Introduction Amongst the various bodies that have worked towards employee rights in the workplace, trade unions

have been the most influential and successful. Trade unions are collective bodies that represent employees within a specific profession, industry or company and often bargain with companies the interests of its members. Trade unions tend to exist in most developed nations and they are recognized by law in much of North America and Europe. As they work towards instituting the demands of their members, an interesting question that arises is whether trade unions have any impact on the notion of diversity in workplaces or not. Their role as representatives of the workforce implies that they must have some form of impact on the notions of diversity and equality. In other words, it is appreciated in literature that trade unions do tend to have positive impacts on diversity and equality. The question that then arises is to what extent - do unions tend to have considerable impact on the notion of diversity and equality, or is the impact insignificant? In consideration of this, the aim of this paper is to realize the extent to which trade unions tend to have a positive impact on the notion of diversity and equality.

Impact on Equality Research with respect to trade unions impact on diversity and equality can be divided into two respective sections; trade unions role in advancing equality also known as equality bargaining - and trade unions role in promoting diversity. Firstly, the role of trade unions with respect to equality bargaining would

be considered. With respect to equality bargaining, the first major study was conducted by Colling and Dickens (1989). Colling and Dickens defined the notion of equality bargaining. The main components of equality bargaining were; inclusion of issues of particular concern to women and equality dimension to negotiation of change. With respect to equality bargaining, it was found that it was largely amiss from the trade unions of the late 1980s. Colling and Dickens (1989) realized that behind this were two reasons - parochialism of trade unions and absence of bargainers focused on equality or diversity. Firstly, trade unions were too focused on relatively small issues at workplace such as timings and wages of majority members that they did not consider issues of equality. Secondly, the membership of ethnicities and females in trade union was relatively minor and as such the leadership of trade unions, i.e. the bargainers, was not particularly focused on issues of equality and diversity. A follow-up study by Colling and Dickens (1999) found that trade unions bargaining for equality at workplace had increased. The reasons behind this were the support garnished by equality at workplace in EU Law and UK Politics. Moreover, female membership in trade unions had increased. Both of these factors had resulted in increased equality bargaining by trade unions. It should be noted that while both the studies reflected a change in trade unions agenda on equality bargaining, it did not associate actual changes in workplace to the change in trade union membership. In the 2000s, several studies found that an increased female membership in trade unions or even greater democratic union structures was not likely to

cause greater equality bargaining. This was first highlighted by McBride (2001) in a comprehensive study on trade unions and gender democracy in their structures. The reason behinds this was that most trade unions had two different divisions for bargaining with respective organizations and for democratic elections. As such, even despite females holding majority in a trade union and a democratic system being in place, the notion of equality bargaining in the end depended upon the bargainers themselves. This was particularly true where trade unions were decentralized and union officers independently sought local bargaining (Colling and Dickens (1989). However, it should be noted that it was also found that in centralized trade unions, were pressure from women was more affective, equality bargaining was more prevalent (Weiler, 2000). Nevertheless, it should be understood from these studies that the effect of female membership on the equality bargaining of a trade union is largely non-existent. Too many prerequisites are needed (trade union should be centralized, should multiemployer, should be democratic, women members should put pressure, union leaders should be influential, etc.) for it to be said with confidence that trade unions with significantly high female membership are likely to play a major role in equality bargaining. The most extensive study on equality bargaining, however, was conducted by Heery (2006). In essence, Heery (2006) looked at survey data from nearly 514 trade union officers. Several findings were made from analysis of this data. First of all, it was found that equality bargaining is quite widespread unlike what prior studies might make one believe. Around 73% of survey respondents have

