Labouring to Learn: Union Renewal in Swedish Manufacturing

Citation

Brown, M. (2001), "Labouring to Learn: Union Renewal in Swedish Manufacturing", Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 179-181. https://doi.org/10.1108/jwl.2001.13.4.179.1

This is a book that reports on highly original empirical research on the change and renewal processes within two unions in the manufacturing industry in Sweden. The change processes are presented as forms of organisational learning. The study is highly complex, yet it is made accessible by being presented in a clear and concise manner. The text is punctuated throughout with a number of summaries and tables, which also aid the reader. Part of the complexity is derived from the fact that the study by necessity crosses boundaries. It draws ideas and concepts from a number of fields, such as management and organisational theory, economics, industrial relations, education, learning theory and contemporary discourse and policy analysis. The result is a highly unique and contextualised study of learning and renewal within Swedish manufacturing unions.

The book has 15 chapters, of which the first four run the reader through the general literature on various aspects of the research. Chapter 1 is called “Managing the unions”. This provides an overview and introduction to the study. It looks at the role of unions in a changing world and the pressures on unions to change accordingly. It discusses some major theoretical issues relating to the study and even an autobiographical snapshot of the author and his interest in this area. This offers insight into how the study emerged and how it connects with the author. The author presents his three main research questions:

1. 1.

   (1) How might we conceptualise trade union learning processes?

2. 2.

   (2) If differences in learning between unions are discernible, how might these be accounted for?

3. 3.

   (3) What are the characteristics of the learning trade union and the implications of learning for union management?

To the author’s credit he attempts to openly lay‐out and discuss limitations and shortfalls in the study, though for many the major criticism will be the failure of the concept of “organisational learning” to address differences within the organisation.

The second chapter runs through “Theories of trade unionism”. Seven schools of thinking are presented. These are derived from systems theories, neo‐classical economics, institutional, corporatist, political governance, Marxist, organisational theory and strategic management. It concludes with some remarks on recent Swedish research.

Chapter 3 is an extensive literature review on learning in organisations. This very impressive chapter brings together ideas from different fields like management and education. Interestingly, Huzzard distinguishes between organisational learning and “the learning organisation”. In the summation at the end of the chapter the author warns against attempts to synthesise and provides a summary of the definitions.

Chapter 4 focuses on the researcher’s assumptions on learning and his conceptual framework. “Towards a theoretical frame of reference” explains that, in relation to the understanding of learning used, the study moves beyond individualist cognitive learning theory. Instead he utilises the work of Argyris, Dewey and Kolb to emphasise an action component of learning, while still avoiding behaviourist notions. Subsequently, he argues that learning is “the process of collective sense making that generates adjustments to routines in communities of practice” (p. 109). At this point Huzzard also thinks through the different levels at which the action of the communities of practice occurs within unions. He distinguishes between the elected national officials, district committees and workplace based rank and file organisation. By necessity he chooses to ignore the middle tier of the union from this study.

Chapters 5 and 6 explain the research methodology and the research design respectively. In these chapters the reader begins to gain an appreciation of the complexities associated with the research and the subsequent approach and design. In essence, change is framed in terms of Fordism and post‐Fordism, and two unions are chosen to be representative of manufacturing industry. The first is Metall, which is blue collar, and SIF, which covers the technical and white‐collar workers. The multi‐layering of the union is looked at through two of the three levels, namely the elected national officials and those at the workplace. The national tier is understood partly through official policy documents, interviews and minutes of various meetings. The policy documents provide what is called “the narratives of change”. The ideas conveyed in these documents are compared with the union action and learning at the level of the shopfloor, which is researched through four case studies of large workplaces. The resulting data are compared with regard to similarities and differences (reminiscent of studies of rhetoric and reality).

Chapter 6 contextualises the study. This locates the various sites of the study within the social, economic and political scenes at the international, national and local levels. Chapters 7 and 8 provide profile and relevant information about each of the two unions, Metall and SIF. These look in detail at the key policy documents and narratives of change specific to each union.

Chapters 9, 10, 11 and 12 present data and discussion of the four workplace case studies. The first is Ericsson Telecom at Norrkoping; the second is Volvo Trucks at Umeverken, while chapter 11 looks at Assa AB at Eskilstuna and chapter 12 at Alfa Laval Thermal at Lund. Chapter 13 provides discussion on the analysis and comparison of the data, which results in a typology of union learning.

At the national level of the union the learning is argued to be “enactive, discursive, evaluative and reactive”. Enactive learning involves the framing of new issues through strategic reformulation and learning is considered to be new knowledge of content. An example is the general switch of strategy to encompass production issues. Discursive learning occurs internally to the union and is associated with the extension of the role of the union. Learning is seen as involving reconstruction of identity. Evaluative learning is often associated with production issues and involves evaluation of change projects and union pedagogy through dialogue. Learning is seen as new process knowledge. Reactive learning is associated with a defensive reaction to perceived threats.

Huzzard identifies and describes six types of learning within the union at the level of the shopfloor. The first is reflexive learning. This is an internal process that emerges from reflexivity and is evident in changes and adjustments to the routines and procedures of the shopfloor committees. Second is integrative learning. This is evident in both internal and external interactions. An example is the development of the labour process involving working between the national union and the employers.

Third is participative learning. This is where a strong shopfloor based union organisation takes the initiative to develop the labour process in accordance with their own work organisation agenda. Learning is seen as involving new process and content knowledge. Fourth is proactive learning. This involves a strong shopfloor organisation working within a favourable macro context, and occurs when the shopfloor unionists are on the offensive and pursuing the national union agenda on work organisation. Fifth is defensive learning; this is described as internal to the union and occurs when under‐resourced shopfloor union organisations are unable to embrace new issues or establish reflexive routines. Sixth is resistive learning. This is internal and external to the union such as a campaign to defend jobs. This involves the mobilisation of members and the public in the context of hostile employers.

The final chapter presents discussion on the significance and importance of the role played by “the narratives of change”, which in this case was the policy document “Good work”. Huzzard closes by identifying areas for further research.

Critical educators need to consider the language used in naming the forms of learning in the typology, as we know they are not neutral and do not need them to be used to position and further manipulate workers and their learning. Another concern needs to be the structuralist tendency of the study, where the learning of the organisation might be used to mask significant differences of other groupings such as men and women workers, (categories that are already recognised as being problematic).

Further, the union renewal process reported in this study is a corporatist conceptualisation. This accepts capitalism and assumes that workers should pursue a strategy of gaining improved pay and conditions alongside social democratic notions of having input into national issues. As an Australian reader (and an ex‐metalworker), I found the study of particular significance, as it provided insight into the discourse of the industry change strategies that occurred in Australia (much of which was modelled on the ones that are reported in this research). Huzzard’s study stands alongside the Australian narrative of change Australia Reconstructed, and the follow‐up work of academics like John Mathews and Bill Ford. All up this is a fascinating study that empirically derives types of organisational learning that can now be utilised in analysis of learning within other unions. Further, it is made more interesting to me personally because of its relationship with the renewal processes associated with “strategic unionism” that occurred in manufacturing industry via the Australian Metalworkers Union (AMWU).