Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Normative Argument for Independent Voice and Labor Unions

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper argues that an ethical firm has cause to realize and to respect, in good faith, the decision of workers regarding labor unions, and proceeds along the following lines. First, the employer is due appropriate deference the bounds of which should be determined in conjunction with employees, as they are the most closely affected party. Second, employee preferences for defining the employment relation and appropriate deference are best reflected through autonomous voice. Third, autonomous voice is assured by the right to free association and generally achieved through labor unions. Fourth, because employment is so important to a dignified existence, an economically just system of employment requires respect for workers’ choice regarding labor unions. And fifth, there are concerns and contradictions that arise from labor union operations, but they do not justify impeding a morally valid prerogative.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Workers desire to address employers collectively includes, but is not exclusive to, labor unions.

  2. This proviso is often formalized in collective bargaining contracts and referred to as the management rights or residual rights clause.

  3. Exit and voice are prominent aspects of Hirschman’s typology, but he also discusses loyalty and posits that it reflects the cost–benefit analysis of using exit or voice and is especially high in organizations where voice is heard and used as a basis for reform.

  4. See International Labor Standards on Freedom of Association. http://www.ilo.org/global/standards/subjects-covered-by-international-laborstandards/.

  5. ILO Convention 87: "Workers… without distinction whatsoever, shall have the right to establish and… to join organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization.” ILO Convention 98: "Workers shall enjoy adequate protection … particularly in respect of acts calculated to… [c]ause the dismissal of or otherwise prejudice a worker by reason of union membership or because of participation in union activities.”

  6. ILO Up-to-Date Instruments List, 2013. http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@ed_norm/@normes/documents/genericdocument/wcms_125121.pdf.

  7. The other three fundamental and customary conventions are: The elimination of all forms of forced or obligatory labor, as defined by the fundamental ILO Conventions on Forced Labor, 1930 (No. 29) and the Abolition of Forced Labor, 1957 (No. 105); the effective abolition of child labor, as reflected in the fundamental Conventions on the Minimum Age, 1973 (No. 138) and the Worst Forms of Child Labor, 1999 (No. 182); and the elimination of discrimination in employment and occupation, as defined in the fundamental Conventions on Equal Remuneration, 1951 (No. 100) and Discrimination (Employment and Occupation), 1958 (No. 111). ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. http://www.ilo.org/declaration/lang–en/index.htm. The UDHR became the most widely translated document in the world in 2009. These data are maintained the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner Of Human Rights. See: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/Introduction.aspx.

  8. A United Nations committee that included representatives from Australia, Chile, France, Soviet Union, UK, China, France, Lebanon, and the USA drafted the UDHR. The UDHR has 30 articles, Independent Voice and Labor Unions 35 for the complete document see: http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-humanrights/index.html.

  9. I acknowledge the argument that labor unions increase inflation and decrease overall market efficiency. Conversely, others will state that the assumptions of neoclassical economics do not hold and other factors contribute to the outcomes as well. This is an intractable debate, and thus, I will leave the economic impacts aside.

  10. Some will observe that the autonomy of citizens in free democratic societies is routinely impeded by the discretion accorded unelected officials in institutions such as the Federal Reserve and the World Trade Organization without appreciable effect on dignity or self-worth. The discretion afforded these institutions result from decisions made by elected officials and could be similarly undone (i.e., authority withdrawn, treaty rescinded) were the citizenry to insist.