pursued bargaining for an equal pay issue. Moreover, it is quite relatively successful, with nearly 70% or more of attempted bargaining in each equal pay issue showing success. However, when Heery (2006) assessed the data even further, several issues were found with equality bargaining. First of all, it was noted that most equality bargaining efforts were relatively minor, i.e. amongst the 73% officers who pursued equal pay issues, nearly a third only pursued 1-3 issues and another third only pursued 4-6 issues. As such, only 26.6 percent of the officers surveyed pursued equality bargaining rigorously. Moreover, it was found that equality bargaining was pursued prominently in organizations either within public service or at least associated to public service. The study however dismissed the notion that trade unions that are facing declining membership tend to indulge in equal pay initiatives to attract female membership. The study also found that equality bargaining was dependent on a variety of officer characteristics. Officers that possessed access to equal pay issue training, reported commitment to equal pay, external union advice, university education or were female were more likely to advocate for equal pay. On the other hand, recent appointees and younger officers were less likely to advocate for equal pay and focus on traditional union issues. Similarly, the study also found that equality bargaining depended upon a lot of internal and external pressures. In short, the findings within Heery (2006) reiterated the earlier finding that there are too many characteristics and types of trade unions and union officers for it to be definitively said that any trade union is likely to. However, it should be noted that the findings of Heery (2006) do point out that if a trade union emphasizes on

members voice (i.e. individual members issues in context of specialist understanding of the issues), possesses pro-equality representatives (as per the choice model), and has a centralized and coordinated system of operations, the trade union is likely to emphasize intensively on equality bargaining. It should be noted that another issue with trade unions promoting equality is the declining significance and power of trade unions. According to Tavora (2012), participation of fresh graduates within UK in trade unions is quite low. This is further supported by Parker and Foley (2010) which point towards decreasing membership of trade unions within UK and Canada. Both of these papers essentially take into consideration the issue of gender equality and the role of trade unions, but find that trade unions inf luence has considerably decreased over the last few decades. They point out that unions have become too fragmented and labor mobility has increased to such an extent that if trade unions make too many demands, it often results in increased eventual unemployment or outsourcing of functions to lower-cost areas. This has specifically been seen in the case of manufacturing over the years, as US and UK manufacturing has largely been outsourced to China where lower-cost labor is available and trade union pressure does not exist. This is further supported by an economic proposition by Krugman (1994). The gist of Krugmans argument is that when equal pay or greater incentives are beseeched by trade unions, they tend to cost businesses money. However, businesses by nature operate on the principle of profitability, and the increase in cost in one area of operations has to be compensated by decrease in cost in another area of operations. According to

Krugman (1994), this area of operations tends to be one which is not represented by a trade union. For instance, if a manufacturer has three factories of which employees in one factory are not registered with any trade union, then they are more likely to face the implications of increased pay for the employees of other two branches. Hence, equality bargaining or collective bargaining does not result in a more equal environment or a better working environment for the collective employees of an organization but for only those employees who are registered on the trade union. This is also known as the insider bias, and is one of the reasons trade union bargaining is not appreciated in the greater economic discussion.

Impact on Diversity Much of the literature regarding diversity and the role trade unions play with respect to diversity has been written and researched by Anne-marie Green and Gill Kirton. In their first paper, specifically on the issue, Green and Kirton (2004) realize that trade unions are not exactly open to the idea of diversity management. The issue typically arises because of the difference of diversity from its predecessor, i.e. equal opportunity or equality. The notion of equality dwelled on the concept of sameness. On the other hand, diversity specifically emphasizes on the notion of difference. The issue that according to trade unions that occurs then is that it becomes too difficult to reach compromises in the greater business context. For instance, diversity management might propose that women should be hired in engineering professions because scientific research

that promotes their superiority in the field. However, the proposal underlying this is that only women should be given jobs in the engineering function of the business. Obviously, this would go against the rhetoric of trade unions that promote equality. Hence, the primary issue that trade unions face with diversity is that it differs from the sameness or equality that theyd like for their members. Secondly, the issue that arises, according to Green and Kirton (2004), is that diversity focuses on the individualistic case and is concerned with the business case, whereas trade emphasize on the collectivistic focus and the social justice case for equality. It should be noted however that this does not mean that trade unions absolutely shun the idea of diversity or diversity management. If the findings within Green et al. (2005) are emphasized, it would be realized that trade unions are not against the notion of diversity, per se, but rather the individualistic approach and business case that it emphasizes. Moreover, the opposition to diversity management as a policy approach is not universally opposed, but it is actually accepted in Denmark as an appropriate manner to dealing with racial discrimination at workplace. It should be noted however that Denmark has an extremely negative political scenario with regards to racism, and any approach that might better it might seem as Danish unions to be appropriate. It should also be noted that diversity is accepted even by British unions when arguing specifically for equality. The British unions realize that the business case that diversity management proposes is useful in advocating notions of equality, and this is exactly what they often base their arguments on. As such, it should be

