Get access

Trade Union Presence and Employer-Provided Training in Great Britain

Authors

  • RENÉ BÖHEIM,

    1. Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler Universität Linz, Linz, Austria
    Search for more papers by this author
    • *

      The authors’ affiliations are, respectively, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler Universität Linz, Linz, Austria, and Economics Program, RSSS, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia. E-mail: alison.booth@anu.edu.au and Rene.Boheim@jku.at. We would like to thank Mark Bryan, Gordon Kemp, the anonymous referees, and participants in seminars at the Universities of Essex and Munich for helpful suggestions on an earlier draft. The support of the ESRC, the University of Essex, and the Leverhulme Trust (under Award F/00213C, “Work-Related Training and Wages of Union and Nonunion Workers in Britain”) is gratefully acknowledged. We acknowledge the Department of Trade and Industry (1999), the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service, and the Policy Studies Institute as the originators of the 1998 Workplace Employee Relations Survey data and the Data Archive at the University of Essex as the distributor. None of these organizations bears any responsibility for the authors’ analysis and interpretations.

  • ALISON L. BOOTH

    1. Economics Program, RSSS, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
    • *

      The authors’ affiliations are, respectively, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler Universität Linz, Linz, Austria, and Economics Program, RSSS, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia. E-mail: alison.booth@anu.edu.au and Rene.Boheim@jku.at. We would like to thank Mark Bryan, Gordon Kemp, the anonymous referees, and participants in seminars at the Universities of Essex and Munich for helpful suggestions on an earlier draft. The support of the ESRC, the University of Essex, and the Leverhulme Trust (under Award F/00213C, “Work-Related Training and Wages of Union and Nonunion Workers in Britain”) is gratefully acknowledged. We acknowledge the Department of Trade and Industry (1999), the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service, and the Policy Studies Institute as the originators of the 1998 Workplace Employee Relations Survey data and the Data Archive at the University of Essex as the distributor. None of these organizations bears any responsibility for the authors’ analysis and interpretations.


Abstract

Using linked employer-employee data from the British 1998 Workplace Employee Relations Survey, we find a positive correlation between workplace union recognition and private-sector employer-provided training. We explore the avenues through which union recognition might affect training by interacting recognition with the closed shop, the level at which pay bargaining takes place, and multiunionism. For non-manual-labor men and women, only union recognition matters. The various types of collective-bargaining institutions have no separate effect. However, the male manual training probability is significantly increased by union presence only through multiple unionism with joint negotiation. In contrast, for women manual workers, union recognition at the workplace has no effect on the training probability.

Ancillary