Skip to main content

Rising Income Inequality in a Time of Plenty: The Influence of Micro-Justice Standards and Group Membership on Macro-Justice Perceptions

Abstract

Rising income inequality in the 1990s was used to examine the links between micro- and macro-justice. Data from a sample of 119 managers and 334 union members supported our hypothesis that those who more strongly endorsed equality norms at the micro-justice level perceived macro-level income inequality as more unjust. Looking at two key subgroups, our hypothesis that union members were more likely than managers to endorse an equality norm was not supported. Yet managers were significantly more likely than union members to endorse an equity norm at the micro level, as predicted. Finally, our fourth hypothesis that the equality norm mediates the relationship between union membership and perceived injustice was not supported.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. AFL-CIO Committee on Evolution of Work. (1985 February). A ReportThe Changing Situation of Workers and Their Unions. p. 28. Washington: DC.

  2. Arts, W., Hermkens, P., & Van Wijck, P. (1991). Income and the idea of justice: Principles, judgments, and their framing. Journal of Economic Psychology, 12, 121–140.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bentler, P. M., & Chou, C. P. (1987). Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociological Methods and Research, 16, 78–117.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bernstein, J., & Mishel, L. (1999). Strong income growth, falling poverty rates in ‘98, Yet inequality unchanged. Economic Policy Institute Income Fax, 1.

  5. Bernstein, J., McNichol, E.C., Mishel, L., & Zahradnik, R. (2000). Pulling Apart: A State-By-State Analysis of Income Trends. Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Economic Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boomsma, A. (1982). The robustness of LISREL against small sample sizes in factor analysis models. In Joreskog, K. G., & Wold, H. (Eds.), Systems Under Indirect Observation: Causality, Structure and Prediction, Part I. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brickman, P., Folger, R., Goode, E., & Schul, Y. (1981). Micro-justice and Macro-justice. In Lerner, M. J., & Lerner, S. C. (Eds.), The Justice Motive in Social Behavior: Adapting to Times of Scarcity and Change, 173–204. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chen, C. C. (1995). New Trends in Reward Allocation Preferences: A Sino-U.S. Comparison. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 408–428.

    Google Scholar 

  9. D’Anjou, L., Steijn, A., & Van Aarsen, D. (1995). Social Position, Ideology, and Distributive Justice. Social Justice Research, 8, 351–384.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Deery, S., & Walsh, J. (1999). The decline of collectivism? A comparative study of white-collar employees in Britain and Australia. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 37, 245–269.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dornstein, M. (1991). Conceptions of Fair Pay: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Research. New York: Praeger Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ehrenreich, B. (2001). Nickeled and Dimed: On (Not) Getting by in America. NY: Metropolitan Books.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Frege, C. M. (1997). Does economic transformation undermine union collectivism? The case of East German textile workers. Industrial Relations Journal, 28, 163–175.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Geary, J. F. (1993). A new collectivism or trade union marginalization?: The role of trade unions in the introduction of New Work structures. Management Research News: MRN, 16, 57–58.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hester, L. M. (1997). “The Influence of Family Socialization, Individual Work Beliefs and Orientation on Union Commitment and Union Participation.” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Alabama.

  16. Homans, G. C. (1982). Introduction. In Greenberg, J., & Cohen, R. L. (Eds.), Equity and Justice in Social Behavior, xi–xviii. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hui, C. H., Triandis, H. C., & Yee, C. (1991). Cultural differences in reward allocation: Is Collectivism the explanation? British Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 145–157.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hurd, R. W. (1998). Contesting the Dinosaur image: The labor movement’s search for a future. In Neufeld, M. F., McKelvey, J. T., & Zamoiski, P. (Eds.), Industrial Relations at the Dawn of the New Millennium, 127–144. Cornell University: New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Jasso, G. (1983). Fairness of individual rewards and fairness of the reward distribution: Specifying the inconsistency between the micro and macro principles of justice. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46, 185–199.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Klandermans, B., Roefs, M., & Olivier, J. (2001). Grievance formation in a country in transition: South Africa, 1994–1998. Social Psychology Quarterly, 64, 41–54.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kochan, T. A., Katz, H. C., & McKersie, R. B. (1994). The Transformation of American Industrial Relations. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Levanthal, G.T., Karuza, J., & Fry, W.R. (1980). Beyond fairness: A theory of allocation preferences. In Macula, G. (Ed.), Justice in Social Interaction, 166–218. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Leung, K. (1988). Theoretical Advances in Justice Behavior: Some Cross-Cultural Inputs. In Harris, M. (Ed.), The Cross-Cultural Challenge to Social Psychology, 218–229. Bond. Newberry Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lucio, M. M., & Stewart, P. (1997). The paradox of contemporary labour process theory: The rediscovery of labour and the disappearance of collectivism. Capital & Class, 62, 49–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Markovsky, B. (1985). Toward a multi-level distributive justice theory. American Sociological Review, 50, 822–839.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness of fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391–410.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Martin, J. (1992). “Inequality, Distributive Injustice, and Organizational Illegitimacy.” Working Paper, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University. Stanford, CA.

  28. Mikula, G. (1980). On the Role of Justice in Allocation Decisions. In Mikula, G. (Ed.), Justice and Social Interaction, 67–217. New York and London: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Mikula G., & Schwinger, T. (1978). Intermember Relations and Reward Allocation. In Brandstatter, H., Davis, J. H., & Schuler, H. (Eds.), Dynamics of Group Decision, 229–250. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Reingold, J., & Grover, R. (1999). Executive Pay: Special Report. Business Week, 3625, 72–90.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Tornblom, K. Y., & Foa, U. G. (1983). Choice of a Distribution Principle: Cross-Cultural Evidence on the Effects of Resources. Acta Sociologica, 26, 161–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Triandis, H. C. (1989). Cross-Cultural Studies of Individualism and Collectivism. In Berman, J. (Ed.), The Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 41–133. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patricia A. Simpson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Simpson, P.A., Kaminski, M. Rising Income Inequality in a Time of Plenty: The Influence of Micro-Justice Standards and Group Membership on Macro-Justice Perceptions. Employ Respons Rights J 17, 47–61 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10672-005-1813-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • income inequality
  • organizational justice
  • distributive justice
  • CEO pay