Eugene Hickland

Employer occupation of regulatory space of the Employee Information and Consultation (I&C) Directive in liberal market economies

This article shows how both employers and the state have influenced macro-level processes and structures concerning the content and transposition of the European Union (EU) Employee Information and Consultation (I&C) Directive. It argues that the processes of regulation occupied by employers reinforce a voluntarism which marginalizes rather than shares decision-making power with workers. The contribution advances the conceptual lens of ‘regulatory space’ by building on Lukes’ multiple faces of power to better understand how employment regulation is determined across transnational, national and enterprise levels. The research proposes an integrated analytical framework on which ‘occupancy’ of regulatory space can be evaluated in comparative national contexts.

Regulating for mutual gains? Non-union employee representation and the Information and Consultation Directive

Interest in ‘mutual gains’ has principally been confined to studies of the unionised sector. Yet there is no reason why this conceptual dynamic cannot be extended to the non-unionised realm, specifically in relation to non-union employee representation (NER). Although extant research views NER as unfertile terrain for mutual gains, the paper examines whether NER developed in response to the European Directive on Information and Consultation (I&C) of Employees may offer a potentially more fruitful route. The paper examines this possibility by considering three cases of NER established under the I&C Directive in Ireland, assessing the extent to which mutual gains were achieved.

Double-breasting employee voice: An assessment of motives, arrangements and durability

This article explores employee voice within the specific institutional arrangement of double-breasting. Double-breasting is when multi-plant organizations recognize trade unions in some company sites, with non-union arrangements at other company plants, or where a unionized firm acquires a new site that it then operates on a non-union basis. We examine three research questions in four separate case study organizations that operate employee voice double-breasting arrangements across 16 workplace locations on the island of Ireland. These questions consider employer motives for double-breasting, the practices that characterize double-breasting employee voice, and the micro-political implications of double-breasting. The article contributes to knowledge on the emergence and impact of double-breasting and employee voice systems. We subsequently advance two theoretical propositions: the first theorizing employer motives for double-breasting, and the second explaining the extent to which the practice of double-breasting is durable over time.

The shifting contours of collective bargaining in the manufacturing sector in the Republic of Ireland: Government, employer and union responses since the economic crisis

This article examines the responses of the industrial relations actors to the economic crisis in Ireland and the impact on collective bargaining. The data were collected at national, sectoral and workplace levels. We find the existence of both change and continuity, with increased diversity in collective bargaining in manufacturing, including a distinct shift to enterprise bargaining shaped by the capacity of management and local union representatives to adapt to wider pressures. We consider the implications for government, employers and unions.

Triggering employee voice under the European Information and Consultation Directive: A non-union case study

The transposition of the 2002/14/EC Directive, establishing a general framework for information and consultation (I&C), has proven contentious in largely voluntarist systems of employment regulation. Receiving particular criticism is the employee ‘opt-in’ mechanism as a means to access I&C rights. For non-union employees in particular, the ability and potential to negotiate rights for I&C is widely seen to be problematic. This article uniquely examines the opt-in mechanism in the context of non-unionism, considering how non-union employers respond to non-union employees invoking their legislative rights to I&C. Drawing upon a case study conducted over four years in a large non-union multinational, the evidence shows how the opt-in and negotiation process function to the advantage of the employer rather than the intended regulatory impact to advance employee rights.

Beyond Union Avoidance? Exploring the Dynamics of Double-Breasting Voice Regimes in Ireland

A recent element in the battery of employer tactics to de-unionise labour relations is the notion of ‘double-breasting’. The term itself refers to those instances where an employer recognises a union at an older plant, while developing a non-union voice regime at another, newer, one (Lipsky and Farber 1976, Beaumont and Harris 1992). Historically, the practice is rooted in the US construction industry, where it served to describe an explicit avoidance strategy undertaken by unionised employers so as to curtail union influence (see also Moody, this volume). The term has now become somewhat broader in scope, although the assumption of an anti-union animus remains embedded in contemporary formulations (Gunnigle et al. 2009, Cullinane et al. 2012). Much of the contemporary research has focused on quantitative studies, charting the growth of the double-breasting phenomenon, often in the context of employment practices of multinational corporations establishing operations in different countries (Beaumont and Harris 1992, Gunnigle et al. 2009, Marginson et al. 2010, Lavelle et al. 2010). However these types of studies tend to be confined to identifying the incidence of double-breasting practices rather than what has actually occurred within them. Virtually no assessment has been made on the internal dynamics of double-breasting in terms of why employers decide to opt for such schemes or how they are played out in practice.

The Information and Consultation of Employees (ICE) Directive: Employer Occupation of Regulatory Space for Informing & Consulting Workers in Liberal Market Regimes

This working paper explores the transposing of the EU Information and Consultation of Employees (ICE) Directive in the Liberal Market Economies of the Republic of Ireland (ROI) and Northern Ireland (NI) by considering how employers and employees have responded to national information and consultation regulations. We outline the analytical concept of ‘regulatory space’ and assess the impact of ICE Regulations in both ROI and NI jurisdictions in 4 cross-border case study organisations. The research concludes that an analytical framework to advance the concept of ‘regulatory space’ enables a refined assessment of employer and employee responses to employee voice regulation. Employer occupancy of regulatory space for voice is explained in part by a reassessment of the regulatory function of the State, from one of employee to employer protection. The UK and Irish governments both closely circumscribed the parameters of the national ICE Regulations to limit encroachment on the terrain of managerial prerogative. Ambivalence of national unions towards contesting the space opened by the ICE Directive also aids employers in occupying space for voice. The case evidence suggests that, consequently, employers largel