Employer associations: collective bargaining, services and power in historical perspective: the case of the EEF in the UK

ABSTRACT

This paper makes two major contributions: firstly, following on recent research, it offers a more detailed critical analysis of the historical role and structure of Employers’ Associations (EAs), concentrating on a detailed analysis of the range of member services offered by a local Employers’ Association within the Engineering Employers Federation (the EEF) during the 1970s. This focus is in contrast to the literature which has concentrated on the EAs national or ‘central peak’ level. It secondly addresses the ‘countervailing power’ hypothesis, and in so doing it illustrates the key roles of the disputes procedure. The study, as a typical or representative case, uses a qualitative methodology of documentary research combined with triangulation interviews of former officials: evidence which has so far not been prominent in the literature. This paper is, therefore, a significant addition to our understanding of these institutions.

KEYWORDS:

• Employer Associations
• collective bargaining
• services
• power

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Jim Arrowsmith, W. W. (Bill) Knox, and Rochelle Mayes for their helpful comments and proof reading. Any errors are however mine alone. I would also like to acknowledge the very helpful comments from the anonymous referees.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1. Power

The concept of power has been in the literature since Machiavelli used it to denote strategy, outcomes and then by and Hobbes to denote agency, and its sources. The agency approach of power enabling and agent to persuade another to do something they would not otherwise have done is widely used in management literature (Clegg 1993).

In industrial relations however, Kelly (1998 p9-13 and 23) states “power has rarely been conceptualized by industrial relations writers and the concept tends to be used in a purely commonsensical way without definition or explication…we lack a reliable way of measuring it and we do not have a convincing theory of its acquisition and deployment”

2. Origin of the case

This research paper set out to follow the local initiatives of Hyman and Croucher, and to attempt to detail how the association actually interfaced with member firms and trade unions. I was able to trace three members of the Coventry and District EEA staff, all of whom had served as IR officials in the 1970s, and all three agreed to provide documents and to anonymized interviews, and I contacted the EEF (now rebranded as MakeUK) whose West Midlands legal officer was able to confirm the present situation.

3. The continued collective bargaining under the Procedure is carried out in five major Make UK offices:

• Gateshead: Unit 1, Queens Park, Gateshead, NE11 0QD

• Sheffield: Advantage House, Poplar Way, Catcliffe, Rotherham, S60 5TR

• Birmingham: St James House, Frederick, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 1JJ

• Reading: Atlantic House, Imperial Way, Reading RG2 0TD

• Bristol: Engineers House, The Promenade, Clifton Down, Bristol BS8 3NB

• Collective bargaining under the EEF/Make UK Procedure is still carried out in different locations on the construction and M+R projects under the National Agreement (NAECI). There is a construction sites group which was based in the West of England EA which administered the consultation and negotiation on very large engineering construction and maintenance and repair (M+R) on infrastructure projects motorways, railways, the London underground and power stations - including the decommissioning of nuclear plants, and two oil refineries on the Thames. These are conducted under the Engineering Construction National Agreement (NAECI); (Source: pers. Comm. Goodchild, Jeremy IR Officer, West of England EA 1993 via email.

• We do not know the volume of conferences and advisory services to these “sites” or the outcomes of collective bargaining because these are not companies but the temporary active sites of clients who may well not be members of an EA

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Neil H Ritson

Neil H Ritson is a Chartered Fellow of the UK’s Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. His managerial career has comprised roles in employee/industrial relations and management consultancy in the UK oil and engineering industries. Subsequently, in academic roles in various universities, he has published empirical papers concerning managerial and trade union strategies.