Reevaluating US company paternalism from the nineteenth to the twenty-first centuries

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

1. Other companies that have implemented guaranteed employment programs include Digital Equipment Corporation, IBM, Bank of America, Delta Airlines and Hewlett-Packard. For a favorable discussion of such programs, see Mink et al., ‘Critical Review’.

2. The operation of Lincoln Electric's Advisory Board appears to be similar to that of employer-dominated labor organizations as determined by the National Labor Relations Board's 1992 Electromation decision (Electromation v. Teamsters Local 1094). For discussions of this controversial decision, see Gely, ‘Where Are We Now?’ and LeRoy, ‘Employer Domination’.

3. Employee representation plans, also known as company unions, can be defined as labor organizations which are found in only one company and are either dominated or strongly influenced by the company. Information on the history of US company unions can be found in Fairris, ‘From Exit to Voice’, and Nelson, ‘Company Union Movement’.

4. Rees's arguments appear to be similar to those made in defense of the passage of the Teamwork for Employees and Management Act (1996) which was vetoed by then-President Bill Clinton. The act's implementation would have allowed employers to establish joint worker–management committees in non-union shops for discussing various workplace issues. For one highly critical viewpoint and one supportive position on the Team Act, see Gould, ‘Employee Participation’ and Estreicher, ‘Employee Involvement’.

5. The social entrepreneurship movement utilizes entrepreneurial principles for establishing and managing enterprises dedicated to achieving social change. For articles elaborating on the concept of social entrepreneurship, see Mair and Marti, ‘Social Entrepreneurship Research’ and Peredo and Mclean, ‘Social Entrepreneurship’.

6. For empirical evidence supporting this position, see Friedman, Reigniting the Labor Movement, 29.