ABSTRACT
Several broad assertions have recurred through the discussion so far, and have borne up well against repeated assaults by evidence. The first is that the scale and intensity of strike activity in a setting depend closely on the prior organization of the workers in the setting, on the availability of a structure which identifies, accumulates and communicates grievances on the one hand, and facilitates collective action on the other. Although that sort of conclusion is self-evident from several points of view, it contradicts two widely held interpretations of industrial conflict: (1) the reading of the level of strike activity as an index of worker ‘discontent’; (2) the attribution of a large weight to momentary impulse or accidents of local leadership. To be sure, we have presented precious little evidence concerning the day-to-day dynamics of individual strikes and the week-to-week waxing of conflict within particular workplaces. Our evidence has taken the form of general correspondences between unionization and strike activity, demonstrations that strike waves tend to draw disproportionately from those industries which already have high propensities to strike in ordinary years.…
