A Longitudinal Test of a Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Union Loyalt

8/2/2019 A Longitudinal Test of a Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Union Loyalt

1/15

Journ al of Appl ied Psychology Copyr ight 1989 by the Am erican Psychological Associat ion, Inc.1989, Vol . 74, No. 2, 213-2 27 0021-9010/89/S00.75

A L on gi tu d in a l T est o f a M o d e l o f th e A n teced en tsa n d C o n s e q u e n c e s o f U n i o n L o y a l tyr

C l i v e F u l l a g a r ;U n i v e r s i t y o f t h e W i t w a t e r s r a n dJ o h a n n e s b u r g , S o u t h A f r i c aJ u l i a n B a r l i n gQ u e e n ' s U n i v e r s i t yK i n g s t o n , O n t a r i o , C a n a d a

In the prese nt s tudy we aimed to co nstruct a process m odel of union loyalty. Various personal , work,and u nion-re lated variables were hypothesized to p redict union loyalty, which in tu rn w ould causegreater part icip ation in essential u nion activi t ies . Furtherm ore, the s tudy assessed whether differentmodels o f un ion loya l tyex is ted fo r 169 Black and 139 W hi te mem bers o f a m ul t i rac ia l South Afr icanunion. For both samples, cross-lagged regression analyses showed that u nion loyalty caused greaterform al part icipation in union activi t ies . Separate path analyses demo nstrated that perce ptions ofunion instrumental ity, extr insic jo b dissat isfaction, an d early social izat ion experiences pre dictedunion lo yalty n both samples. However; he natu re and strength of several relationships between theantecedent variables and union lo yaltywere moderated by race. In a further refinement of he model,perceived union in strum ental i ty was found to m oderate the relat ionsh ip between union loyalty andunion part icip ation, and the relationships between the pred ictor variables and union loyalty.

U n i o n l o y a l ty i s in c r e a s in g l y b e in g r e c o g n i z e d a s a n i m p o r -t a n t v a r i a b l e fo r u n d e r s ta n d i n g u n i o n s ( G o r d o n & N u r i c k ,1 9 8 1) . A n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f l o y a l t y t o l a b o r o r g a n i z a t i o n s e n -a b l e s g r e a t e r i n s i g h t i n t o p s y c h o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s i n v o l v e d i nu n i o n s , p r o v i d e s u n i o n s w i t h k n o w l e d g e o f s o m e p r a c t i c a l u s e,a n d o f fe r s a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o t e s t t h e g e n e r a l i t y o f t h e o r i e s o fo r g a n i z a t i o n a l a t t a c h m e n t i n a d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n , s u c ha s a n o n p r o f i t l a b o r o r g a n i z a t i o n .

U n i o n l o y a l t y h a s b e e n s t u d i e d p r e v i o u s l y i n t h e c o n t e x t o fd u a l a l l eg i a n c e t o b o t h u n i o n a n d e m p l o y i n g c o m p a n y ( D e a n ,1 9 5 4 ; P u r c e l l , 1 9 6 0 ; S t a g n e r , 1 9 5 4 ) . H o w e v e r , t h e s e e a r l y s t u d -i e s l a c k e d a n a d e q u a t e a n d o p e r a t io n a l c o n c e p t u a l i z a ti o n o fl o y a l t y t o l a b o r o r g a n i z a t i o n s . R e c e n t l y , a n o p e r a t i o n a l d e f i n i -t i o n o f c o m m i t m e n t a n d l o y a l ty t o l a b o r o r g a n i z a t io n s h a s b e e nd e v e l o p e d , a n d c o r r e l a t e s o f u n i o n l o y a l t y h a v e b e e n s p e c i f ie d( F u l la g a r , 1 98 6; G o r d o n , B e a u v a i s , & L a d d , 1 9 8 4 ; G o r d o n ,P h i l p o t , B u r t , T h o m p s o n , & S p i l l e r , 1 9 8 0 ; L a d d , G o r d o n ,B e a u v a i s , & M o r g a n , 1 9 8 2) . I n t h e s e s tu d i e s , u n i o n l o y a l t y c o n -s i s t e n tl y w a s f o u n d t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e m o s t v a r i a n c e i n u n i o nc o m m i t m e n t a n d t o b e t h e m o s t s t a b l e c o m p o n e n t o f u n i o nc o m m i t m e n t a c r o s s s a m p l e s . L o y a l t y t o t h e u n i o n i s d e f i n e d a sa n a f f e c ti v e a t t a c h m e n t t o t h e l a b o r o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d i s d e n o t e db y ( a ) p o s i ti v e a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d t h e u n i o n a n d i t s v a l u e s a n d

