Industrial Action

Abstract

Since the growth of trade unionism after the Industrial Revolution, the strength of the employee has been in his freedom to associate with fellow employees and to negotiate collectively with the employer. This may seem to be a bold statement at first sight but its basis is the fundamentals of industrial relations. An employer has economic strength when compared to an employee. He has the job and if the employee does not comply with the employer’s wishes then, unless the law prevents it, the employer can easily replace him Any protest by the individual employee is unlikely to have much effect. If the employee, however, is one of a large group, all of whom protest against the employer, then the impact will be much greater and the possibility of such a protest could keep the employer from making unreasonable demands. Thus, simplistically, the power of employees to organise balances the economic power of the employer. This power to organise, however, is only half of the story. The body of workers must be able to protest in a way which will be effective and which will persuade the employer to see their point of view. Hence, industrial action in one form or another, be it a go-slow, a work-to-rule or ultimately a strike, gives the body of workers bargaining power. It is therefore the power to organise plus the power to take industrial action which is the balance to the employer’s economic power. Good industrial relations policy tries to achieve an equal balance of power. Too much power on the part of the unions will shift the balance in their favour, too little power on the part of the unions will shift the balance the other way and increase the strength of the employer.