  11. See Zwolinski (2007). He marshals a libertarian defense of sweatshops as an issue of individual choice.

  12. A similar case has been made in other countries such as the UK and Germany (Metcalf 2003).

  13. This provision is available in US ‘Right to Work’ states and in some public sector occupations in other states.

References

  • Addison, J. T., & Belfield, C. R. (2004). Union voice. Journal of Labor Research, 25(4), 563–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Addison, J. T., & Hirsch, P. M. (1997). The economic effects of employment regulation: What are the limits? In B. E. Kaufman (Ed.), Government regulation of the employment relationship. Madison, WI: Industrial Relations Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aidt, T. S., & Tzannatos, Z. (2008). Trade unions, collective bargaining and macroeconomic performance: a review. Industrial Relations, 39(4), 258–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arneson, R. J. (1990). Liberalism, distributive subjectivism, and equal opportunity for welfare. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 19, 158–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T. L. (2003). A defense of the common morality. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 13(3), 259–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blader, S. L. (2007). What leads organizational members to collectivize? Injustice and identification as precursors of union certification. Organization Science, 18(1), 108–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bok, S. (1995). Common values. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, N. E. (1999). Business ethics: A Kantian perspective. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, D. J., Kim, I., & Tian, X. (2013). In The causal effect of labor unions on innovation (pp. 1–24). SSRN Paper (2232351).

  • Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and monopoly capital: The degradation of work in the twentieth century. New York: Monthly Review Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brenkert, G. G. (1992). Freedom, participation and corporations: The issue of corporate (economic) democracy. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2(3), 251–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenkert, G. G. (1995). The environment, the moralist, the corporation and its culture. Business Ethics Quarterly, 5(4), 675–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bronfenbrenner, K. (2009). No holds barred—The intensification of employer opposition to organizing, (May 20 ed.) Briefing Paper #235. Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute.

  • Bryson, A. (2004). Managerial responsiveness to union and nonunion worker voice in Britain. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 43(1), 213–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, A., Cappellari, L., & Lucifora, C. (2004). Does union membership really reduce job satisfaction? British Journal of Industrial Relations, 42(3), 439–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchmueller, T. C., DiNardo, J., & Valletta, R. (2004). A submerging labor market institution? Unions and the nonwage aspects of work. In R. B. Freeman, J. Hersch, & L. Mishel (Eds.), Emerging labor market institutions for the twenty-first century (pp. 231–264). University of Chicago Press.

  • Budd, J. W., & Bhave, D. (2008). Values, ideologies, and frames of reference in employment relations. In N. Bacon, P. Blyton, J. Fiorito, & E. Heery (Eds.), Sage handbook of industrial and employment relations (pp. 92–112). London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2009). Employee Benefits in the United States, March ed.

  • Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2011). Economic News Release, Jan 21 ed.

  • Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2016). Union Membership Summary.

  • Dahl, R. A. (1961). Who governs? Democracy and power in an American City. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. (1985). A preface to economic democracy. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, C. E. (2012). Labored relations: Corporate citizenship, labor unions, and freedom of association. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(3), 473–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delery, J. E., Gupta, N. J., Shaw, D., Jenkins, J. R., & Ganster, M. L. (2000). Unionization, compensation, and voice effects on quits and retention. Industrial Relations, 39(October), 625–645.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiNardo, J., & Lee, D. S. (2004). The economic impacts of new unionization on private sector employers: 1984–2001. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119, 1383–1442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doucouliagos, C., & Laroche, P. (2003). What do unions do to productivity? A meta-analysis. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 42(4), 650–691.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dribbusch, H. (2016). Organizing through conflict: Exploring the relationship between strikes and union membership in Germany. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 22(3), 347–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dworkin, R. (1984). Rights as trumps. In J. Waldron (Ed.), Theories of Rights (pp. 153–167). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eaton, A. E., & Nocerino, T. (2000). The effectiveness of health and safety committees: Results of a survey of public-sector workplaces the effectiveness of health and safety committees. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 39(2), 265–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edward, P., & Willmott, H. (2008). Corporate Citizenship: Rise or demise of a myth? Academy of Management Review, 33(3), 771–773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ely, R. T. (1886). The labor movement in America. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenn, P., & Ashby, S. (2004). Workplace risk, establishment size and union density. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 42(3), 461–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finnis, J. (1980). Natural Law and Natrual Rights. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzroy, F. R., & Kraft, K. (2005). Co-determination, efficiency and productivity. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 43(2), 233–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavin, P., Pacek, A. C., & Radcliff, B. (2010). Labor unions and life satisfaction: Evidence from new data. Journal of Social Indicators Research, 98(3), 435–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavin, P., & Shufeldt, G. (2016). Labor union membership and life satisfaction in the United States. Labor Studies Journal, 41(2): 171–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. B. (2007). Do workers still want unions? More than ever, EPI briefing paper. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute. Independent Voice and Labor Unions 29.