g o a l s , ( b ) a s e n s e o f p r i d e i n b e i n g a m e m b e r o f t h e u n i o n , a n d( c ) a d e s i r e t o m a i n t a i n o n e ' s m e m b e r s h i p . H o w e v e r, r e s e a r c hu n d e r t a k e n o n u n i o n l o y a l t y h a s b e e n c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l i n n a t u r e ,e v e n t h o u g h c a u s a l i n f e re n c e s h a v e b e e n m a d e . T h e a i m o f th ep r e s e n t r e s e a r c h w a s t o d e v e l o p a p r o c e s s m o d e l o f u n i o n l o y -a l t y t h a t i d e n t i f i e d i t s a n t e c e d e n t s a n d o u t c o m e s a n d t o t e s t th i sm o d e l w i t h l o n g i t u d i n a l d a t a b y u s i ng p a t h a n a l y t ic p r o c e d u r e s .

T h e m o d e l o f u n i o n l o y a l t y p r e s e n t e d h e r e i s d e r i v e d f r o mt h r e e m a j o r s o u r c e s, n a m e l y t h e l i t e ra t u r e o n o r g a n i z a t i o n a lc o m m i t m e n t ( M o w d a y , P o r t e r , & S t e e r s , 1 9 8 2 ; S t e e r s , 1 9 7 7 ) ,u n i o n l o y a l t y a n d c o m m i t m e n t ( F u l l a g a r & B a rl i n g , 1 9 87 ) , a n dg e n e r a l u n i o n i z a t i o n ( B r e t t , 1 9 8 0; F i o r i t o , G a l l a g h e r , & G r e e r ,1 9 8 6; ' K o c h a n , 1 98 0) . W i t h r e s p e c t t o g e n e r a l u n i o n i z a t i o n ,u n i o n l o y a l t y c a n b e s e e n a s a c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e p r o c e s s o fu n i o n i z a t i o n , w i t h p r i o r s t a g e s c o n s i s t i n g o f t h e d e c i s i o n t o j o i nt h e u n i o n , v o t i n g f o r a u n i o n , a n d i n i t i a l s o c i a li z a t i o n . F u r t h e r -m o r e , l o y a l t y t o t h e u n i o n p r o v i d e s a m o r e c o n t i n u o u s a s s e s s-m e n t o f p s y c h o lo g i c al a t t a c h m e n t t o l a b o r o r g a n iz a t io n s , c o m -p a r e d w i t h s u c h n o m i n a l m e a s u r e s a s m e m b e r s h i p a n d u n i o nv o t i n g b eh a v io r . T h e m o d e l t e s t e d h e r e c o n c e r n s a t t a c h m e n t t ol a b o r o r g a n i z a ti o n s o n ce i n d i v id u a l s h av e b e c o m e m e m b e r s o fu n i o n s .

A n t e c e d e n t s o f U n i o n L o y a l t yThis research fo rmed the bas i s o f Cl ive Fu l lagar ' s doc tora l d i~ ,~ ta -t ion conducted under the supervision of Julian Bail ing.The f inancial assistance oftb e H um an Science Research Cou ncil toClive Fullagar and the Social Sciences and Hum anit ies Research Co un-cil of Canad a (Gra nt No. 410-85-1139) to Julian B arl ing is hereby ac-knowledged . We express our apprec ia t ion to Wi l l i am E. Cooper , Kary lE. MacEw en, Laur ie I . Prat t and two ano nym ous reviewers for helpfulcomm ents on ea r l ie r d ra f ts o f th i s a r t i c le .Correspondence concerning this art icle should be addressed to CliveFullagar, who is now at the De partm ent o f Psychology, Kan sas StateUniversity, Manhattan, Kan sas 66506.

F o l l o w i n g t h e r e s e a r c h o n o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c o m m i t m e n t ( e . g . ,S t e e rs , 1 9 7 7 ), o n e f i n d s t h a t t h e a n t e c e d e n t s o f u n i o n l o y a l t yw e r e c a t e g o r i z e d i n t o d e m o g r a p h i c , p e r s o n a l , a n d w o r k d e t e r -m i n a n t s . T h e r e w e r e t w o m a j o r c r i t e r i a f o r t h e i n c l u s i o n o f v a r i-a b l e s a s a n t e c e d e n t s i n t h e p a t h m o d e l t o b e p r o p o s e d : ( a )w h e t h e r t h e v a r i a b l e s c o n s i s te n t l y h a d b e e n f o u n d t o b e t h e o r e t -i c a l ly o r s t a t i s ti c a l l y r e l a t e d t o u n i o n l o y a l t y o r o t h e r i n d i c a t o r so f u n i o n a t t a c h m e n t a n d ( b ) t h e r e l e v an c e o f c e r ta i n v a r i a b l e sw i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e p e c u l i a r c h a r a c t e r i s t ic s o f t h e S o u t h A f r i c a nc o n t e x t .

21 3


2/15

2 1 4 CLI VE FULLAGAR AND J ULI AN BARLINGDemographic Characteristics

Va r i a bl e s s u c h a s s ex , a g e, t e n u r e , n u m b e r o f d e p e n d e n t s , o c -c u p a t i o n a l l e v el , i n c o m e , a n d u r b a n i z a t i o n a r e a s s o c i a t e d wi t hunioniza t ion (Kochan, 1978) . However , these assoc ia t ions a reusua l ly weak, and mo s t ev idence sugges t s tha t there i s li t tl e sup-p o r t f o r th e i d e a o f a d e m o g r a p h i c " u n i o n t y p e " ( G o r d o n e t al .,1980).On e d e m o g r a p h i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c t h a t h a s b e e n r e l a t e d t ou n i o n i z a t i o n i s r a c e . Re s u l t s s h o w t h a t u n o r g a n i z e d B l a c kwo r k e r s a r e m o r e wi ll in g t o j o i n u n i o n s t h a n a r e u n o r g a n i z e dW h i t e wo r k e r s ( Ko c h a n , 1 9 80 ), p e r h a p s b e c a u s e B l a c k wo r k e r se x p e r i e n c e m o r e o p p r e s s i o n a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , l e s s o p p o r t u -n i t y t o o b t a i n a l t e r n a t i v e e m p l o y m e n t , a n d d i m i n i s h e d o p p o r -t u n i t ie s f o r th e e x p r e s s i o n o f i n t r i n s ic n e e d s ( Bu c h h o l z , 1 9 7 8 a ).Ev e n t h o u g h t h e l ev e l o f l o y a l ty to t h e u n i o n h a s b e e n f o u n d t ob e n o d i f fe r e n t f o r B l a c k a n d W h i t e wo r k e r s i n So u t h A f r i c a(Fullagar, 1986), the i r r easons fo r be ing loya l to the un ion ma ydi f fe r . Consequent ly , r ace was t rea ted as a modera tor var iab lei n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y , a n d t h e a n t e c e d e n t s a n d c o n s e q u e n c e s o fl o y a l t y t o l a b o r o r g a n i z a t i o n s we r e s t u d i e d s e p a r a t e l y f o r B l a c ka n d W h i t e u n i o n m e m b e r s .Personal Characteristics

Va r i o u s p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s h a v e b e e n a s s o c i a t e d wi t hs u p p o r t o f l a b o r o r g a n i z at i o n s . Re s e a r c h h a s i n d i c a t e d a c o n s i s -t e n t l y st r o n g r e la t i o n s h ip b e t we e n i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y p e r c e p t i o n sc o n c e r n i n g t h e u n i o n ' s e f f e c ti v e ne s s a t i m p r o v i n g w o r k c o n d i -t i o n s a n d t h e w o r k e r ' s d e c i s io n t o v o t e f o r o r a g a i n s t u n i o n i z a -t ion (Beute l l & Biggs, 1984; Bigoness & Tos i, 1984; 'Bre t t , 1980;De C o t i i s & Le Lo u a r n , 1 9 8 1 ; Yo u n g b l o o d , De Ni s i' , M o l l e s t o n ,& M o Ne y , 1 9 8 4 ) . I n d e e d , u n i o n i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , c o m p a r e dwi th e i ther ex t r ins ic or in t r ins ic job sa t i s fac tion , i s mo re predic -t iv e o f u n io n ~ s u p p o r t a m o n g b o t h wh i t e - c o l l a r a n d b l u e - c o l la rwo r k e r s I Ko c h a n , 1 9 79 ). Fu r t h e r m o r e , K o c h a n ( 1 9 7 9 ) f o u n dt h a t p e r c e p t i o n s o f u n i o n i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y 'we r e s i g n if i c a n tl ym o r e p r e d i c ti v e o f v o t i n g b e h a v i o r t h a n g e n e r a l a t t i t u d e s t o -wa r d o r g a n i z e d l a bo r . Co n s e q u e n t l y , we h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t p e r -c e i v e d u n i o n i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y wo u l d c o n t i n u e t o h a v e a n e f f e c to n a t t a c h m e n t t o l a b o r o r g a n i z a t i o n s , o n c e t h e i n d i v i d u a l h a dj o i n e d a u n i o n , a n d w o u l d b e a s t r o n g d e t e rm i n a n t o f b o t hu n i o n l o y a l t y a n d p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n u n i o n a c t iv i ti e s f o r b o t hBl a c k s a n d W h i t es . Pe r c e p t i o n s o f wh e t h e r t h e u n i o n wa s c a p a -b l e o f i m p r o v i n g wo r k i n g c o n d i t i o n s wo u l d d e t e r m i n e t h e i n d i -v i d u a l ' s a t t i tu d e s o f l o y a l t y a s we ll a s t h e e f f o rt h e o r s h e w o u l db e p r e p a r e d t o p u t i n t o p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n u n i o n a f fa ir s.

