Search

In this paper, we study whether and how firm-level unionism and collective agreements affect workplace training. Theory provides inconclusive predictions on the various channels and processes through which firm-level industrial relations may affect workplace training. Quantitative and qualitative analyses, when used in isolation, have also proved insufficient for an adequate account of the various factors at play. In the spirit of opening the ‘black box’ of firm-level unionism and collective bargaining, we combine quantitative and qualitative strategies. Our results suggest that workplace unionism, and especially decentralized collective agreements, favor workplace training in subtler and often more dynamic ways than commonly understood.

Among the steps to improve a country's competitiveness, several commentators and international institutions include a general emphasis on deregulation and decentralization of industrial relations. In this paper, we contribute to this debate by studying whether and how firm-level unionism and collective agreements affect workplace training, a key ingredient to competitiveness. Theory provides inconclusive predictions on the various channels and processes through which firm-level industrial relations may affect workplace training. Quantitative and qualitative analyses, when used in isolation, have also proved insufficient for an adequate account of the various factors at play. This is where our paper mostly contributes. In the spirit of opening the "black box" of firm-level unionism and collective bargaining, we mix together quantitative and qualitative strategies. Our results suggest that workplace unionism, and especially decentralized collective agreements, favor workplace training in subtler and often more dynamic ways than commonly understood.

This article investigates the relation linking single-employer bargaining and within-firm wage dispersion - a significant driver of overall wage inequality. The study considers six European economies (Belgium, Spain, Germany, France, the Czech Republic and the UK), featuring different collective bargaining institutions, in 2006 and 2010. We examine two different measures of within-firm inequality, allowing to capture how different groups of employees (top vs. bottom paid, and managers vs. low-layer employees) may differently benefit or lose from firm-level bargaining. Our findings show that firm-level bargaining has heterogeneous effects across countries, over time and by inequality measures. We interpret our evidence as supporting that country-specificities and the heterogeneous balance of power within organizations represent key elements to understand the role of the bargaining system in shaping inequalities.

Decentralised bargaining is an important wage setting mechanism that promotes wage flexibility which in turn determines how earnings and employment are affected by economic shocks. We investigate the impact of the 2011 industrial relations reform in Greece that allowed firms with less than 50 employees to participate in firm-level bargaining. Matching administrative contractual data with longitudinal firm-level data we identify treated and non-treated firms. We find that during the first post-reform year, treated firms with less than 50 employees experienced a 4.8 percent increase in firm-level bargaining and a 12 percent drop in wage floors relative to non-treated firms. We also document a positive employment impact.