  • Freeman, R. B., & Medoff, J. L. (1984). What do unions do?. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. B., & Rogers, J. (1999). What workers want. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. B., & Rogers, J. (2006). Want Workers Want (updated edition ed.). Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.

  • Friedman, R., Hunter, L., & Chen, Y. (2008). Union-management conflict: Historical trends and new directions. In C. K. W. De Dreu & M. J. Gelfand (Eds.), The psychology of conflict and conflict management (pp. 353–384). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godard, J., & Delaney, J. T. (2000). Reflections on the ‘high performance’ paradigm’s implications for industrial relations as a field. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 53(3), 482–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goetschy, J., & Jobert, A. (2004). Employment relations in France. In G. J. Bamber, R. D. Lansbury, & N. Wales (Eds.), International and comparative labor relations (pp. 176–210). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, C. (1988). Rethinking democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenhaus, J. H., Collins, K. M., & Shaw, J. D. (2003). The relation between work-family balance and quality of life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 510–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M. (2007). Stakeholder engagement: Beyond the myth of corporate responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(4), 315–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffeth, R. W., & Hom, P. W. (2004). Innovative theory and empirical research on employee turnover. New York: IAP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grzywacz, J. G., & Marks, N. F. (2000). Reconceptualizing the work-family interface: An ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover between work and family. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 111–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, T. H., & Avgar, A. (2005). The impact of unionism on job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover. Journal of Labor Research, 26(2), 241–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, P. D. (2005). AFL-CIO Union Message Survey. Study No. 7518 (unpublished).

  • Henckaerts, J.-M., & Doswald-Beck, L. (2005). Customary international humanitarian law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, B. T. (2004). What do unions do for economic performance? Journal of Labor Research, 25(3), 415–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh, N. (2005). Rawlsian justice and workplace republicanism. Social Theory and Practice, 31, 115–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh, N. (2008). Justice in production. Journal of Poltical Philosophy, 16(1), 72–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ILRF. (2014). Right to organize and bargain. International Labor Rights Forum, Mar 10, 2014.

  • ILO. (1998). ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up (June ed.). International Labor Organization.

  • ILO. (2013). ILO Up-to-Date Instruments List. Geneva: International Labor Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, S. M. (1997). Modern manors: Welfare capitalism since the new deal. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1994). The metaphysics of moral: The metaphysical principles of virtue (1797) (2nd ed.) (J. W. Ellington, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Hackett Publishing Company.

  • Kaufman, B. E. (1997). Labor markets and employment regulation: The view of the ‘old’ institutionalists. In B. E. Kaufman (Ed.), Government regulation of the employment relationship. Madison, WI: Industrial Relations Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kochan, T. A. (2000). On the paradigm guiding industrial relations theory and research. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 53, 704–711.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolben, K. (2009). Labor rights as human rights. Virginia Journal of International Law, 50, 449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, D. S., & Mas, A. (2012). Long-run impacts of unions on firms: New evidence from financial markets, 19161–1999. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127, 333–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, S. M. (1983). Consensus and conflict: Essays in political sociology. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luce, S. (2014). Labor movements: Global perspectives. Oxford: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luchak, A. A. (2003). What kind of voice do loyal employees use? British Journal of Industrial Relations, 41(March), 115–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, C., & Whellams, M. (2007). Corporate decisions about labelling genetically modified foods. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(2), 181–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maertz, C. P., & Campion, M. A. (2004). Profiles in quitting: Integrating process and content turnover theory. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 566–582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandville, S., & Brown, T. C. (2009). How do employees view their grievance system? A survey of unionized healthcare workers. Annual Meeting of the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada. Niagra Falls, ON.