On e q u e s t i o n t h a t e m e r g e s i s wh e t h e r p e r c e i v e d u n i o n i n s t r u -m e n t a l i t y i s b e s t d e p i c t e d a s a n a n t e c e d e n t i n t h e m o d e l o fu n i o n l o y a l t y o r wh e t h e r i t m o d e r a t e s t h e r e l a t io n s h i p b e t we e na t t it u d e s o f l o y a l t y t o t h e u n i o n a n d o t h e r a n t e c e d e n t v a r i a b le s .Br e t t ( 1 9 8 0 ) h a s s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e l i n k b e t we e n j o b d i s s at i sf a c -t i o n a n d j o i n in g a u n i o n i s m o d e r a t e d b y p e r c e p t i o n s o f u n i o ni n s t r u m e n t a l i t y a n d a t t i t u d e s t o wa r d o r g a n i z e d l a b o r . Ou rs t u d y a t t e m p t e d t o a ss e s s wh e t h e r p e r c e i v e d u n i o n i n s t r u m e n -t a l it y i n f lu e n c e s u n i o n l o y a l t y i n a s i m i l a r m a n n e r . T h a t i s, a r et h e r e l a t io n s h i p s b e t we e n u n i o n l o y a l t y a n d i t s h y p o t h e s i z e da n t e c e d e n t s a n d o u t c o m e s c o n t i n g e n t o n t h e wo r k e r ' s p e r c e p -t i o n s o f i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y c o n c e r n i n g t h e u n i o n ' s p o t e n t i a l t o s a t -i s fy var iou s needs?

W o r k v a l u e s a r e p e r s o n a l v a r i ab l e s t h a t h a v e b e e n c o r r e l a t e dwi t h a t t a c h m e n t t o o r g a n i z a t i o n s ; wo r k e r s wi t h a s t r o n g wo r ke t h i c ( i. e. , b e l i e f t h a t wo r k i s in h e r e n t l y g o o d a n d p r o v i d e s b o t hs t a t u s a n d m a t e r i a l s e c u r i t y f o r t h e wo r k e r ) m a n i f e s t h i g h e r o r -g a n i z a t i o n a l c o m m i t m e n t ( Bu c h a n a n , 1 9 7 4 ; Ha l l & Sc h n e id e r ,1 9 7 2 ; Ki d r o n , 1 9 7 8 ; Ra b i n o wi t z & H a l l , 1 9 7 7 ). Re g a r d l e s s o focc upa t iona l s ta tus , w ork e th ic be li e f s am on g unio n of fi c ia ls a ret h e l o wes t i n c o m p a r i s o n t o o t h e r b e l i e f s y s t e m s . Un i o n l e a d er sexhib i t a grea te r prop ens i ty tow ard M arxi s t - re la ted be l i e fs (i .e .,b e l ie f s t h a t w o r k a s c u r r e n t l y o r g a n i z e d r e p r e s e n t s e x p l o i t a t io na n d a l i e n a t i o n o f t h e wo r k e r b y m a n a g e r s a n d o wn e r s ) c o m -p a r e d wi t h n o n u n i o n i z e d c l e r ic a l , p r o f e s s io n a l , a n d m a n a g e r i a le m p l o y e e s ( Bu c h h o l z , 1 9 7 8 a ). T h i s s u g g e s ts t h e p o s s i b i li t y o f ar e l a t io n s h i p b e t we e n f e e li n g s o f e x p l o i ta t i o n a n d a n e e d f o re q u a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e wo r k p l a c e o n t h e o n e h a n d , a n d l o y -a l ty to l abor organiza t ions on the o ther . However , the f indingso f Go l d t h o r p e , Lo c k w o o d , Be c h h o f e r, a n d P l a t t ( 1 9 6 9 ) s u g ge s tt h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t we e n wo r k v a l u e s a n d a t t a c h m e n t t ol a b o r o r g a n i z a t i o n s m a y b e a c o m p l e x o n e . Go l d t h o r p e e t a l .( 1 9 6 9 ) h a v e a r g u e d t h a t t h e m o d e r n , a f f l u e n t wo r k e r v i e wsu n i o n m e m b e r s h i p a n d a c t i v i ty i n i n s t r u m e n t a l a n d e x t r i n s ict e r m s . C o n s i d e r a t i o n s o f p a y a n d s e c u r i t y a r e n o t o n l y p o we r f u lfac tors in b inding a f f luent , sk i l l ed workers to the i r jobs but a rea l so p r e d i c to r s o f u n i o n c o m m i t m e n t w h e n i n d iv i d u al s a r e n o tsa t i sf i ed wi th the i r jobs .

