SENDİKALARIN EMEK PİYASASI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİLERİ: OECD ÜLKELERİ ÜZERİNE BİR İNCELEME

Araştırma, 2017 OECD ülkeleri için sendikal kurumsallaşmanın (sendikal yoğunluk ve toplu pazarlık kapsamı) emek piyasası göstergeleri (uzun dönemli işsizlik oranı, emek piyasasına olan güvensizlik, istihdam oranı ve işe bağlı kazançlar) üzerindeki etkisini belirlemeyi hedeflemektedir. Verilerin analizinde SmartPLS programı ve yapısal eşitlik modellemesi tekniği kullanılmıştır. Güvenirlik analizi sonuçlarına göre; değişkenlerin harici yüklerinin 0.8018 ile 0.9304 arasında değiştiği; faktörlerin yapı güvenirlik değerlerinin 0.8593 ve 0.8937 olduğu, içsel tutarlık değerlerinin de 0.6902 ve 0.7634 olduğu görülmüştür. Geçerlik analizi sonuçlarına göre ise çıkarılan ortak varyans değerlerinin 0.50’den ve çıkarılan ortak varyans değerinin karekökünün ilgili sütundaki korelasyon değerlerinden yüksek olduğu görülmüştür. Bulgular, sendikaların kurumsallaşmasının 2017 yılında OECD ülkelerinde negatif istihdam göstergeleri üzerinde (uzun dönemli işsizlik oranı ve emek piyasasına olan güvensizlik) bir etkisi bulunmadığını (t<1.96), ancak pozitif istihdam göstergelerinin (istihdam oranı ve işe bağlı kazançlar) iyileşmesine katkıda bulunduğunu (t: 4.52; r: 0.50) ve pozitif istihdam göstergelerinde meydana gelen değişmenin %25’inin sendikal kurumsallaşma tarafından açıklandığını göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Sendika, Emek piyasası, OECD Ülkeleri

THE IMPACTS OF TRADE UNION ON LABOR MARKET: A RESEARCH ON OECD COUNTRIES

The present research aims to determine the impact of trade union institutionalization (trade union density and collective bargaining coverage) on labor market indicators (longterm unemployment, labor market insecurity, employment rate, and personal earnings) for 2017 OECD countries. In the analysis of the data, SmartPLS Structural Equation Modeling program was conducted. According to reliability analysis results; outer loadings of the items vary from 0.8018 to 0.9304, the structure reliability values of the factors are 0.8593 and 0.8937, and internal consistency values are 0.6902 and 0.7634. Validity analysis results show that AVE values of variables are over 0.50 and the “square root” of AVE of each latent variable is greater than the correlations among the latent variables. The findings showed that in 2017 in OECD countries, trade union institutionalization does not have an impact on (t<1.96) negative employment indicators (long-term unemployment and labor market insecurity), whereas it contributes to the recovery (t: 4.52; r: 0.50) of the positive employment indicators (employment rate and personal earnings) and 25% of the change in positive employment indicators is explained by trade union institutionalization. The present research aims to determine the impact of trade union institutionalization (trade union density and collective bargaining coverage) on labor market indicators (long-term unemployment, labor market insecurity, employment rate and personal earnings) for 2017 OECD countries. In the analysis of the data, SmartPLS Structural Equation Modeling was conducted. According to reliability analysis results; outer loadings of the items vary from 0.8018 to 0.9304, the structure reliability values of the factors are 0.8593 and 0.8937, and internal consistency values are 0.6902 and 0.7634. Validity analysis results show that AVE values of variables are over than 0.50 and “square root” of AVE of each latent variable is greater than the correlations among the latent variables. The findings showed that in 2017 in OECD countries, trade union institutionalization does not have an impact on (t<1.96) negative employment indicators (long-term unemployment and labor market insecurity), whereas it contributes to the recovery (t: 4.52; r: 0.50) of the positive employment indicators (employment rate and personal earnings) and 25% of the change in positive employment indicators is explained by trade union institutionalization.

Keywords:

