scholarly journals Do Politicians Use Policy to Make Politics? The Case of Public-Sector Labor Laws

2016 ◽  
Vol 110 (4) ◽  
pp. 763-777 ◽  
Author(s):  
SARAH F. ANZIA ◽  
TERRY M. MOE

Schattschneider's insight that “policies make politics” has played an influential role in the modern study of political institutions and public policy. Yet if policies do indeed make politics, rational politicians have opportunities to use policies to structure future politics to their own advantage—and this strategic dimension has gone almost entirely unexplored. Do politicians actually use policies to make politics? Under what conditions? In this article, we develop a theoretical argument about what can be expected from strategic politicians, and we carry out an empirical analysis on a policy development that is particularly instructive: the adoption of public-sector collective bargaining laws by the states during the 1960s, 1970s, and early 1980s—laws that fueled the rise of public-sector unions, and “made politics” to the advantage of Democrats over Republicans.

ILR Review ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald G. Ehrenberg ◽  
Daniel R. Sherman ◽  
Joshua L. Schwarz

This paper develops and illustrates the use of two methodologies to analyze the effect of unions on productivity in the public sector. Although the methodologies are applicable to a wide variety of public sector functions, the focus of the paper is on municipal libraries because of the availability of relevant data. The empirical analysis, which uses 1977 cross-section data on 260 libraries, suggests that collective bargaining coverage has not significantly affected productivity in municipal libraries.


ILR Review ◽  
1976 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 602
Author(s):  
David Lewin ◽  
Frank H. Cassell ◽  
Jean J. Baron

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Chambers

This analysis explores some of the challenges facing public managers in nurturing their relationship and partnership with public-sector unions. It begins with a discussion of the background that elaborates on union history, discussing the birth of unions, the fall of private-sector unions, and the rise of government unions.  This is followed by a review of the relevant professional and scientific literature to better develop the topic and focus the analysis.  As the field of government labor-management relations is complex, the unique characteristics of government labor-management relationships that are lacking in the private-sector context necessitate a practitioner approach and an integrated synthesis of the literature. The analysis concludes that when collective bargaining is applied to public-sector business, it must be tailored to achieve proper alignment with taxpayers, who are the major stakeholders in public-sector services.


ILR Review ◽  
1979 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 552
Author(s):  
Paul D. Staudohar ◽  
Alan Edward Bent ◽  
T. Zane Reeves

1979 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 504
Author(s):  
Ronald Donovan ◽  
Alan Edward Bent ◽  
T. Zane Reeves

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexis N. Walker

Why did public sector unionization rise so dramatically and then plateau at the same time as private sector unionization underwent a precipitous decline? The exclusion of public sector employees from the centerpiece of private sector labor law—the 1935 Wagner Act—divided U.S. labor law and relegated public sector demand-making to the states. Consequently, public sector employees' collective bargaining rights were slow to develop and remain geographically concentrated, unequal and vulnerable. Further, divided labor law put the two movements out of alignment; private sector union density peaked nearly a decade before the first major statutes granting public sector collective bargaining rights passed. As a result of this incongruent timing and sequencing, the United States has never had a strong union movement comprised of both sectors at the height of their membership and influence.


2016 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 463-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Touati ◽  
J.-L Denis ◽  
C. Grenier ◽  
P. Smits

Dougherty et al. posit that production of complex innovations requires that ecologies be organized, involving three activities: orchestrating knowledge capabilities, ongoing strategizing to frame and direct continuous innovation, and developing public policy to embrace ambiguity. Our study aims to understand how such ecologies emerge. Based on a longitudinal case study, performed in the context of the Quebec health system, our results suggest (a) that the emergence of innovations in highly institutionalized fields requires an additional activity, namely, working on boundaries to make actors perceive their interdependences (b) some levers that can foster the implementation of the model.


Author(s):  
Nick Letch

Information and communications technologies are emerging as important drivers of reform in the public sector. This chapter explores both enabling and constraining aspects of the role that ICTs can play in transforming the development and delivery of public policy. Two issues are explored: the reduction in flexibility of decision making that frequently accompanies ICT-based initiatives, and the critical role of knowledge embedded in networks of stakeholders in policy development and delivery. A case study, which traces the knowledge embedded in networks of relationships of actors involved in developing and implementing operational policy in an Australian public sector agency, is presented to illustrate the unintended constraints on knowledge activities. A framework for analyzing socio-technical networks involved in integrating ICTs into the cycle of public policy is presented.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document