I n So u t h Af r i c a , sk i ll e d j o b s r e m a i n t h e m o n o p o l y o f W h i t ewo r k e r s wh o c o m m a n d h i g h e r wa g e s , wh e r e a s u n s k i l l e d a n ds e m i s k i ll e d j o b s r e m a i n t h e p r e s e r v e o f B l a c k wo r ke r s . Th u s ,t h e n o r m a l s t r u c t u r a l d i v i s i o n s t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z e t h e wo r k i n gc l a s s i n t h e Un i t e d S t a t e s a r e c o m p o u n d e d b y r a c i a l d i v i s i o n swi th in th e Sou th Afr ica n working c lass (Ful lagar, 1986). Essen-t i a l ly , the d i s t inc t ion i s be tween workers who have a h i s tory off r e e d o m a n d a c c e s s t o p o l i t i c a l p o we r a n d u n i o n i z a t i o n , a n dwo r k e r s wh o a r e n o t f r e e a n d w h o h a v e e x p e r i e n c e d r e s t r i c ti o n swi t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r j o b s e c u r i t y a n d t h e p r i c e o f t h e ir l a b o r.M i g r a n t l a b o r , t h e h o m e l a n d s y s t e m , t j o b r e s tr i c ti o n , t h e p r e -d o m i n a n t a b s e n c e o f t r a d e u n i o n r ig h t s, a n d t h e o p p o s i ti o n o fW h i t e wo r k e r s h a v e m e a n t t h a t B l a c k wo r k e r s e x p e r i e n c e ad i f fe r e n t a n d i n f e r i o r s e t o f l a b o r c o n d i t io n s . W e h y p o t h e s i z e dtha t Marxi s t - re la ted be l i e f s would exer t a s t ronger inf luence ont h e u n i o n l o y a l t y o f B l a c k wo r k e r s wh o a r e m o r e e x p l o i t e d a n dd i s c r i m i n a t e d a g a i n s t a n d wh o s e e u n i o n s a s i n s t r u m e n t a l t othe a t t a in me nt o f pol i t i ca l chan ge (Webs ter , 1983). Converse ly ,f o r m o r e a f f l u e n t a n d s k i l l e d W h i t e s wh o c o n s t i t u t e t h e l a b o ra r i s to c r a c y , t h e r e wo u l d b e a s t r o n g e r a d h e r e n c e t o wo r k e t h i cbe li ef s; these be l i e f s wo uld be m ore pred ic t ive of un ion loya l tya m o n g W h i t e wo r k e r s , wh o p e r c e i v e u n i o n s a s b e i n g i n s t r u -m e n t a l t o m a i n t a i n i n g t h e i r j o b s e c u r i t y a n d s t a t u s (W e b st er ,1983) , than among Black workers . In the present s tudy , th i sd i f fe rence would be re f l ec ted in a pos i t ive re la t ionship be tweenwo r k e t h i c b e li e fs a n d u n i o n l o y a l t y fo r W h i t e u n i o n m e m b e r s ,

t The strategy of divide and rule in S outh A frica is reflected in theexistence oft en separate "homelands" where Blacks are meant to exer-cise their political rights and mo st are free to reside. These homelandsremain economically dependent on South Africa, resulting in a largepool o f migrant wo rkers whose influx to the eco nomically viable, indus-trialized centers of South A frica is controlled by the South African gov-ernment.


