After World War II, it indicates that many governments adopt a more active role in regard to employment relations (Bamber et al. 2004 p 12).
Bain and Clegg (1974) as well as Clegg (1976) state that dissimilarity in the dimensions of collective bargaining in various countries is the most important element in the shaping of union behaviour. This might represent a theory of trade union behaviour regarding collective bargaining however Clegg does not consider it a complete theory of trade unionism, because theory does not clarify the political actions of trade union. Even if the theory was comprehensive enough, it would not still not be considered as of theory of industrial relations. The dimensions of collective bargaining for Clegg are mostly affected by the structure as well as attitudes of employers’ relations and management. State involvement through legislation might also be a dominant influence if it takes place at an amply early stage during the development of collective bargaining. If it was a comprehensive theory of industrial relations it would take these factors into consideration as well.
Hyman (1994) supports Clegg’s analysis of union behaviour, mainly due to the fact that the theory fails to describe the changes that take place in the trade union density and strike behaviour in the following years. He emphasizes on impact of factors of political-economic like global competition that is intensified, the capital and employment restructuring, as well as the fall of Keynesianism in a country. He states that, as national institutional arrangements surely assist in shaping the effect of these forces on industrial relations, he supports Shalev (1980) notion that ‘the organization of industrial relations ought to still occupy no more than the position of variables that are dominant in theories which are comparative in nature. A strong theory must emphasize on political economy. However we are left with no comprehensive account of national differences.
Institutions can be known as symptoms , and not as causes, with differentiation in institutions among countries being mainly manifestation of the power distribution as well as the results of conflicts among different parties when these institutions start functioning (Shalev 1998 p.248).
Institutions also replicate party’s collective strategic choices, as well as the choice of unions along with labour movements to follow a path which is political in nature.
According to Poole (1984. 1986. 1993) the differences that are found in industrial relations institutions as well as practice in diverse countries have a strong foundation in the strategic choices of different parties to that of the employment relationship (Kochan, Katz and McKersie, 1984 p16). These parties are basically social ‘actors’ who form the arrangements of the institutions in which they function. The