对 1975-1977 年工业民主调查委员会的思考,由艾伦-布洛克主持

Q2 Arts and Humanities
George Bain
{"title":"对 1975-1977 年工业民主调查委员会的思考,由艾伦-布洛克主持","authors":"George Bain","doi":"10.3828/hsir.2023.44.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Committee of Inquiry on Industrial Democracy, 1975–77 (chair: Alan Bullock) was established to explore the Trades Union Congress’s proposals for board-level workers’ representation, which it saw as a means to locate workers’ interests within corporate strategy. Two issues emerged in the committee’s work: the macro division of class and ideology chiefly between union and union-sympathizing advocates of worker directors on the one hand, and business and business-sympathizing opponents on the other hand; and the micro division within the trade-union movement over worker directors. Two reports were published: the Majority Report recommended that one-third of company directors be elected, on a statutory basis, by union members employed in the company, whereas the Minority Report proposed the establishment, on a voluntary basis, of below-board committees elected by all workers. The Labour government did not accept the Majority Report and its White Paper proposed a diluted version of the Minority Report. There was no attempt to legislate. Comparing the Bullock Committee with the Low Pay Commission (of which he was the first chair) reinforced a central tenet of Bain’s experience of industrial relations, which is that meaningful redistribution of authority from employers to workers has only ever been achieved in the UK with a level of government support that is sufficient to override business opposition.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reflections on the Committee of Inquiry on Industrial Democracy, 1975–1977, Chaired by Alan Bullock\",\"authors\":\"George Bain\",\"doi\":\"10.3828/hsir.2023.44.11\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Committee of Inquiry on Industrial Democracy, 1975–77 (chair: Alan Bullock) was established to explore the Trades Union Congress’s proposals for board-level workers’ representation, which it saw as a means to locate workers’ interests within corporate strategy. Two issues emerged in the committee’s work: the macro division of class and ideology chiefly between union and union-sympathizing advocates of worker directors on the one hand, and business and business-sympathizing opponents on the other hand; and the micro division within the trade-union movement over worker directors. Two reports were published: the Majority Report recommended that one-third of company directors be elected, on a statutory basis, by union members employed in the company, whereas the Minority Report proposed the establishment, on a voluntary basis, of below-board committees elected by all workers. The Labour government did not accept the Majority Report and its White Paper proposed a diluted version of the Minority Report. There was no attempt to legislate. Comparing the Bullock Committee with the Low Pay Commission (of which he was the first chair) reinforced a central tenet of Bain’s experience of industrial relations, which is that meaningful redistribution of authority from employers to workers has only ever been achieved in the UK with a level of government support that is sufficient to override business opposition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36746,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2023.44.11\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2023.44.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1975-77 年工业民主调查委员会(主席:艾伦-布洛克)的成立是为了探讨工会大会关于董事会工人代表的提议,该委员会认为这是一种将工人利益纳入企业战略的手段。在委员会的工作中出现了两个问题:一方面是工会和工会支持工人董事的拥护者与企业和企业支持工人董事的反对者之间在阶级和意识形态上的宏观分歧;另一方面是工会运动内部在工人董事问题上的微观分歧。 当时发表了两份报告:《多数派报告》建议,三分之一的公司董事应在法定基础上由受雇于公司的工会会员选举产生,而《少数派报告》则建议在自愿基础上成立由全体工人选举产生的董事会下设委员会。工党政府没有接受《多数派报告》,其白皮书提出了《少数派报告》的稀释版。工党政府没有试图立法。 将布洛克委员会与低薪委员会(他是低薪委员会的首任主席)进行比较,强化了贝恩在劳资关系方面的一个核心原则,即在英国,只有在政府的支持力度足以压倒企业的反对意见时,才能实现从雇主到工人的有意义的权力再分配。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reflections on the Committee of Inquiry on Industrial Democracy, 1975–1977, Chaired by Alan Bullock
The Committee of Inquiry on Industrial Democracy, 1975–77 (chair: Alan Bullock) was established to explore the Trades Union Congress’s proposals for board-level workers’ representation, which it saw as a means to locate workers’ interests within corporate strategy. Two issues emerged in the committee’s work: the macro division of class and ideology chiefly between union and union-sympathizing advocates of worker directors on the one hand, and business and business-sympathizing opponents on the other hand; and the micro division within the trade-union movement over worker directors. Two reports were published: the Majority Report recommended that one-third of company directors be elected, on a statutory basis, by union members employed in the company, whereas the Minority Report proposed the establishment, on a voluntary basis, of below-board committees elected by all workers. The Labour government did not accept the Majority Report and its White Paper proposed a diluted version of the Minority Report. There was no attempt to legislate. Comparing the Bullock Committee with the Low Pay Commission (of which he was the first chair) reinforced a central tenet of Bain’s experience of industrial relations, which is that meaningful redistribution of authority from employers to workers has only ever been achieved in the UK with a level of government support that is sufficient to override business opposition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Historical Studies in Industrial Relations
Historical Studies in Industrial Relations Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信