Historical Changes in the Conservative Party's Industrial Relations Philosophy

Abstract

Just what is the Conservative Government's industrial relations policy? There are usually two different sets of answers given by industrial relations commentators to this question, determined by their stance on the Government's general policies. The first line of argument is that the question itself is a contradiction in terms: the Government, by definition of its laissez‐faire economic philosophy, has no specific policy towards industrial relations. The content of national and locally negotiated contracts, in both the private and, increasingly, the public sector, must be the product of what the market can afford, and of a bargaining process that is unfettered by interference from external agencies. The free play of market forces must be the primary determinant of wage and price levels. Thus Margaret Thatcher and Arthur Scargill have at least one thing in common, that is, a view of free collective bargaining in which wages and prices are determined by the daily trial of strength between capital and labour. Indeed, the Government's employment legislation was placed on the statute book, so they tell us, not to strengthen the hand of the employer at the expense of labour, but because the state had been used by previous governments, Labour and Conservative alike, for the benefit of trade union growth, and not in its more traditional role as a guarantor of individual freedom and private property. Hence the Government must stand aloof from disputes like the recent miners' strike.

Citation

Hibbert, N. (1985), "Historical Changes in the Conservative Party's Industrial Relations Philosophy", Employee Relations, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 9-14. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb055052