Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Enablers of the Collective Bargaining in Industrial Relations: A Study of India’s Industrial Policies Through ISM and MICMAC Analysis

  • Research Note
  • Published:
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Industrial disputes result in a loss of work days, resources and also put a lot of pressure on employers, employees and the Government. Collective bargaining as a bipartite process is an effective mechanism to resolve disputes through the negotiation between employee and employer representatives. The study aims to identify the ‘enablers’, i.e. factors that permit and encourage collective bargaining in an industry. Through this study, the researchers have attempted to identify the nature of the relation and linkages between the factors identified.

Design/Methodology

The research was undertaken in three major parts. In the initial part of the study, the enablers were identified through extant literature review. These factors were then validated with basic statistics in the second part of the research. In the final part, Interpretative Structural Modelling and MICMAC analysis was performed to arrive at a model highlighting the nature of relationship between the identified factors. Case studies on collective bargaining practices were studied to further validate the enablers.

Findings

The ISM model for the enablers of collective bargaining had four levels, from the model awareness about law emerged as the most important enabler. MICMAC analysis further classified the enablers and disablers as driving, dependent, linkage and autonomous factors.

Originality and Significance of the Study

The research is unique as it attempts to propose a model through the expert opinion on industrial relations manager, trade union representatives, employees’ representatives, management and experts from academia. To the researcher’s knowledge, there has been no significant contribution in the area of proposing a model for the enablers of collective bargaining through ISM and MICMAC. The researchers have also studied case studies related to the practices of collective bargaining in industries. The identified and validated factors would be useful to stakeholders in collective bargaining to design policies to ensure the effectiveness of the process.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  • Acharya, V., R. Baghai, and K. Subramanian. 2013. Labor Laws and Innovation. The Journal of Law & Economics 56(4): 997–1037. https://doi.org/10.1086/674106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Addink, Henk. 2005. Principles of Good Governance: Lessons from Administrative Law. In Good Governance and the European Union: Reflections on Concepts, Institutions and Substance.

  • Ahsan, A., and C. Pagés. 2009. Are All Labor Regulations Equal? Evidence from Indian Manufacturing. Journal of Comparative Economics 37(1): 62–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aidt, T., and Z. Tzannatos. 2002. Unions and Collective Bargaining: Economic Effects in A Global Environment. Washington: World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Aidt, T., and Z. Tzannatos. 2008. Trade Unions, Collective Bargaining and Macroeconomic Performance: A Review. Industrial Relations Journal 39(4): 258–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, J. A., and J. R. Bloom. 1987. Collective Bargaining in Hospitals: An Organizational and Environmental Analysis. Journal of health and social behavior, 60–73.

  • Banks, R. 1971. British Collective Bargaining: The Challenges of the 1970’s. Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations 26(3): 642–691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharjea, A. 2006. Labour Market Regulation and Industrial Performance in India: A Critical Review of the Empirical Evidence. Indian Journal of Labour Economics 49(2): 211–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, C.S., D.E. Sims, E.H. Lazzara, and E. Salas. 2007. Trust in Leadership: A Multi-level Review and Integration. Leadership Quarterly 18(6): 606–632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caverley, N., B. Cunningham, and L. Mitchell. 2006. Reflections on Public Sector-Based Integrative Collective Bargaining: Conditions Affecting Cooperation Within the Negotiation Process. Employee Relations 28(1): 62–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conger, M. 2013. Study: Transparency in Collective Bargaining Could Save Taxpayers $50 Billion. Retrieved from https://goldwaterinstitute.org/article/study-transparency-in-collective-bargaining-could/.

  • Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., and T. Kochan. 2004. Taking Stock: Collective Bargaining at the Turn of the Century. Industrial and Labor Relations Review 58(1): 3–26. https://doi.org/10.2307/4126634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dayal, S. 1982. Revival of Collective Bargaining in India: Some Recent Evidence. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 329–337.

  • Deb, T. 2010. Reforming Labour Legislation on Working Conditions for Competitive Advantage: An Empirical Study. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations 46(2): 201–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, P. 2002. Impact of Collective Bargaining on Workplace Performance Assessed. Retrieved from https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/article/2002/impact-of-collective-bargaining-on-workplace-performance-assessed.

