As a complement to the historical institutionalist literature on policy outcomes, in order to making sense of labor unions strategic choices, interactions, and pacts with the state, this study drew insights upon the strategic choice literature on social movements (Jasper 2004; Maney, Kutz-Flamenbaum, Rohlinger, and Goodwin 2012). This literature enabled us to bring to the table a way of interpreting organized labor action state in the process of labor unions vis-à-vis laws reform through the lens of organized labor capacities and strategic choices which was obscured in the structuralist approach of the historical institutionalist tradition. Unlike rational choice theory which focuses on strategic choices of the agents taken in light of a larger rationality, strategic choices approach analyses agents’ strategies and choices at a micro level, without assuming that these choices are made as part of and deploy a broader and abstract rationality. Hence, in this study, in order to making sense of labor unions choices and pacts in the politics of labor unions laws policymaking, we focused not only on the historical and institutional configuration of the relationships that shaped labor politics in the eighties but also we examined what labor strategic choices shaped labor political interactions, political actions, goals, and influenced policy outcomes. In doing so, we focused on two organized labor unions capacities: coherence as a collective actor and capacity to fit its demands toward the state. By coherence of labor as a collective actor, I understand the capacity of labor to maintain as a unified collective actor, overcoming any eventuality of labor fragmentation although its own internal heterogeneity. Labor's capacity to fit its demands upon the state is defined as the capacity of labor as a collective actor to wisely engage in a dual relationship with the state, which not necessarily expressed different strategies, cooperation or confrontation, but, on the contrary, further enhanced the capacity of labor to alternately combine, with considerable freedom of action, how and when to cooperate or confront with the state. The two critical dimensions of
As a complement to the historical institutionalist literature on policy outcomes, in order to making sense of labor unions strategic choices, interactions, and pacts with the state, this study drew insights upon the strategic choice literature on social movements (Jasper 2004; Maney, Kutz-Flamenbaum, Rohlinger, and Goodwin 2012). This literature enabled us to bring to the table a way of interpreting organized labor action vis-à-vis state in the process of labor unions laws reform through the lens of organized labor capacities and strategic choices which was obscured in the structuralist approach of the historical institutionalist tradition. Unlike rational choice theory which focuses on strategic choices of the agents taken in light of a larger rationality, strategic choices approach analyses agents’ strategies and choices at a micro level, without assuming that these choices are made as part of and deploy a broader and abstract rationality. Hence, in this study, in order to making sense of labor unions choices and pacts in the politics of labor unions laws policymaking, we focused not only on the historical and institutional configuration of the relationships that shaped labor politics in the eighties but also we examined what labor strategic choices shaped labor political interactions, political actions, goals, and influenced policy outcomes. In doing so, we focused on two organized labor unions capacities: coherence as a collective actor and capacity to fit its demands toward the state. By coherence of labor as a collective actor, I understand the capacity of labor to maintain as a unified collective actor, overcoming any eventuality of labor fragmentation although its own internal heterogeneity. Labor's capacity to fit its demands upon the state is defined as the capacity of labor as a collective actor to wisely engage in a dual relationship with the state, which not necessarily expressed different strategies, cooperation or confrontation, but, on the contrary, further enhanced the capacity of labor to alternately combine, with considerable freedom of action, how and when to cooperate or confront with the state. The two critical dimensions of
Paper-Marcela-.docx