Social Class, Union Strategies, and Preference in Wage Outcomes in Norway
Keywords:Employment, Wages, Unemployment & Rehabilitation, Labor Market Institutions & Social Partners
This article explores a potential socialization effect of unions on member preferences in wage outcomes and bargaining structures. This challenges notions of union wage policies simply reflecting the material self-interest of their constituency. In their formative role, unions can either propagate more redistribution in society, that is, increasing equality, or increasing societal inequalities, arguing instead for equity. However, equity could be measured either individually or collectively, where the latter would mean increasing societal wage inequalities while favouring intra-union equality. By putting perspectives on worker preferences and political economic theories in dialogue with the literature on the role of unions in constructing notions of equality/equity, we discuss on union strategy as it relates to their socialization effects and members’ attitudes towards income inequality and bargaining structures. Analysing survey data, we find that socioeconomic status has greater influence on preferred wage outcomes, while union membership has more influence over bargaining structure.
Alesina, A. F., & Giuliano, P. (2009). Preferences for redistribution (No. w14825).
Alt, J., & Iversen, T. (2017). Inequality, labor market segmentation, and preferences for
Redistribution, American Journal of Political Science 61(1): 21-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12264
Arndt, C. (2018). White-collar unions and attitudes towards income inequality, redistribution,
and state–market relations, European Sociological Review 34(6): 675-693. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcy033
Barth, E., Moene, K., &Wallerstein, M. (2003) Likhet under press. Utfordringar for den skandinaviske fordelingsmodellen, Oslo: Gyldendal.
Becher, M., & Pontusson, J. (2011). Whose interests do unions represent? Unionization by income in Western Europe. In Comparing European workers Part B: Policies and institutions. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0277-2833(2011)000022B00
Bergene, A.C. & Mamelund, S.E. (2015). Fit for fight? A cross-sectional study of union apathy in Norway, Economic and Industrial Democracy 38(2): 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831X14566889
Campbell, S. & Haiven, L. (2011). Struggles on the frontier of professional control: Leading cases from Canada, Economic and Industrial Democracy 33(4): 669-689. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831X11426805
Castree, N., Coe, N. M., Ward, K. &Samers, M. (2004) Spaces of work, London: Sage.
Checchi, D., Visser, J., &Van de Werfhorst, H. G. (2010). 'Inequality and union membership: The influence of relative earnings and inequality attitudes', British Journal of Industrial Relations 48(1): 84-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.2009.00757.x
Elster, J. (1989). 'Social norms and economic theory', The Journal of Economic Perspectives 99-117. DOI: 10.1257/jep.3.4.99
Fennefoss, A. (1996). 'Organisasjoner, klassifikasjoner og klasser', Sosiologisk Årbok, Vol 2. 127-152.
Fennefoss, A., & Høgsnes, G. (2002). 'Lønnsoppgjøret 2002: Bakgrunn, forløp og konsekvenser', Søkelys på arbeidslivet 19(2): 181-191.
- (2004). 'Lønnsoppgjøret i 2004 - en oppsummering og noen refleksjoner', Søkelys på
arbeidslivet 21(2): 225-231.
- (2006). 'Lønnsoppgjøret i 2006 - noen hovedtrekk', Søkelys på arbeidslivet 23(2): 213-220.
- (2008). 'Lønnsoppgjøret 2008: Oppsummering og analyse', Søkelys på arbeidslivet 25(3): 381-399.
Fennefoss, A., Høgsnes, G., &Larsen, K. A. (2000). 'Lønnsoppgjøret 2000 - og fremtidens lønnsdannelse', Søkelys på arbeidslivet 17(2): 189-202.
Hyman, R. (2001). Understanding European Trade Unionism: Between Market, Class and Society, SAGE: London.
Høgsnes, G. (1989). 'Wage bargaining and norms of fairness-a theoretical framework for analysing the Norwegian wage formation', Acta Sociologica 32(4): 339-357. https://doi.org/10.1177/000169938903200402
Høgsnes, G. (1999). Krone for krone. Lønnsforhandlinger og -fordelinger, Oslo: Ad Notam.
Iversen, T. & Soskice, D. (2001). An asset theory of social policy preferences, American Political Science Review: 875-893. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3117719
Jones, G. S. (1983) Languages of class. Studies in English working class history 1832-1982, Cambridge Universiy Press: Cambridge.
