Union Learning Funds and Trade Union Revitalization: A New Tool in the Toolkit?

Abstract

This article examines the potential of union-led learning through union learning funds to contribute to trade union revitalization. Empirical data are drawn from an evaluation of the Scottish Union Learning Fund. Findings suggest that union-led learning can contribute to revitalization by enhancing relationship building with members, potential members, employers and government. However, problems exist in each case, and the findings suggest that a more strategic orientation to learning is required by unions.

Mobilising resources for union learning: a strategy for revitalisation?

“…Shifts in the opportunity structure allowed UNISON to develop new means of attracting members, to build on members' enthusiasm for learning through new union roles and to forge a link between the union's learning and organising agendas. The article's findings therefore provide further support for the argument that union‐led learning has the potential to make a substantial contribution to trade union revitalisation (see Findlay and Warhurst, 2011 for a discussion). The article has also emphasised the importance of ‘resource mobilisation’ in this regard.…”

Reconsidering Union Activism and Its Meaning

“…When scholars or union leaders discuss the relations between activism and union renewal, they tend to focus on the more demanding activist roles (e.g. Findlay and Warhurst : s129 on Union Learning Fund representatives and revitalization via ‘new layers’ of representation). Importantly, past research and some results here suggest that antecedents may differ depending on the form of union activism.…”

Across Boundaries: The Global Challenges Facing Workers and Employment Research

“…For example, comparative ER scholars have highlighted how globalization has affected different sectors and groups of workers, resulting in a growing diversity in patterns of industrial relations within nations, as well as a growing convergence of such patterns across nations (Katz and Darbishire 2000;Locke et al 1995). Similarly, the effects of globalization on ER systems has been well studied (Frenkel and Kuruvilla 2002), and the response of labour unions to globalization has been of interest, particularly in the burgeoning literature on union revitalization (Findlay and Warhurst 2011;Frege and Kelly 2003;Saundry et al 2012;Turner 2005) (Guillen and Garcia-Canal 2009), and these have been increasingly applied to study employment in multinationals (Marginson et al 2010). Sociologists have articulated global value chain (GVC) theory (Gereffi and Korzeniewicz 1994) and have used network analysis to better understand phenomena occurring across the boundaries of multiple organizations (Podolny 2001;Powell 1991;Whitford 2005), and geographically dispersed social groups.…”

“…For example, comparative ER scholars have highlighted how globalization has affected different sectors and groups of workers, resulting in a growing diversity in patterns of industrial relations within nations, as well as a growing convergence of such patterns across nations (Katz and Darbishire 2000;Locke et al 1995). Similarly, the effects of globalization on ER systems has been well studied (Frenkel and Kuruvilla 2002), and the response of labour unions to globalization has been of interest, particularly in the burgeoning literature on union revitalization (Findlay and Warhurst 2011;Frege and Kelly 2003;Saundry et al 2012;Turner 2005) or transnational unionism (Gumbrell-McCormick 2013;Keller and Werner 2012;Meardi 2012;Niforou 2012). Thus, even though comparative ER scholars have grappled with globalization's effects, their frameworks and theories have centred on individual actors embedded in distinct national institutional contexts, and the impacts of these national contexts on firm strategies.…”