解释供应链中的各种社会团结:外包公共服务中的行为者、机构和市场风险分配

IF 1.3 2区 管理学 Q3 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR
Anna Mori
{"title":"解释供应链中的各种社会团结:外包公共服务中的行为者、机构和市场风险分配","authors":"Anna Mori","doi":"10.1111/bjir.12786","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>On the basis of a comparative analysis of market risks (re)distribution between labour and management in public-service outsourcing in Italy and Denmark, this article examines different cross-national patterns of social solidarity in similar encompassing and co-operative employment relations regimes. It seeks to explain why similar inclusive and collaborative systems of public-sector employment relations are not functionally equivalent in preventing labour inequalities under market-making pressure, as predicted by the extant literature. The analysis demonstrates that variation between the countries considered was due to three interrelated factors which mutually reinforced each other in either virtuous (Denmark) or (semi)vicious (Italy) circles: (i) the availability of legislative loopholes; (ii) the cross-sectoral (public/private) organizational structure and strategy of trade unions and (iii) employers’ outward/inward orientation. The findings confirm the capacity of cross-sectoral public/private dynamics to either build or erode solidarity in inclusive systems, and they highlight the importance of incorporating the strategic agency exerted by unions and public employers as a crucial determinant of the granular differences emerging between similar models.</p>","PeriodicalId":47846,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Explaining varieties of social solidarity in supply chains: Actors, institutions and market risks distribution in outsourced public services\",\"authors\":\"Anna Mori\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bjir.12786\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>On the basis of a comparative analysis of market risks (re)distribution between labour and management in public-service outsourcing in Italy and Denmark, this article examines different cross-national patterns of social solidarity in similar encompassing and co-operative employment relations regimes. It seeks to explain why similar inclusive and collaborative systems of public-sector employment relations are not functionally equivalent in preventing labour inequalities under market-making pressure, as predicted by the extant literature. The analysis demonstrates that variation between the countries considered was due to three interrelated factors which mutually reinforced each other in either virtuous (Denmark) or (semi)vicious (Italy) circles: (i) the availability of legislative loopholes; (ii) the cross-sectoral (public/private) organizational structure and strategy of trade unions and (iii) employers’ outward/inward orientation. The findings confirm the capacity of cross-sectoral public/private dynamics to either build or erode solidarity in inclusive systems, and they highlight the importance of incorporating the strategic agency exerted by unions and public employers as a crucial determinant of the granular differences emerging between similar models.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47846,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Industrial Relations\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Industrial Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjir.12786\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Industrial Relations","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjir.12786","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文在对意大利和丹麦公共服务外包中劳资双方的市场风险(再)分配进行比较分析的基础上,研究了类似的包容与合作雇佣关系制度中不同的跨国社会团结模式。文章试图解释为什么类似的包容性和合作性公共部门雇佣关系制度在防止市场制造压力下的劳动不平等方面并不像现有文献所预测的那样具有同等功能。分析表明,各国之间的差异是由三个相互关联的因素造成的,这三个因素在良性循环(丹麦)或(半)恶性循环(意大利)中相互促进:(i) 是否存在立法漏洞;(ii) 工会的跨部门(公共/私营)组织结构和战略;(iii) 雇主的外向/内向。研究结果证实,跨部门的公共/私营动态有能力在包容性制度中建立或削弱团结,研究结果还强调了将工会和公共雇主的战略机构作为类似模式之间出现细微差别的关键决定因素的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Explaining varieties of social solidarity in supply chains: Actors, institutions and market risks distribution in outsourced public services

On the basis of a comparative analysis of market risks (re)distribution between labour and management in public-service outsourcing in Italy and Denmark, this article examines different cross-national patterns of social solidarity in similar encompassing and co-operative employment relations regimes. It seeks to explain why similar inclusive and collaborative systems of public-sector employment relations are not functionally equivalent in preventing labour inequalities under market-making pressure, as predicted by the extant literature. The analysis demonstrates that variation between the countries considered was due to three interrelated factors which mutually reinforced each other in either virtuous (Denmark) or (semi)vicious (Italy) circles: (i) the availability of legislative loopholes; (ii) the cross-sectoral (public/private) organizational structure and strategy of trade unions and (iii) employers’ outward/inward orientation. The findings confirm the capacity of cross-sectoral public/private dynamics to either build or erode solidarity in inclusive systems, and they highlight the importance of incorporating the strategic agency exerted by unions and public employers as a crucial determinant of the granular differences emerging between similar models.

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
British Journal of Industrial Relations
British Journal of Industrial Relations INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
11.50%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: BJIR (British Journal of Industrial Relations) is an influential and authoritative journal which is essential reading for all academics and practitioners interested in work and employment relations. It is the highest ranked European journal in the Industrial Relations & Labour category of the Social Sciences Citation Index. BJIR aims to present the latest research on developments on employment and work from across the globe that appeal to an international readership. Contributions are drawn from all of the main social science disciplines, deal with a broad range of employment topics and express a range of viewpoints.
×
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