Whose Hard Times?

Author(s):  
Lu Zhang

This chapter carries out an in-depth analysis of the transformation of China's automobile industry and its labor force over the past two decades, with particular attention on how shop-floor, national, and global processes interact in complex ways to produce the specific industrial relations and dynamics of labor unrest in the Chinese automobile industry. It argues that the massive foreign investment in China's auto sector through joint ventures and the increased scale and concentration of automobile production have created and strengthened a new generation of autoworkers with growing workplace bargaining power and grievances. However, the acute contradictory pressures of simultaneously pursuing profitability and maintaining legitimacy with labor have driven large state-owned automakers and Sino-foreign joint ventures to follow a policy of labor force dualism, drawing boundaries between formal and temporary workers. While formal workers enjoy high wages, generous benefits, and relatively secure employment, temporary workers suffer comparatively low wages, unsecure employment, and heavier and dirtier job assignments. Temporary and other low-wage autoworkers have also become the main source of militancy in the auto industry.

2008 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lu Zhang

AbstractThis article explores the changing workplace and labor-management relations in the Chinese automobile industry under the influence of globalization and China's market reform. It depicts the everyday working lives of Chinese autoworkers and the shop-floor dynamics of labor relations based on the author's intensive fieldwork at the seven major automobile assembly enterprises in China during 2004–2007.The main findings of this paper are that, in spite of the generalized lean production and homogenization of workplace experiences of Chinese autoworkers, two different models of labor controls have emerged in the Chinese auto industry: “lean-and-dual” and “lean-and-mean.” On the one hand, under the lean-and-dual regime, management adopts labor force dualism by using both formal contract workers and agency workers on production lines side by side, which leads to a “hybrid” factory regime that combines both “hegemonic” and “despotic” elements. Hegemonic relations have been established between management and formal workers based on high wages, generous benefits, better working conditions, and relatively secure employment for formal workers, while “despotic” labor control characterizes the conditions for temporary agency workers with lower wages and insecure employment.On the other hand, the lean-and-mean type of auto firms adopt a high-wage, high-turnover strategy of lean production without the promise of job security to their entire workforce. The interventionist roles of the Chinese central and local states in regulating labor relations and the roles of managerial staff, factory unions, and factory party committees in building hegemonic consent among workers in the auto industry are also explored. The paper concludes by discussing the potentials and limits of Chinese autoworkers and the likely roles they are to play in the evolution of labor relations under China's current market transition and globalization.


2021 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 169-213
Author(s):  
Caixia Shen ◽  
Yanfei Wang ◽  
Junji Xiao ◽  
Xiaolan Zhou

1994 ◽  
Vol 3 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 393-409 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.P. Awasthi ◽  
Ashoka Chandra

The article examines the contemporary trends and future prospects of migration from India to Australia. The focus is on Indian Settlers and Temporary Entrants admitted to Australia for employment and Indian students admitted to Australia for higher studies. The volume of emigration for permanent residence during the early 1990s has made India one of the leading source countries of migration to Australia. A majority of Indians admitted as Settlers every year join the labor force. Recent data indicate that, among Indian Settlers, there is a preponderance of unsponsored Independent Skilled Migrants. Given the anticipated growth in the number of Indian students, the coming years are likely to witness a spurt in Skilled Temporary Workers from India.


2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 242-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young-Kyu Shin ◽  
Tuomas Ylä-Anttila

The literature on new social risk (NSR) groups, such as single parents and temporary workers, has argued that they are less likely to join trade unions than other employees. It has been suggested that this is due to the unions’ incapacity or unwillingness to promote policies that mediate NSRs. We argue that there are differences in unionization between different NSR groups, and that country-level institutional structures, operationalized here as industrial relations (IR) regimes, have effects on how likely NSR groups are to unionize. Our multilevel logistic models using European Social Survey (ESS) data produce three main results: (1) family policy-related NSR groups (single parents, female employees with children and female caregivers) are more – not less – unionized than the average worker; (2) precarious workers (low-skilled service employees, temporary employees and part-timers) are, indeed, less unionized than average but (3) this result concerns mostly the liberal and transitional IR regimes.


2014 ◽  
Vol 101 (1) ◽  
pp. 663-683 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuandi Wang ◽  
Jian Li ◽  
Lutao Ning ◽  
Deming Zeng ◽  
Xin Gu

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document