Trade union policy and new technology: the Civil and Public Services Association

The introduction of a micro-electronic based technology to the workplace has had a far reaching and widespread effect on the numbers and content of jobs. The importance of the implications of new technology were recognised by the trade unions, leading to a plethora of advice and literature in the late 70s and early 80s, notably the TUC 'Technology and Employment ' report. However, studies into the union response have consistently found an overall lack of influence by unions in the introduction of technology. Whilst the advent of new technology has coincided with an industrial relations climate of unprecedented hostility to union activity in the post-war period, there are structural weaknesses in unions in coming to terms with the process of technological change. In particular was the identification of a lack of suitable technological expertise. Addressing itself to this perceived weakness of the union response, this thesis is the outcome of a collaborative project between a national union and an academic institution. The thesis is based on detailed case studies concerning technology bargaining in the Civil Service and the response of the Civil and Public Services Associations (CPSA), the union that represents lower grade white collar civil servants. It is demonstrated that the application of expertise to union negotiators is insufficient on its own to extend union influence and that for unions to effectively come to terms with technology and influence its development requires a re-assessment across all spheres of union activity. It is suggested that this has repercussions for not only the internal organisation and quality of union policy formation and the extent, form and nature of collective bargaining with employer representatives, but also in the relationship with consumer and interest groups outside the traditional collective bargaining forum. Three policy options are developed in the thesis with the 'adversarial' and 'co~operative' options representing the more traditional reactive and passive forms of involvement. These are contrasted with an 'independent participative' form of involvement which was a 'pro-active' policy option and utilised the expertise of the Author in the CPSA's response to technological change.

The European Union and global governance:a handbook

The role of the European Union in global politics has been of growing interest over the past decade. The EU is a key player in global institutions such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) and NATO. It continues to construct an emerging identity and project its values and interests throughout contemporary international relations. The capacity of the EU to both formulate and realise its goals, however, remains contested. Some scholars claim the EU’s `soft power’ attitude rivals that of the USA’s `hard power’ approach to international relations. Others view the EU as insufficiently able to produce a co-ordinated position to project upon global politics. Regardless of the position taken within this debate, the EU’s relationship with its external partners has an increasingly important impact upon economic, political and security concerns on an international level. Trade negotiations, military interventions, democracy promotion, international development and responses to the global economic crisis have all witnessed the EU playing a central role. This has seen the EU become both a major force in contemporary institutions of global governance and a template for supranational governance that might influence other attempts to construct regional and global institutions. This volume brings together a collection of leading EU scholars to provide a state-of-the-art overview covering these and other debates relating to the EU’s role in contemporary global governance. The Handbook is divided into four main sections: Part I: European studies and global governance – provides an overview and critical assessment of the leading theoretical approaches through which the EU’s role in global governance has been addressed within the literature. Part II: Institutions – examines the role played by the key EU institutions in pursuing a role for the EU in contemporary international relations. Part III: Policy and issue areas – explores developments within particular policy sectors, assessing the different impact that the EU has had in different issue areas, including foreign and security policy, environmental policy, common commercial policy, the Common Agricultural Policy, development policy, accession policy, the Neighbourhood Policy and conflict transformation. Part IV: The global multilevel governance complex and the EU – focuses on the relationship between the EU and the institutions, regions and countries with which it forms a global multilevel governance complex, including chapters on the EU’s relationship with the WTO, United Nations, East Asia, Africa and the USA.

The Legitimation of authority in the European Union

The founding Treaties of the European Union (EU) provide the Commission with bureaucratic structures and functions, and the authority to take a political leadership role in the integration process. However, the legitimacy of the Commission's authority to act either as a bureaucracy or as a political institution is periodically contested, as is the authority and leadership of its President. Max Weber's theory of the legitimation of authority suggests itself in this context as a working tool for assessing the nature of institutional and individual authority and leadership in the Commission and the broader EU context. Weber's typology of authority offers both an understanding of the changes in the Commission's fortunes within the 'would-be polity' of the European institutions, and an appraisal of claims to authority at the individual level by the Commission President. When applied to two contrasting moments in the Commission's life during the presidency of Jacques Delors (the generating of the White Papers of 1985 and 1993), Weber's typology provides an explanation for the evolution of the legitimation of these forms of authority in terms of, first, the Union's imperfect provisions for legitimate claims to leadership authority on 'charismatic' grounds and, second, the absence in the Union of resources for leadership legitimacy based on 'traditional'-type authority, such as explicit, popular, or party political European-wide support for the project of European union. These are resources which, if present in the EU, would legitimise calls to reform the EU's institutions in the direction of more integration and a more federal polity. The case studies offer an appraisal of the functioning and malfunctioning of authority within the Union, as well as a critical assessment of the applicability of the Weberian model to the legitimation of authority in the EU.