Abstract
Alan Fox’s conceptualisation of ‘unitary’, ‘pluralistic’ and subsequently ‘radical’ frames of reference has been outstandingly influential in the analysis of industrial relations and human resource management since the 1960s. This article demonstrates, however, that these distinctions long predate Fox even though he popularised the terminology. Evidence that observers used comparable frames of reference to categorise perceptions of the employment relationship goes back to the 1830s, and may be found in certain ‘condition-of-England’ novels that were set amid the social turbulence of the time. This article is based on close examination of one such novel, North and South, by Elizabeth Gaskell. It informs our historical understanding of Fox’s concept of ‘frames of reference’ through exploration of the relationship between three characters who broadly represent employer (unitary), union (radical) and middle-class (pluralist) perspectives. Their discussions about industrial conflict raise dilemmas similar to those analysed in contemporary industrial relations literature: how to forge closer relationships between employers and workers through processes designed to nurture high-trust dynamics while remaining aware of the underlying power imbalances between the two sides resulting from social inequalities of class and wealth.
Highlights
Fox’s conceptualisation of what he termed ‘unitary’, ‘pluralistic’ (1966) and subsequently ‘radical’ (1974a) frames of reference has been outstandingly influential in the analysis of industrial relations (IR) and human resource management (HRM) since the 1960s
Discussions between John Thornton and Margaret Hale exhibit contemporary distinctions between unitarism, in both its traditional and paternalist forms, and pluralism, while the emerging relationship between Thornton and Higgins demonstrates the practical benefits of pluralism and greater cooperation
There is a further ‘strong’ conclusion possible too if we speculate that Higgins is in some sense a radical, who advocates a ‘redesigned society’ as many textile workers at that time did
Summary
Fox’s conceptualisation of what he termed ‘unitary’, ‘pluralistic’ (1966) and subsequently ‘radical’ (1974a) frames of reference has been outstandingly influential in the analysis of industrial relations (IR) and human resource management (HRM) since the 1960s. 2) – cannot be extracted from the broader social structures in which they are embedded in capitalist societies, including private property, legal frameworks that define rights and obligations, hierarchical pay systems and the nature of the state itself These structures reflect fundamental class inequalities and conflicts of interest that – arguably – preclude Donovan-focused pluralist ‘solutions’ to IR problems unless they are themselves overturned: Only a total transformation of the whole structure of control, at a level which transcends the conventional narrow definitions of industrial relations, can resolve the current contradictions within the organization of work and in social and economic life more generally. This article explores two of those sources – trade union activity and religious nonconformity – through an analysis of North and South, a novel that considers industrial conflict in a pre-Marxist environment
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
