Communalism and the gains from development: the case of Nigeria
In: Paper - Program of Development Studies, William Marsh Rice University no. 74
44 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Paper - Program of Development Studies, William Marsh Rice University no. 74
In: Paper - Program of Development Studies, William Marsh Rice University no. 50
In: William Marsh Rice University. Program of Development Studies, paper no. 27
In: The annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Band 492, Heft 1, S. 226-227
ISSN: 1552-3349
In: Sachzwänge und Handlungsspielräume in der Wirtschafts- und Sozialpolitik der Zwischenkriegszeit, S. 159-174
In: The journal of economic history, Band 44, Heft 1, S. 219-220
ISSN: 1471-6372
In: The journal of economic history, Band 42, Heft 2, S. 483-484
ISSN: 1471-6372
In: The journal of economic history, Band 41, Heft 2, S. 474-475
ISSN: 1471-6372
In: The journal of economic history, Band 40, Heft 1, S. 219-221
ISSN: 1471-6372
In: The journal of economic history, Band 39, Heft 3, S. 857-858
ISSN: 1471-6372
In: The journal of economic history, Band 39, Heft 3, S. 833-834
ISSN: 1471-6372
In: The journal of economic history, Band 38, Heft 2, S. 513-514
ISSN: 1471-6372
In: The journal of economic history, Band 37, Heft 2, S. 456-460
ISSN: 1471-6372
In: The journal of economic history, Band 37, Heft 1, S. 210-225
ISSN: 1471-6372
This article compares the development of the workers' right to organize and bargain collectively in England, France, and the U.S. Starting with a common repressive policy, each country followed a different path toward establishing the workers' rights. The main ultimate difference lies in the extent to which the state became involved in industrial relations. In England the state remained aloof after securing very broad legal rights of collective action. The workers were left to do their own battling. In France the state came to look upon collective agreements as an aspect of public policy and became the dominant partner in labor negotiations. The American pattern lies in between: state protection extends to procedural but not to substantive issues.