Kim, S. E., & Margalit, Y. (2017). Informed preferences? The impact of unions on workers' policy views, American Journal of Political Science 61(3): 728-743. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414013516066
Kitschelt, H., &Rehm, P. (2014). 'Occupations as a site of political preference formation', Comparative Political Studies 47(12): 1670-1706.
Kjellberg, A. (2000). Sweden. Trade Unions in Western Europe since 1945 (The Societies of Europe), 605-655.
Messel, J. (2010). LO og ”de nye gruppene”: konseptualiseringen av arbeidstakerne 1975-1989. PhD dissertation, Faculty of Humanities, University of Oslo.
Mosimann, N. & Pontusson, J. (2017). Solidaristic unionism and support for redistribution in contemporary Europe. World Pol., 69, 448. DOI:10.1017/S0043887117000107
Osberg, L. & Smeeding, T. (2006). '“Fair” inequality? Attitudes toward pay differentials: the United States in comparative perspective', American Sociological Review 71(3): 450-473. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240607100305
Pernicka, S. & Lücking, S. (2012). 'How knowledge shapes collective action: professionalism, market closure and bureaucracy in the fields of university and non-university research', Journal of Industrial Relations 54(5): 579-595. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022185612454958
Pontusson, J. (2013). Unionization, inequality and redistribution, British Journal of Industrial Relations 51(4): 797-825. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjir.12045
Ritzman, R. L. & Tomaskovic-Devey, D. (1992). 'Life chances and support for equality and equity as normative and counternormative distribution rules', Social Forces 70(3): 745-763. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/70.3.745
Scheuer, S. (1986). Fagforeninger mellem kollektiv og profession, København: Nyt fra Samfundsvidenskaberne.
Scheuer, S. (1993). 'Leaders and Laggards: Who Goes First in Bargaining Rounds?' in T. P. Boje and S. E. Olsson Hort (eds.) Scandinavia in a New Europe. p. 239-268. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Silver, B. (2003) Forces of Labor: Workers' Movements and Globalization Since 1870, Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics: Cambridge.
Svallfors, S. (1993). 'Dimensions of inequality: A comparison of attitudes in Sweden and Britain', European Sociological Review 9(3): 267-287. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.esr.a036681
Svallfors, S. (1997). 'Worlds of welfare and attitudes to redistribution: A comparison of eight western nations', European Sociological Review 13(3): 283-304. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.esr.a018219
Wallerstein, M., and Golden, M. (1997). 'The Fragmentation of the Bargaining Society Wage Setting in the Nordic Countries, 1950 to 1992', Comparative Political Studies 30(6): 699-731. https://doi.org/10.1177/001979399705000301
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2020 Author and Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The Copyright Holder of this Journal is the authors and the Journal. This Journal gives Open Access with CreativeCommons license CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0.
You can download all the content of the Journal and share it with others as long as you credit the authors and the journal, but you can’t change it in any way or use it commercially.
More specifically this license means that you – authors and users – may:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or form as long as you follow the license terms. The freedom to share includes parallel publishing on authors’ own website and in institutional repositories or in ResearchGate after publication in NJWLS, or if you want to reprint your article as part of publication of a PhD-thesis or a dissertation
You may share under these terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit and provide a link to the license. Appropriate credit implies that you provide the name of the creator and attribution parties, a copyright notice, a license notice, a disclaimer notice, and a link to the material. The link used should be its DOI.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes. A commercial use is one primarily intended for commercial advantage or monetary compensation.
NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material. Merely changing the format never creates a derivative.
Exceptions to the license terms may be granted
If you want to use content in the Journal in another way then described by this license, you must contact the licensor and ask for permission. Contact Bo Carstens at email@example.com. Exceptions are always given for specific purposes and specific content only.
The Journal is listed as a blue journal in Sherpa/Romeo, meaning that the author can archive post-print ((ie final draft post-refereeing) and author can archive publisher's version/PDF.
Copyright of others
Authors are responsible for obtaining permission from copyright holders for reproducing any illustrations, tables, figures or lengthy quotations previously published elsewhere.
All published material is archived at Roskilde University Library, Denmark, and transmitted to the Danish Royal Library in conformity with the Danish rules of legal deposit.
We do not screen articles for plagiarism. It is the responsibility of the authors to make sure they do not plagiate.