Abstract
S. M. Lipset, M. Trow and J. Coleman argue that the possibilities for significant and widespread union democracy in labor unions are slight. They base their pessimism on their understanding of where democracy is likely to develop : in unions with highly skilled and highly paid workers, with moderately sized units, and with autonomous subunits. Autonomous subunits are likely to develop only in small-scale and not in highly rationalized industries. Here the author reexamines the bases for this pessimism by comparing the highly democratic International Typographical Union with United Automobile Workers Local 600, which displayed equally impressive levels of democracy, but entirely different structural and political characteristics. This historical and comparative analysis is followed by an in-depth empirical analysis of the political processes within Local 600. The latter finds that while union factions based on Communist-influenced ideology acted as a boost to union democracy (measured here by the level of electoral contention), factions based on the more conservative Association of Catholic Trade Unionists acted to suppress high levels of electoral contention. Hence, factionalism's impact on union democracy depends in part on the ideological orientation driving it
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.
