Labor Unions Strike Lengths: Correcting

Labor Unions Strike Lengths: Correcting for Prestrike Announcements and the Ratio of Bargaining Size to Firm Size Anticipating the duration of a labor strike can be vital for both sides of the dispute, as well as outside observers (Finley, 2010). This study attempts to provide a model that can provide insights into how long a strike can be predicted to last based on factors such as the portion of the total number of employees who participate in the strike; which serves as something of a proxy for bargaining power.

It was hypothesized that this percentage would be a better indicator of the strike duration than the firm's size or total number of workers. Thus the ratio provides a more insights to strike dynamics that other metrics that have been constructed. Discussion The author of this paper follows up on some interesting insights into strike dynamics. Most people would reasonably suspect that unions with lower labor membership would have a significantly reduced amount of power in which to bargain from.

Furthermore, it is also reasonable to suspect that the bigger the union membership is the more power that they would possess; the old adage states that there is power in numbers. Applying this to this trend would predict that with the more numbers that a union would have in membership would correspond to their negotiating power with enterprise.

One study analyzed Canadian data as well as surveyed to analyze labor strikes in the United States from 1992 to 2008 and found that strikes are found to be generally shorter when the striking unit represents a larger portion of the firm's total workers, a proxy for its bargaining power (Finley, 2010). Examining the problem from the bargaining power of the total workforce, despite the workforce's size, seems like it could definitely be a better predictor of bargaining power than membership size alone.

For example, if you only had twenty employee but all twenty went on strike, then you would have to take their demands seriously. However, by contrast, if the union's membership size was two hundred but the total workforce was comprised of thousands of members, then the union would not necessarily have much effect on the overall operations of the company. In this sense the percentage of unionization in the workforce can be a more important factor than simply membership alone.

The Ashenfelter and Johnson (1969) model spells out three crucial parties to the strike negotiations: firms, workers, and union representatives. It is assumed that the major considerations for union leaders are "(1) the survival and growth of the union as an institution, and (2) the personal political survival of the leaders (Finley, 2010)." The motivations of the union leaders can be vastly different. Some way focus on the future and strength of the union while others may have their own political ambitions.

However, when you consider the union on a whole, the high the percentage of the membership then the more likely the union is to be committed to achieving some goal whether it be better benefits, higher wages, safer conditions, better schedules or other issues that serve as the basis of a strike. While other studies have also examined similar relationships, this study takes a slightly different approach than previous studies. Previous studies have included data from all strikes that have occurred in a given period.

However, this study excludes a certain set of strikes that do not meet the following criteria. Some strikes are announced beforehand and also have a set duration.