ADAPTING LABOUR MARKET INSTITUTIONS AND REGULATIONS
TO THE CHANGING NATURE OF WORK
The Growth Study is quite right in pointing out that in order to enhance
the benefits of new technology and to realise the potential of human capital,
it is essential to reorganise work within firms. A large number of studies
are providing evidence that there is a strong association between the use
of ICT and new work practices such as teamwork, employee participation
and flatter management structures
Major changes in work practices - sometimes referred to as high performance
or high commitment practices - have been adopted by companies trying to
meet the new standards of competition. For instance research conducted
by American researches clearly shows that, in particular in manufacturing,
high performance work systems, in which workers share decision making responsibility
with managers, really do deliver improved performance for the plants that
adopt them. According to the findings they also pay off for workers in
terms of more interesting work, greater employment security, and a high
trust environment that results in greater job satisfaction. And worker
surveys show that over 70 percent of American workers want a direct voice
at work. Thus for some workers, information technology and the changes
in work organization that it has motivated have improved the quality of
jobs. (1)
Similar findings are provided by a series of NBER working papers. They
reveal that firms that re-engineer their workplaces to incorporate more
high performance practices experience higher productivity. Moreover, they
find that employee voice has a larger positive effect on productivity when
it is done in the context of unionised establishments. (2)
Another study, rather sceptical about the effect of high performance work
systems, finds that work practices that transfer power to employees do
not harm the competitiveness of firms. (3)
Yet many manufacturing firms still follow the low road approach because
managers are reluctant to share power with workers. Instead they are intensifying
work, speeding up the line, and attempting to compete on price alone. However,
their efforts are not sustainable; a narrow focus on shareholder value
often means many managers won't invest in retraining their workers and
reorganizing their workplaces, simply because it costs money up front and
takes time to yield results.
Many employers and managers too believe that workers participation and
in particular works councils, a "governance system" under which employees
and their representatives are allocated some control over managerial decisions
and corporate assets by law, are hindering innovation and organisational
change and thus undermining competitiveness. However, no one of the studies
available are suggesting that firms are putting their productivity and
competitiveness at risk if they choose to create more co-operative labour
relations. On the contrary, anecdotal as well as empirical evidence shows
that workers provide more accurate information to employers about preferences
and corporate issues when workers or their representatives (like works
councils) have some say over how that information is used. Moreover, under
the framework of co-operative labour relations the communication from employers
to workers produces also worker concessions in bad times that would not
occur without this practice.
What is of high importance, however, is how new work practices are actually
implemented within companies. Empirical evidence suggests that unionised
establishments that have adopted what have been called new or transformed'
industrial relations practices that promote joint decision making have
higher productivity than other similar non-union plants. The latter maintain
more traditional labour management relations at the expenses of lower productivity.
(4)
It is against this background and goes without saying that TUAC supports
the conclusion of the growth project that social partners and government
need to work together to ensure that the virtuous circle of new work practices,
new technology and productivity is set in motion. As it is stated in the
draft ministerial paper, "this crucially depends on workers being given
a sufficient "voice" in the firm." This is a prerequisite to accomplish
a climate that facilitates change.
1) See, for example, Eileen Appelbaum,
Thomas Bailey, Peter Berg, and Arne L. Kalleberg, Manufacturing Advantage:
Why High Performance Work Systems Pay Off, Ithaca, NY: Cornell U. Press,
2000; Erik Brynjolfsson and Lorin M. Hitt, "Beyond Computerization: Information
Technology, Organizational Transformation and Business Performance," Journal
of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 14, no.4, 2000, pp. 23-40.
2) See Sandra E. Black, Lisa M.
Lynch What's Driving the New Economy: The Benefits of Workplace Innovation;
NBER Working Paper No. W7479 Issued in January 2000
3) David Neumark, Peter Cappelli:
Do "High Performance" Work Practices Improve Establishment-Level Outcomes?
NBER Working Paper No. W7374, Issued in October 1999
4) Sandra E. Black, Lisa M. Lynch, How
to Compete: The Impact of Workplace Practices and Information Technology
on Productivity, NBER Working Paper No. W6120, Issued in August 1997