Side By Side We Battle Onward? Representing Workers in Contemporary America
Side By Side We Battle Onward? Representing Workers in Contemporary America
复制标题
我们并肩作战？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
R. Givan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Givan
随着集体谈判在美国的衰落，各种形式的工人代表权正在激增。代表权的战略困境是代表工人利益的不同方面的不同组织和联盟的核心。工会继续进行集体谈判，同时与其他团体结成联盟，为成员提供一系列服务。其他组织和松散的协会代表工人利益的具体方面，代表他们的利益，同时停止集体谈判。本文比较了工会和非谈判行为者代表工人的范围、目标和方法。它认为，在什么问题上代表哪些工人以及通过何种组织形式代表哪些工人的关键难题既适用于工会，也适用于非谈判行为者，如社区组织和倡导团体，它们代表特定工人的特定利益。这些非讨价还价的参与者是工会的关键战略盟友。虽然这些组织不承担集体谈判，但它们有时更能代表工人的其他关键需求和利益。这些新兴群体有时很好地满足了工人的法律-政治和相互保险需求。然而，这些组织没有也不能提供传统集体谈判的优势。
As collective bargaining in the United States declines, diverse forms of worker representation are proliferating. Strategic dilemmas of representation are central to the diverse organizations and coalitions representing disparate aspects of workers' interests. Unions continue to bargain collectively, while forming alliances with other groups and providing an array of services to members. Other organizations and loose associations represent specific aspects of workers' interests and advocate on their behalf while stopping short of collective bargaining. This article compares the scope, objectives and methods of worker representation by unions and non-bargaining actors. It argues that the key dilemmas of which workers to represent, over what issues and through which organizational forms, apply both to unions and to non-bargaining actors, such as community organizations, and advocacy groups, which represent select interests of particular workers. These non-bargaining actors are key strategic allies for unions. While these organizations do not take on collective bargaining, they are sometimes better positioned to represent other key needs and interests of workers. The legal-political and mutual insurance needs of workers are sometimes well met by these emergent groups. However, these organizations do not, and cannot, provide the advantages of traditional collective bargaining.