Different Pathways to the Decentralisation of Industrial Relations: Denmark and Australian compared

Lansbury, R; Kaine, SJ; Kaj Andersen, S

Different Pathways to the Decentralisation of Industrial Relations: Denmark and Australian compared

Lansbury, R Kaine, SJ

Kaj Andersen, S

Permalink

Publisher:: The Publishing Group Jurist
Publication Type:: Chapter
Citation:: Den danske model set udefra Anna Ilsøe. Larsen, 2016, pp. 127 - 146 (19)
Issue Date:: 2016

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	Den Danske Model set udefra print version.pdf	Published version	3.23 MB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Lansbury, R	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Kaine, SJ https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8485-7156	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Kaj Andersen, S	en_US
dc.contributor.editor	Pernille Larsen, T	en_US
dc.contributor.editor	Ilsoe, A	en_US
dc.date.issued	2016	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Den danske model set udefra Anna Ilsøe. Larsen, 2016, pp. 127 - 146 (19)	en_US
dc.identifier.isbn	8757436207	en_US
dc.identifier.isbn	9788757436204	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/96969
dc.description.abstract	This paper compares the Danish and Australian systems of industrial relations over the past three decades. Despite significant differences in historical starting points and trajectories, that reflect different political economies, both Denmark and Australia have made the transition from a centralised to a more decentralised system. However, there are important differences in means by which these developments occurred and the extent to which the basic character of industrial relations has changed in each country. Furthermore, the nature of the earlier centralised industrial relations systems in Denmark and Australia were configured differently. The trend towards more decentralised forms of industrial relations among a number of countries, which were formerly more centralised, has been evident for some time. Katz (1993) reported a shift towards decentralised bargaining in six countries which he argued was initiated mainly by employers against the opposition of central union organisations. Katz and Darbishire (2000) later noted that there was increasing convergence across countries while at the same time there was increasing diversity within countries, which they described as ‘converging divergences’. They also commented that, despite evidence of divergence, ‘the persistence of sizable country differences in the relative mix of employment patterns, and the role that national level institutions play in shaping that mix, suggests a continuing influential role for national employment-related institutions’ (Katz and Darbishire 2000, 281).	en_US
dc.publisher	The Publishing Group Jurist	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Den danske model set udefra Anna Ilsøe. Larsen	en_US
dc.title	Different Pathways to the Decentralisation of Industrial Relations: Denmark and Australian compared	en_US
dc.type	Chapter
utslib.location	Denmark	en_US
utslib.for	1503 Business and Management	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business/Management Discipline
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.consider-herdc	false	en_US
pubs.place-of-publication	Denmark	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US

Abstract:

This paper compares the Danish and Australian systems of industrial relations over the past three decades. Despite significant differences in historical starting points and trajectories, that reflect different political economies, both Denmark and Australia have made the transition from a centralised to a more decentralised system. However, there are important differences in means by which these developments occurred and the extent to which the basic character of industrial relations has changed in each country. Furthermore, the nature of the earlier centralised industrial relations systems in Denmark and Australia were configured differently. The trend towards more decentralised forms of industrial relations among a number of countries, which were formerly more centralised, has been evident for some time. Katz (1993) reported a shift towards decentralised bargaining in six countries which he argued was initiated mainly by employers against the opposition of central union organisations. Katz and Darbishire (2000) later noted that there was increasing convergence across countries while at the same time there was increasing diversity within countries, which they described as ‘converging divergences’. They also commented that, despite evidence of divergence, ‘the persistence of sizable country differences in the relative mix of employment patterns, and the role that national level institutions play in shaping that mix, suggests a continuing influential role for national employment-related institutions’ (Katz and Darbishire 2000, 281).

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/96969