Explaining Strike Outcomes in Chile

Associational Power, Structural Power, and Spatial Strategies

Bibliographic Data

ID2956629
AuthorsJoel Stillerman (0000-0002-9402-653X, Grand Valley State University, corresponding author)
Year2017
Volume59
Issue1
Pages96-118
Publication date2017-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLatin American Politics and Society (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1531-426X • E-ISSN: 1548-2456
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1111/laps.12012
OpenAlexW2585832326
LanguageEN
Citations received15
References cited31

Research on strikes has traditionally focused on how economic, institutional, and political variables shape strike patterns. Recent work examines how workers' structural, associational, and symbolic power facilitate strikes. Building on this research, this article asks, what factors determine strike outcomes? It analyzes four strikes at MADECO, Chile's largest copper manufacturer, across democratic, authoritarian, and postauthoritarian regimes. Using qualitative and documentary evidence, it argues that strike outcomes reflect workers' capacity to halt or disrupt production and to access government allies who can pressure management to settle strikes in workers' favor. Outcomes vary based on the political composition of government, workers' capacity to halt production, and industry's and government's dependence on foreign investment. MADECO workers' location in Santiago, near national officials, allowed them to mobilize at the local, national, and international scales to pressure management. Comparisons with other strikes in Chile, Argentina, and Peru identify similar mobilization patterns

Authoritarianism · Democracy · Development economics · Economics · Mobilization · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · International Labor and Employment Law · Labor Movements and Unions · Law · Social Policy and Reform Studies

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub