Union Leadership, Mobilization and Decision-Making in a Prolonged Strike
Kathryn M. Steel
What the paper says
Why is it that some strikes continue despite no apparent chance of success? And why do followers continue to endorse leaders who no longer appear effective in achieving union collective goals? This paper offers insights into these two questions in an analysis of leaders’ language and action during a lengthy, unsanctioned, and unsuccessful strike in Australia. The analysis is framed within the industrial history of the strikers and the themes of collective identity, collective (moral) values, and collective vision and goals. It suggests that emotion-laden identity-signalling by leaders may dominate content and contextual awareness. The dispute illustrates the complexity of the worker–activist relationship and supports an explicit discussion of workers’ agency in the leadership dynamic within mobilization theory. The paper concludes with an analysis of changes to the law on strikes and considers a potential model for union mobilization in the future.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.00 × 0.4 = 0.00 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.