AuthorKim, Byeng Dae.
Committee ChairShockey, James
MetadataShow full item record
PublisherThe University of Arizona.
RightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
AbstractThis study is about the development of Japanese industrial relations, based on a quantitative analysis of industrial disputes. This study proposes a model of industrial relations, which incorporates interactions between principal actors, such as the state, capital, and labor and two major contingent factors, i.e., political and economic factors. Two levels at which these factors affect industrial relations are distinguished: one at the world-systemic level, another at a subsystemic (country) level. The model predicts that the triadic relation among the state, capital, and labor affects industrial relations, and they are in turn influenced by both political and economic processes at the world-systemic as well as at a subsystemic level. An application of the model to Japanese industrial relations, however, requires a close examination of the cultural interpretation of Japanese industrial relations. It is often asserted that Japanese industrial relations, characterized as unique as they are exemplified by lifetime employment, seniority-based wage system, and enterprise unionism, are rooted in the Japanese tradition and culture. This implies the contribution of unique and continuous industrial relations to economic success in Japan. Nonetheless, the findings of this study reject the culturalist explanation of Japanese industrial relations, clearly illustrating a significant structural change in industrial relations in Japan during the period from 1916- 1934. This significant structural change was also accompanied by social, political, and economic changes. Further, industrial relations in Japan for the period from 1897-1985 were tested by the model, using the method of linear structural equation models. Findings of the study are: The strength of capital was inversely related to the likelihood of industrial disputes, while the strength of labor increased disputes. The state's strength indirectly decreased industrial disputes. In addition, substantial differences in the triadic interactions regarding industrial disputes between pre and post World War II Japan also supported the structural change in Japanese industrial relations before World War II.