economic Review 70 (June 1980): 355–71.Google Scholar
  3. Farber, Henry S. “The Determination of the Union Status of Workers.”Econometrica 51 (September 1983): 1417–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Freeman, Richard. “The Effects of the Union Wage Differential on Management Opposition and Union Organizing Success.”American Economic Review Proceedings 76 (May 1986): 92–96.Google Scholar
  5. Hills, Stephen. “The Attitudes of Union and Nonunion Male Workers Towards Union Representation.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review 38 (January 1985): 179–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hirsch, Barry and Mark Berger. “Union Membership Determination and Industry Characteristics.”Southern Economic Journal 50 (January 1984): 665–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kochan, Thomas and David Helfman. “The Effects of Collective Bargaining on Economic and Behavioral Job Outcomes.” InResearch in Labor Economics. Vol. 4. Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press, 1981.Google Scholar
  8. Leigh, Duane E. “The Determinants of Worker’s Union Status: Evidence from the National Longitudinal Survey.”Journal of Human Resources 20 (Fall 1985): 555–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Leigh, J. Paul. “Are Unionized Blue Collar Jobs More Hazardous than Nonunionized Blue Collar Jobs?”Journal of Labor Research 3 (Summer 1982): 349–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lucas, Robert. “The Distribution of Job Characteristics.”Review of Economics and Statistics 56 (November 1974): 530–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Robinson, James. “Racial Inequality and the Probability of Occupation-Related Injury and Illness.”Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly 62 (Fall 1984): 567–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Worrall, John and Richard Butler. “Health Conditions and Job Hazards: Union and Nonunion Jobs.”Journal of Labor Research 4 (Fall 1983): 339–47.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Journal of Labor Research 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • James C. Robinson
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CaliforniaBerkeley

Personalised recommendations