an exploration of the ideolody of Hyman
the “hollow company” by Sabel (1995), has generated increased competition between employees and challenged unions’ ability to promote solidarity. Its three distinguishing elements are:
1. The subcontracting and franchising out of functions, such as payroll,
2. The division of big companies into distinct subsidiaries, and critically,
3. The devolution of decision-making responsibility to individual employees.
Traditionally, unions used solidarity as a weapon to collectively bargain for the protection of jobs. Currently, collectivised bodies of employees are often vulnerable en masse to huge job losses, due to the intense market competition to which their employer is exposed by the globalised economy. Towns and cities throughout Ireland, and indeed Europe, bear witness to the vulnerability of both European and American MNCs’ operations. This is evident in the recent closure of the Irish operations of European electrical appliance manufacturers, Krups in Limerick, and Square-D in Galway; the American computer manufacturer, Gateway in Dublin, and the 2001 collapse of the Swiss National Flag Carrier, Swissair. Unions engaged in plant level bargaining with MNCs operating outside Ireland’s national pay agreement, face increased difficulty in harnessing employee solidarity.
Hyman suggests these challenges are complicated further by mechanical solidarity. The three dominant challenges he identifies are:
1. The pressure trade unions are under to surrender concessions, in the interests of company competitiveness – a practical example being the pressure Aer Lingus placed on trade unions, specifically the I.A.L.P.A., the pilots’ union, to accept job cuts necessary for the implementation of the airline’s survival plan in 2002,
2. The tendency of employers, in the absence of strong trade union leadership, to put their self-interests before their workers’ interests and,
3. The tendency of unions to protect the most vocal and financially secure members of the union when job cuts are necessary to secure competitive restructuring of a company.
(iii) The Eclipse of Egalitarianism
The final reason cited by Hyman for the crisis of mechanical solidarity is the eclipse of egalitarianism. Egalitarianism is a commitment to social equality involving equal treatment for all. Like the trade union movement itself, it has its origins in Marxism. It was established through a commitment to narrowing income differentials, a progressive tax policy, and universal social services. It was achieved through labour movements and socialist politics, which resulted in the establishment of the Keynesian Welfare State. Most welfare states largely succeeded in their goal of redistributing income throughout the work force. Hyman argues that this victory caused the eclipse of egalitarianism. He claims that the narrowing of income differentials created a consciousness of inequity, and that the subsequent revolt was inevitable. White collar trade unions insisted differentials with manual labour be maintained, whilst higher skilled manual workers insisted on a tightening of differentials or escaped through reclassification of their class status to white collar. As a result, trade union membership plummeted in some countries and most workers’ incomes increased. The three main dimensions of the eclipse were:
1. The revolt of the advantaged against particular manifestations [next page]