3/15

UNION LOYALTY 215and be tween M arx i s t- re l a t ed be l i e fs and un ion loya l ty fo r B lacku n i o n m e m b e r s .We wil l a lso cons ider l i fe sa t is fac t ion as an antecedent ofunion loyal ty . On the bas is of a d issa t isfac t ion mo del o f union -i za tion (M axey & M ohrm an , 1980) , we hypo thes ized tha t anexpress ive or compensatory re la t ionship would exis t be tweenl i fe sa t is fac t ion and loyal ty to the union. Recent research inSou th Af r i ca ha s s hown tha t un favorab le communi ty cond i -t ions (namely, inadequ ate edu cat ional faci li ties, lack of hous-ing, poverty , v iolence, securi ty force presence , an d br eakd ow nof family l i fe) have an effec t on organiza t ional processes andworke r behav io r (B luen & Odes n ik , 1987 ; Kam fe r , 1986 ;Schlem mer, Geerdts , & Van Schalkwyk, 1984; Van der Merwe,1983). More specifically, a significant positive correlation hasbeen fo und be tween the expe r i ence o f nega tive towns h ip even t sand loya l ty to the un ion (B luen & O des n ik , 1987) . T h i s i s con -s is tent wi th those s tudies tha t have indica ted an associa t ion be-tween l i fe d issa t is fac t ion an d w ork exp eriences . The sugges tionis tha t life dissatisfaction ha s a spillover effect and influen ces orgenera l izes to an overa l l d iscontent wi th other l i fe domains(Ke rr & Rosow, 1979; Koh n & Sehooler , 1973; She ppa rd & Her -r ick, 1972). In oth er words , we hypothes ized tha t h igh l i fe sa t is -faction will result in low union loyalty, whereas dissatisfactionwith on e 's s tandard of liv ing, s ta te of heal th , educat ion, fam ilyand social life, and broader political issues will cause greaterloyal ty to labor organiza t ions , especia l ly when the las t a re seenas be ing capab le o f chang ing s uch l i f e cond it ions. In Sou th Af -r i ca , l abo r un ions a re pe rce ived by B lack worke rs a s be ing theonly po l i t ica l v oice avai lable for the redress o f l i fe d issa t isfac-t ions (Finnem ore & Van der Merwe, 1986; Schlem mer, 1984).Work and Organizational Experiences

Organ iza t iona l s ocia l iz a t ion and the na tu re and qua l i ty o f ex -pe r i ences du r ing members h ip a re co r re l a t ed w i th o rgan iza -t iona l comm i tme n t (M owday e t at ., 1982) . T he l i t e ra tu re onat t i tude format ion (e .g . , Kelman, 1974; Salancik , 1977) sug-ges ts tha t in i t ia l behavio rs e l ic i ted by v ir tue o f the ind ividual 'srole within the organiza t ion fac i l i ta te s t ronger a t t i tudinal com -mi tm en t a s mem bers deve lop a tt i tudes cons i s t en t w i th the i r be -havior . Stagner (1956) has sugges ted t ha t ear ly involv em ent inunio n ac t iv i t ies he lps individual a t tach me nt to the union. Re-cent ly , Fukami and Larson (1984) showed tha t work experi -ences p red ic t ed bo th o rgan iza t iona l and un ion commi tmen t .This suggests tha t exp eriences during the in i t ia l s tages of organ-iza t ional socia l iza t ion m ay be direc t ly genera l izable to lab or or-gan iza tions . Go rdon e t a l . (1980) found tha t e a r ly un ion s oc ia l -ization exp erienc es were consistently, s trongly, and positivelycorre la ted with union loyal ty . Consequent ly , we hypothes izedthat ear ly socia l iza t ion experiences would pos i t ive ly predic tloyal ty to the union.Severa l job charac ter is t ics tha t ha ve been re la ted to o rganiza-t iona l com mi tme n t migh t a l s o be in s t rumen ta l i n the deve lop -me n t o f un ion loya lty. A m a jo r exp lana t ion o f the p roces s o fun ion iza t ion i s t ha t w orke rs jo in un ions b ecaus e o f pe rce iveddeprivat ions and va rious dissa t is fac t ions with in t r ins ic and ex-t r ins ic emp loy m ent fac tors (Allen & Keaveney, 1983; Bre t t ,1980). That is , jobs tha t have a low motivat ing potent ia l andtha t engender g rea te r work d i s s at i sfac t ion s hou ld evoke g rea te r