noted, as per Green et al. (2005), the role that trade unions might play in advancing diversity is dependent upon several other notions, one of which is the national industrial relations and equality contexts. The context and research on trade unions role with respect to diversity, however, does not specifically illustrate cases where diversity management or diversity policy approaches have been specifically emphasized upon by trade unions. Even in Green et al. (2005), the lone example of an equality specialist that provides training in diversity management has been provided. Besides this, there isnt any quantitative data to support the prevalence of diversity management in Denmark. On the other hand, comments and quotations mentioned in Green et al. (2005), from the UK trade union perspective, often reflect those of the Trade Union Congress which is the largest trade union body and can be held representative of the trade union thought in UK. It is also mentioned in Green et al. (2005) that trade unions have been accepting of diversity management but have not been largely aware of the individualistic aspect of it. It is quite possible that if they become aware of the individualistic aspect of it, they would realize the difficulty of applying diversity to alleviate instances of discrimination. Hence, it should be noted that the findings in UK context tend to be more holistically relevant than the Denmark context. This should be kept in mind when considering the findings of Green et al. (2005).

Conclusion From the aforementioned literature review and analysis, a few things are quite clear. It should be noted that trade unions do play a significant role in

advancing equality and diversity. The issue is that this subject to too many constraints and considerations. With respect to equality, the trade unions role is subject to, according to Heery (2006), the influences of voice, choice and opportunity and this often restricts the role trade unions might play in promoting equality. Moreover, the declining membership of trade unions and the overall negative impact of collective bargaining on non-members tend to be greater than any benefit that union members might find, and at times further impedes equality. It should also be realized that diversity management has not been accepted by trade unions in UK, at least. Moreover, its acceptance is based on national industrial relation and equality contexts. Hence, the role trade unions play in advancing diversity is largely dependent upon the national industrial relations and equality contexts of the region. Nevertheless, the strict business case focus of diversity management and social justice focus of trade unions might impede a complete focus on diversity management by trade unions and hence there will always be some opposition. In consideration of all this, it should be noted that trade unions do play an extensive role with respect to promoting equality; however, this role can be further intensified if trade union members are given more voice and trade union officers are trained in equality issues. On the other hand, the role that trade unions play with respect to advancing diversity is ambiguous and more quantitative research needs to be carried out for a definitive statement to be provided with regards to diversity.

References Colling, T, and Dickens, L. (1989). Equality Bargaining: Why Not? London: HMSO. Colling, T, and Dickens, L. (1998). Selling the case for gender equality: Deregulation and equality bargaining. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 36(3), 389-411. Green, A, Kirton, G, and Wrench, J. (2005). Trade Union Perspectives on Diversity Management: A Comparison of the UK and Denmark. European Journal of Industrial Relations. 11 (2), 179-196. Greene, A, and Kirton, G. (2004). Views from Another Stakeholder: Trade Union Perspective on the Rhetoric of Managing Diversity. Warwick Papers in Industrial Relations, Number 74. Heery, E. (2006). Equality Bargaining: Where, Who, Why? Gender Work and Organization, 13(6), 522-542. Krugman, P. (1994). Past and Prospective Causes of High Unemployment. Economic Review: Federal Bank of Kansas City, 79(4), 23-44. McBride, A. (2001). Gender Democracy in Trade Unions. Aldershot: Ashgate. Parker, J, and Foley, J. (2010). Progress on Women's Equality within UK and Canadian Trade Unions? Industrial Relations, 65(2), 281-. Tavora, I. (2012). Trade Unions and Gender Equality in the Workplace: Casebased Evidence from the UK. University of the West of England. Weiler, A. (2000). Innovative Agreements on Equal Opportunities: New Horizons of Collective Bargaining. Transfer, 6(2), 209226.