Unions and corporate social responsibility in a liberal market context: The case of Ford’s shutdown in Australia

Abstract

Within many coordinated market economies, labour unions have demonstrated to be key actors in shaping corporate social responsibility. Researchers have, however, paid surprisingly little attention to the role of unions in shaping corporate social responsibility strategies and responses in liberal market contexts. This article extends the emerging research on unions and corporate social responsibility through a case study which investigates union influences over corporate social responsibility within the liberal market context of Australia. We conceptualise the role of unions in corporate social responsibility in this context through an industrial relations lens with particular reference to collective bargaining. Drawing on qualitative data, the case study examines the Ford Motor Company’s recent closure of its Australian assembly operations which was hailed by a wide range of stakeholders as an exemplar of ‘best practice’ in their assistance of displaced workers. We conclude that, while highly socially responsible, Ford’s actions were far from voluntary but influenced by a combination of union influence and a ‘subsidised’ corporate social responsibility, where the state, unable and/or powerless to legislate good corporate social behaviour, chose to financially underwrite its cost to the firm. The study represents one of the first studies to demonstrate how unions shape corporate social responsibility strategies of firms in liberal market contexts and how ‘subsidised’ corporate social responsibility becomes an alternative political solution within such a context.

Developing a framework for responsible downsizing through best fit: the importance of regulatory, procedural, communication and employment responsibilities

“…For instance, research points to the role of negotiations with unions over downsizing in terms of regulatory norms or values. The involvement of unions also overlaps with internal procedures and communication practices, discussed below, with supporting evidence from Taiwan (Tsai & Shih, 2013a), Australia (Snell & Gekara, 2020) and across Europe more widely (Kirov & Thill, 2018;Pulignano, 2011).…”

“…In addressing this, through comparative empirical studies, the extent to which responsible practices are embedded within organisational, societal and institutional norms will be further illuminated. For instance, some factors contributing to responsible downsizing are where unions are present at the workplace (Forde et al, 2009;McLachlan et al, 2021), where countries have social democratic traditions (Ahlstrand, 2010;Rydell & Wigblad, 2012;2013;Bergström & Diedrich, 2011) or where there is state influence on the process (McMahon, 1999;Snell & Gekara, 2020). Understanding the potential for responsible downsizing in situations where these factors are absent can help further explain the conditions that underlie the success or failure of organisations.…”

“…Research into responsible downsizing has spread across business and management literature, and a variety of terminology has described the topic: socially responsible restructuring (Forde et al, 2009); responsible restructuring (Cascio, 2002;Johnstone, 2019;Teague & Roche, 2014); socially responsible workforce reduction (Bergström, 2007); social responsibility in downsizing (Bergström & Diedrich, 2011;Van Buren, 2000); social responsibility in business closures (Ahlstrand, 2010); CSR in restructuring (Bonvin, 2007); ethical downsizing (Hopkins & Hopkins, 1999;Long, 2012); corporate responsibility in lay-offs (Kieselbach & Mader, 2002); CSR in closedowns (Rydell & Wigblad, 2011;Snell & Gekara, 2020); and responsible downsizing strategy (Tsai & Shih, 2013a, 2013bTsai & Yen, 2020).…”

“…Regulation varies across and within nations, relating to length of employee consultation and trade union influence along with the degree of stakeholder engagement. Research into downsizing has indicated how national and institutional regulatory contexts may enable or constrain the management of the process (Bergström, 2007;De Witte et al, 2005;Garaudel et al, 2008;Johnstone, 2019;Kirov & Thill, 2018;Mäkelä & Näsi, 2010;Pulignano, 2011;Snell & Gekara, 2020). For instance, research points to the role of negotiations with unions over downsizing in terms of regulatory norms or values.…”

“…This is especially the case for victims of downsizing, though as noted survivors rarely emerge unharmed. Research has therefore considered the practices taken to mitigate such effects, categorised as an organisation's employment responsibilities during downsizing (De Witte et al, 2005;Doherty et al, 1993;Eby & Buch, 1998;Forde et al, 2009;Kieselbach & Mader, 2002;Kirov & Thill, 2018;McLachlan et al, 2021;McMahon, 1999;Snell & Gekara, 2020;Trevor & Nyberg, 2008).…”