loya l ty to the un ion am ong worke rs . K ochan (1979) found th a tthe re i s a t endency fo r worke rs to tu rn to un ions on ly i f o the rmo re in fo rma l and o rgan iza tiona l channe l s o f in f luence a re no tavai lable to change work condi t ions . Research has indica tedtha t the re l a t ions h ip be tween un ion iza t ion and ex t r in s i c andintr ins ic sa t is fac t ion is mode ra ted b y whether workers are blue-col lar or whi te-col lar (Kochan, 1979) and whether they areski l led or semiski l led (Go rdo n e t a l ., 1980). Thus , w e hypothe-s ized tha t d issa t is fac t ion with extr in s ic and in tr ins ic job c harac -ter is t ics would affec t union lo yal ty but tha t the s t rength o f th ise f fec t wou ld d i f fe r fo r B lack and W hi te m emb ers o f the un ionbeing s tudied. Mo re specif ica lly , because o f the his tory o f Whiteworke rs in Sou th Af r i ca and the i r m emb ers h ip o f a l abo r a r i s -tocracy, protec t io nis t in teres ts , and a concern w ith mainta iningtheir securi ty , wages, and privi lege , these un ion m em ber s wouldbe loya l to the u n ion fo r ex t rin s i c rea s ons . Fu r the rm ore , be -cause W hite w orkers have grea ter access to p ol i t ica l , organiza-t ional , and socia l ins t i tu t ions for the sa t is fac t ion of more in t r in -s ic needs , the union would not be perce ived as ins t rumenta l insa t is fying these needs. With Black workers , on the other h and,the ex i s tence o f f a r in fe r io r cond i t ions o f employ me n t and the i rgene ral d i s en f ranch i s emen t l e ads to the hypo thes i s tha t l ab o rorganiza t ions wil l be perce ived as ins t rumenta l in sa t is fyingbo th econom ic and noneconom ic needs.Re la t ed to th i s , one an teceden t o f un ion loya l ty tha t needs tobe researched is work a l ienat ion. Pes tonjee , Singh, and Singh(1981) found a s ignif icant corre la t ion between a l ienat ion andat t i tudes toward u nion s in a cross -sec t ional s tudy o f b lue-col larworkers . Kanungo (1979) be l ieves tha t a l ienat ion ar ises fromthe inabi l i ty o f the o rganiza t ion or w ork to sa t is fy the sa l ientneeds o f the individual . Workers mig ht express grea ter loyal tyto l abo r o rgan iza t ions i f t hey ho ld jobs tha t ( a ) do no t have thepotent ia l to sa t is fy the ir soc ia l needs , (b) do not provid e sutfi -c i en t in fo rma t ion fo r the worke r to p lan a nd p red ic t t he work"env i ronm en t , ( c ) b reak down and s impl i fy work p roces s e s s otha t they b ecom e mean ing le ss , (d ) p rov ide the worke r w i th nopower o r con t ro l becaus e the pace o f work i s con t ro l l ed andmechan ized , o r ( e ) do no t p rov ide the worke r w i th the oppor tu -ni ty to se l f-ac tual ize . I t mus t be noted tha t a l ienat ion is seenas be ing concep tua l ly d i s t inc t f rom jo b s a t is fac tion (Kanungo ,1979; Saleh, 1981). Several theo ries have associa ted a l ienat ionwi th the p roces s o f un ion i s m. T an nenb aum (1952), fo r exam -ple , sees t rade unio nism as a response to the w orker 's sense ofa l i enat ion f rom bo th job and s ociety. T h e un ion p rov ides theindividual wi th a col lec t iv i ty in which he or she can re la te toemploye rs , fe llow m embe rs , and h i s o r he r job . U n ions inc rea s ethe worke r ' s power and con t ro l an d reduce fee lings o f no rmles s -.ness , i sola t ion, and se lf-es t rangemen t . Blauner (1964) a lso seesthe un ion a s a re fo rm m ovem en t tha t cou ld coun te rac t power -lessness . Th ese associa t ions , however, have been mo re an ecdota lthan empi r i ca l . We hypo thes ized in the p re s en t s tudy tha t a l ien -a t ion o r l a ck o f job invo lvem en t wou ld inc rea s e loya lty to theun ion .

T h e C o n s e q u e n c e s o f U n i o n L o y a l tyStagner (1956) sugges ted tha t part ic ipa t ion in union-re la tedact iv i t ies causes individual a t tachment to the union. Yet , veryl i t t le research has been conducted inves t iga t ing the behaviora l


4/15

216 CLIVE FULLAGAR AND JULIAN BARLINGoutcomes of uni on loyalty. U nio n loyalty is significantly andpositively related to participation in union activities (Fullagar,1986; Gordon et al., 1980). However, research is still needed toclarify the causal link between attitudes and behaviors. Re-search evidence on whether commi tme nt attitudes (such as loy-alty) cause commi tted behaviors or whether enacting commit-ting behaviors results in comm itme nt attitudes remains ambig-uous (Mowday et al., 1982). We hypothesized that attitudesexpressing loyalty to the unio n would cause partic ipation in es-sential union activities, but this a ssumptio n was tested using alongitudinal panel design because of its equivocal status.