  • Fox, J. 2007. The Uncertain Relationship Between Transparency and Accountability. Development in Practice 17(4/5): 663–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ilsøe, A. 2010. Between Trust and Control: Company-Level Bargaining on Flexible Working Hours in the Danish and German metal Industries. Industrial Relations Journal 41(1): 34–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaumotte, M. F., & Osorio, M. C. 2015. Inequality and labor market institutions. International Monetary Fund.

  • Kanji, N. 2004. Corporate Responsibility and Women’s Employment: The Case of Cashew Nuts. Gender and Development 12(2): 82–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kannappan, S. 1959. The Tata Steel Strike: Some Dilemmas of Industrial Relations in a Developing Economy. Journal of Political Economy 67(5): 489–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lévesque, C., and G. Murray. 2010. Understanding Union Power: Resources and Capabilities for Renewing Union Capacity. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research 16(3): 333–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mamic, Ivanka. 2004. Implementing Codes of Conduct: How Business Manages Social Performance in Global Supply Chains. Industrial & Labor Relations Review.

  • Marchington, M., and S. Zagelmeyer. 2005. Foreword: Linking HRM and Performance-a Never-Ending Search? Human Resource Management Journal 15(4): 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCauley, D. P., and K. W. Kuhnert. 1992. A Theoretical Review and Empirical Investigation of Employee Trust in Management. Public Administration Quarterly, 265–284.

  • Ministry of Finance. 2006. https://labour.gov.in/finance-division.

  • Prasad, V. 2009. Collective Bargaining—Its Relationship to Stakeholders. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations 45(2): 195–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratnam, C. 2007. Trade Unions and Wider Society. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations 42(4): 620–651.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riivari, E., and A. Lämsä. 2014. Does it Pay to Be Ethical? Examining the Relationship between Organisations’ Ethical Culture and Innovativeness. Journal of Business Ethics 124(1): 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, B. 2013. The Unbundled Union: Politics Without Collective Bargaining. The Yale Law Journal 123(1): 148–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, A. 2016. Labour Regulation in India: Emerging Perspective for Reforms. Retrieved from https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—dgreports/—inst/documents/presentation/wcms_459915.pdf.

  • Singh, J. 2007. Improving the Quality of Corporate Governance in India. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations 43(1): 113–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, I., and V. Kulkarni. 2013. Trade Unionism in India: Perceptions & Future. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations 49(1): 35–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastav, A. 2004. Proactive Industrial Relations: A Frame Work. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations 40(2): 266–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, D. 2006. Trade Union Response to Declining Membership Base: Best Practices from Mumbai Based Trade Unions. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations 41(4): 355–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundar, K. S. 2010. Emerging Trends in Employment Relations in India. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 585–595.

  • Tan, H.H., and C.S. Tan. 2000. Toward the Differentiation of Trust in Supervisor and Trust in Organization. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs 126(2): 241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, B., and S. Pingle. 2015. Employee Grievances Handling for Ambulance Staff at GVK EMRI, Gujarat. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations 51(2): 254–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venn, D. 2009. “Legislation, Collective Bargaining and Enforcement: Updating the OECD Employment Protection Indicators”, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 89, OECD Publishing, Paris.

  • Wellington, H.H., and R.K. Winter Jr. 1969. The Limits of Collective Bargaining in Public Employment. The Yale Law Journal. 78: 1107–1127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, A., T. Dundon, M. Marchington, and P. Ackers. 2004. Changing patterns of employee voice: Case studies from the UK and Republic of Ireland. Journal of Industrial Relations 46 (3): 298–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Symbiosis Centre for Management Studies-Pune (SCMS), Symbiosis International (Deemed University) (SIU), Viman Nagar, Pune, Maharashtra, India

    Raghav Agarwal, Atharva Shirke & Nehajoan Panackal

Authors
  1. Raghav Agarwal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Atharva Shirke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nehajoan Panackal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nehajoan Panackal.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Agarwal, R., Shirke, A. & Panackal, N. Enablers of the Collective Bargaining in Industrial Relations: A Study of India’s Industrial Policies Through ISM and MICMAC Analysis. Ind. J. Labour Econ. 63, 781–798 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41027-020-00241-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41027-020-00241-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation