The meaning and making of union delegate networks. (December 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Peetz, David; Murray, Georgina; Muurlink, Olav; May, Maggie
• Other Names: Barnes Alison guest-editor.; Markey Raymond guest-editor.
• Is Part Of: Economic and labour relations review. Volume 26:Number 4(2015)
• Page Start: 596
• Page End: 613
• Publication Date: 2015-12
• Subjects: Informal networks -- networks -- network-building -- social capital -- social media -- trade unions -- union delegates -- union networks -- union organisers -- weak ties -- workplace relations; J51; Australia -- Economic conditions -- Periodicals; Industrial relations -- Australia -- Periodicals; Economics -- Periodicals; Industrial relations -- Periodicals; 331
• DOI: 10.1177/1035304615614717
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1035-3046

Abstract

Networks are a subject of growing research interest. Yet union networks, particularly networks of delegates, and ways to build them, are still poorly understood. This is a study of the meaning that workplace union delegates assign to networks of support. It explores the characteristics of effective delegate and union networks and influences upon them. Effective networks are a combination of strong and weak ties, such that delegates sometimes do not recognise they are part of a network. Our three-stage research methodology involved delegate focus groups, a paper-based self-completion questionnaire of recently trained delegates (N = 473) and a follow-up telephone survey (N = 145). It found that organisers were key to creation of internal workplace networks (although they did not necessarily establish them) and in providing a bridge for delegates with external networks. They were the key support person for many delegates. Networks took a variety of forms. Only a minority were formalised. A majority were mainly internal to the workplace. Social media were rarely used, with little intention of using them more, and were, we suspect, underutilised.