  • Marsden, D. (2007). Individual employee voice: Renegotiation and performance management in public services. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(7), 1263–1278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalf, D. (2003). Unions and productivity, financial performance and investment: International evidence. In J. T. Addison & C. Schnabel (Eds.), International handbook of trade unions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moriarty, J. (2010). Participation in the workplace: Are employees special? Journal of Business Ethics, 92(3), 373–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muller, A., & Kräussl, R. (2011). The value of corporate philanthropy during times of crisis: The sensegiving effect of employee involvement. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(2), 203–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, D. (1989). Managers and nonunion workers in the rubber industry: Union avoidance strategies in the 1930’s. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 43(1), 41–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2011). OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oh, S.-Y., Park, Y., & Bowles, S. (2012). Veblen effects, political representation, and the reduction in working time over the 20th century. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 83(2), 218–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohanian, L., Lagakos, D., & Alder, S. (2012). The decline of the US rust belt: A macroeconomic analysis. Paper presented at the 2012 Meeting Papers.

  • Olsen, T. D., & Payne, L. A. (2013). The business of human rights: Patterns and remedies in corporate abuses in Latin America. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association.

  • Olson-Buchanan, J. B., & Boswell, W. R. (2002). The role of employee loyalty and formality in voicing discontent. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(6), 1167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, R. B., & Lewin, D. (2000). Research on unionized grievance procedures: Management issues and recommendations. Human Resource Management, 39, 395–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rees, C., Alfes, K., & Gatenby, M. (2013). Employee voice and engagement: Connections and consequences. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(14), 2780–2798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, J., & Streeck, W. (1995). Works councils: Consultation, representation, and cooperation in industrial relations. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie, J. G. (2013). Just business: Multinational corporations and human rights (Norton Global Ethics Series). New York: WW Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, J., & Zipperer, B. (2009). Dropping the ax: Illegal firings during union election campaigns, 1951–2007. Washington, DC: Center for Economic and Policy Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, A. (1982). Meaningful work. Ethics, 92, 634–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwochau, S. (1987). Union effects on job attitudes. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 40(2), 209–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1951). A formal theory of the employment relationship. Econometrica, 19, 293–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toke, A., & Tzannatos, Z. (2002). Unions and collective bargaining: Economic effects in a global environment. Washington, DC: Word Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verma, A. (2007). What do unions do to the workplace? Union effects on management and HRM policies. In J. T. Bennett & B. E. Kaufman (Eds.), What do unions do? The evidence twenty years later (pp. 451–463). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States 57th Congress. (1902). A Compilation of Documents Relating to Injunctions in Conspiracy Cases, Together with Arguments and Decision of the Court in the of Case Commonwealth v. Hunt 4 Metcalf etc. US Government Printing Office. http://books.google.com/books?id=kUbvDMTxgpwC&dq=A+Compilation+of+Documents+Relating+to+Injunctions+in+Conspiracy+Cases&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=gAdSBQjnwd&sig=uhuWms6pFAshEmnavWREhAnsYo&hl=en&ei=FwhdSpjtKoa2MMTJva4C&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1. Retrieved on Mar 29, 2016.

  • U.S. Chamber of Commerce. (2017). Labor, our position. Washington, DC: U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werhane, P. H. (1985). Persons, rights, and corporations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1991). Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(2), 269–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, S. (2008). Job characteristics, employee voice and well-being in Britain. Industrial Relations Journal, 39(2), 153–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, S. J., & Wall, T. D. (2007). Work enrichment and employee voice in human resource management-performance studies. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(7), 1335–1372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. M. (1979). Self-determination as principle of justice. The Philosophical Forum, 11, 30–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwolinski, M. (2007). Sweatshops, choice, and exploitation. Business Ethics Quarterly, 17(4), 689–727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dalhousie University, Kenneth C. Rowe Management Building, 6100 University Ave., Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada

    Cedric E. Dawkins

Authors
  1. Cedric E. Dawkins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cedric E. Dawkins.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dawkins, C.E. A Normative Argument for Independent Voice and Labor Unions. J Bus Ethics 155, 1153–1165 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3539-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3539-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation