The Labor Process in Construction

Control without Bureaucratic and Technological Means

Datos Bibliográficos

ID2362971
AutoresThomas L Steiger (0000-0001-5887-7516, Indiana State University, autor de correspondencia), William H Form (The Ohio State University), William Form (The Ohio State University)
Año1991
Volumen18
Número3
Páginas251-270
Fecha de publicación1991-08-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaWork and Occupations (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0730-8884 • E-ISSN: 1552-8464
EditorialSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0730888491018003001
OpenAlexW2021461205
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas4
Referencias citadas18

The construction industry presents a challenge to current labor process theory. Data from a wide range of work settings suggest it is premature to conclude that management has succeeded in appropriating workers' knowledge, accountability, and responsibility for work. Subcontracting, 'lumping,' use of prefabricated materials, and other factors have undermined the centralization of managerial controls. Moreover, a craft ideology shared by workers, supervisors, and contractors pervades all types of work organizations. Finally, the labor market has become so fluid and dynamic that it no longer conforms to the traditional construct of an internal labor market. Since these observations likely apply to other work settings, a refinement of labor process theory is in order

Accountability · Business · Craft · Economics · Ideology · Labor relations · Labour economics · Political science · Politics · Process theory · Public relations · Secondary labor market · Split labor market theory · Temporary work · Work in process · Computer Science · Construction Engineering and Safety · Construction Project Management and Performance · Engineering · Law · Occupational Health and Safety Research · Marketing