Trade union, Labor market, OECD Countries,

PDF

___

Adal, Z. (2015). İnsan Kaynakları Yönetiminin Hukuki Boyutları. Sadullah, Ö., Uyargil, C., Acar, A.C., Özçelik, A.O., Dündar, G., Ataay, İ.D., Adal, Z., Tüzüner, L. (Ed.), İnsan Kaynakları Yönetimi (ss. 499-618). İstanbul: Beta Yayınları.
Armingeon, K. (1989). Trade Unions Under Changing Conditions: the West German Experience, 1950-1985. European Sociological Review, 5(1), 1-23.
Ashenfelter, O., Pencavel, J.H. (1969). American Trade Union Growth: 1900-1960. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 83(3), 434-448.
Aykaç, M. (2016). Endüstri İlişkileri ve Karşılaştırmalı Endüstri İlişkilerinin Kavramsal Çerçevesi. Tiyek, R. (Ed.), Karşılaştırmalı Endüstri İlişkileri (ss. 5-26). Bursa: Dora Yayınları.
Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y. (1988). On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94.
Bain, G.S., Elsheikh, F. (1979). An Inter-industry Analysis of Unionisation in Britain. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 17(2), 137-157.
Bal, C.G., Ada, S., Çelik, A. (2012). Bilişim Sistemleri Başarı Modeli ve Aile Hekimliği Bilişim Sistemleri. Yönetim ve Ekonomi, 19(1), 35-46.
Barth, E., Bryson, A., Dale-Olsen, H. (2017). Union Density, Productivty and Wages. IZA Discussion Paper, No: 11111, Bonn Germany.
Başol, O. (2018). An Evaluation on Life Satisfaction in OECD Countries. İş-Güç Endüstri İlişkileri Dergisi, 20(3), 67-86.
Başol, O., Gümüş, İ., Çakır, N.N. (2018). The Relationship Between Unionization and Job Satisfaction: A Research On Blue Collar Employees. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 57, 129-143.
Berg, A. van den (1995). Trade Union Growth and Decline in the Netherlands. Tinbergen Institute Research Series, Book Number 101, Amsterdam, Netherland.
Biçerli, M.K. (2007). Çalışma Ekonomisi. İstanbul: Beta Yayınları.
Carruth, A., Disney, R. (1988). Where Have Two Million Trade Union Members Gone?. Economica, 55(1), 1-19.
Carruth, A., Schnabel, C. (1990). Empirical Modelling of Trade Union Growth in Germany, 1956-1986: Traditional versus Cointegration and Error Correction Methods. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 126(2), 326-346.
Charlwood, A. (2002). Why Do Non-union Employees Want to Unionize: Evidence from British. British Journal of Industrial Relation, 40, 463-491.
Çetintaş, H., Şenkal, A., Başel, H. (2008). Unionization, Unemployment and Economic Growth; Case of Tutkey. Serbian Journal of Management, 3(2), 157-170.
Daud, Z., Tumin, S. (2013). The Relationship Between Employees’ Need and the Formation of Trade Union: The Malaysian Manufacturing Company’s Experience. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(13), 124-134.
Dülgeroğlu, İ. (2017). Son Tüketicilerin Değer Bilinci ve Fiyat-Kalite İlişkilerinin İnternet Üzerinden Satın Alma Davranışı Üzerindeki Etkisi: Kırklareli İlinde Bir Araştırma. Kırklareli Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(1), 53-63.
Dülgeroğlu, İ., Başol, O. (2017). İş Stresi ve Çalışma Yaşamı Kalitesi Algısının Yansımaları: Satış Temsilcileri Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Business and Economics Research Journal, 8(2), 293-304.
Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Fox, J., Weisberg, S. (2011). An R Companion to Applied Regression. USA: Sage Publication.
Fukac, M., Pagan, A. (2010). Structural Macro-Econometric Modelling in a Policy Environment. Research Working Paper of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City Economic Reseach Department.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS- SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–151.Hulland, J. (1999). Use of Partial Least Squares (PLS) in Strategic Management Research: A Review of Four Recent Studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 195-204.
Koray, M. (2005). Sosyal Politika. İstanbul: İmge Kitabevi.
Kwong, K., Wong, K. (2013). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) Techniques Using SmartPLS. Marketing Bulletin, 24(Technical Note 1), 1-32.
Lehndorff, S., Dribbusch, H., Schulten, T. (2018). European Trade Unions in a Time of Crises an Overview. Lehndorff, S., Dribbusch, H., Schulten, T. (Ed.), Rough Waters European Trade Unions in a Time of Crises (pp. 7-38). European Trade Union Institute, Brussels Belgium.
Müller, T., Platzer, H.W. (2018). The European Trade Union Federations: Profiles and Power Resources – Changes and Challenges in Times of Crisis. Lehndorff, S., Dribbusch, H., Schulten, T. (Ed.), Rough Waters European Trade Unions in a Time of Crises (pp. 303-329). European Trade Union Institute, Brussels Belgium.
Nakamura, K. (2007). Decline or Revival?: Japanese Labor Unions. Japan Labor Review, 4(1), 7-22.
OECD (2017). Multilingual Summaries How’s Life 2017 Measuring Well-being. OECD Publishing.
Ours, Jan C. van (1992). Union Growth in The Netherlands 1961-1989. Applied Economics, 24(9), 1059-1066.
Önsal, N. (2017). Endüstri İlişkileri Sözlüğü. Ankara: TAEM Yayınları.
Pernot, J.M. (2018). France’s Trade Unions in the Aftermath of the Crisis. Lehndorff, S., Dribbusch, H., Schulten, T. (Ed.), Rough Waters European Trade Unions in a Time of Crises (pp. 39-64). European Trade Union Institute, Brussels Belgium.
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S., Will, A. (2005). SmartPLS 2.0.M3. Hamburg: SmartPLS, http://www. smartpls.de.
Schnabel, C. (2002). Determinants of Trade Union Membership. Friedrich-Alexander-Universıtät Erlangen-Nürnberg, Discussion Paper, No: 15.
Sharpe, I.G. (1971). The Growth of Australian Trade Unions: 1907-1969. Journal of Industrial Relations, 13(2), 138-154.
Stepina, L.P., Fiorito, J. (1986). Toward a Comprehensive Theory of Union Growth and Decline. Industrial Relations, 25(3), 248-264.
Tokol, A. (2015). Sosyal Politikanın Tarafları. Tokol, A., Alper, Y. (Ed.), Sosyal Politika (ss. 79-101). Bursa: Dora Yayınevi.
Troy, L. (1965). Trade Union Membership 1897-1962. NBER, 1-10.
Tsuru, Y. (2002). Non-unionization of Labor-Management Relations. Tokyo: Toyo Keizai Shinposha.
Webb, S., Webb, B. (1920). The History of Trade Unionism. New York: Longman Green&Co.