A Model of Union LoyaltyThe path diagram for the structural model of union loyalty

formula ted here is presented in Figur e 1. We proposed that per-sonal and work characteristics would predict attitudes of loyaltyto the union, which in turn would cause participation in unio nactivities. The major aim of our research was to empirically testthis model. A fu rther aim was to verify whether this model wasmoderated by the uni on member' s race.We hypothesized that two major differences would exist be-tween the models of uni on loyalty for Black and for White work-ers. First, because of the history of White workers in South Af-rica and their membershi p of a labor aristocracy, loyalty to theunion would be solely associated with extrinsic factors forWhite union members. Protectionist interests would prevailand there would be an overriding concern with maint aini ng se-curity, wages, and privilege. In addition, White workers havegreater access to other instit utions for the satisfaction of intrin-sic needs. The existence of inferior employ ment conditions forBlack workers and their general d isen franchisement suggeststhat their loyalty to labor organizations would be related to botheconomic and n onecono mic needs. Black workers in South Af-rica join un ions not only for improved benefits and wages b utalso to defend the dignity and rights of African workers (Web-ster, 1979). Indeed, the ma jorit y of Black unionized workers inSouth Africa (79%) see worker action as ins tru men tal n solvingpolitical problems (Schlemmer, 1984).Second, we hypothesized that the belief systems of White andBlack workers would differ. Specifically, Black workers wouldadhere to Marxist-related beliefs and these beliefs would predic tattitudes of un ion loyalty. Conversely, Whit e workers would fol-low a more traditional pattern of commi tmen t in that their ad-herence to the work ethic and the opport unity to express theircraft or skill would cause loyalty to labor organizations.Finally, to fu rther refine the model o f union loyalty, we ana-lyzed whether unio n instrum ental ity was an antecedent orwhether it moderated the effects of other predictors on unionloyalty in the proposed model. Previous research has indic atedthat perceived union inst rument ality moderates the relation-ship between job dissatisfaction and uni on me mbership (Brett,1980) and participation in such unio n activities as unio n votingbehavior (DeCotiis & LeLouarn, 1981). Consequently, we hy-pothesized that this modera tor effect may generalize to the rela-tionships between un ion loyalty and its antecedents and conse-quences. Specifically, the link between uni on loyalty and dissat-isfaction with extrinsic and int rinsic job conditions may becontingent on the worker's perceptions of the uni on as inst ru-

mental in improving such conditions. Similarly, dissatisfactionwith general living conditions and job alienation may lead toloyalty to the union, depe nding on whether the in dividual per-ceives the unio n as capable of i mproving life circumstances andbringing about greater job involvement. With respect to workvalues, it can be argued that the relationship between work ethicbeliefs and union loyalty is moderated by the worker's percep-tion that unions are instrumental in maintaining o b securityand status. I n addition, i f unions are perceived as viable mecha-nisms for changing the organization of work and the division oflabor, then there is more likely to be an association betweenMarxist-related beliefs and loyalty to labor organizations.Lastly, attitudes of uni on loyalty would only facilitate participa-tion in uni on activities if the unio n is perceived as being instru-mental i n bringin g about change in the workplace. Race wouldalso moderate the relationship between uni on loyalty and par-ticipation in un ion activities. For Black workers, t he unio n is theonly voice available for redressing both work- and life-relatedgrievances. Consequently, we hypothesized that the link be-tween attitudes of loyalty to the union and participation inunion affairs would be stronger for Black workers than forWhite workers, who have alternative chan nels for dealing withsimil ar issues.

MethodSubjects

Data were collected from Black and White union members of one ofSouth Africa's largest multiracial unions (28,420 Black and 21,300White members). In the present sample, there were significant differ-ences between Black and White union members that reflected he SouthAfrican apartheid context: White union members earned more, M =$109 versus $57 per week, t(291) = 14.41; had a higher level of educa-tion, M = Grade 7 versusGrade 6, t(302) = 3.55; had less people depen-dent on their salary,M = 4 versus 5, t(303) = 3.44; and had been mem-bers of the organization or company, M = 9.93 versus 5.51 years,t(301) = 6.43, and union, M = 14.24 versus 2.72 years, t(298) = 18.49,for longer periods (p < 0.01 in all cases) than had Black members. Thissample comprised only male union members for two reasons. First, theunion under study was predominantly male (95%). Second, sex has beenfound to be associated with union loyalty (Gordon et al., 1980) andcould have been a confounding variable.Procedure

Questionnaires, together with a cover letter from the union's generalsecretary, were sent to every Black and White shop steward throughoutthe country who was registered on the union's mailing list (N = 400).The letter outlined the reasons for the research and encouraged partici-pation. Stewards were requested to complete and return the anonymousquestionnaire in the addressed, stamped envelope provided. In addi-tion, 786 union members were surveyed from two factories in the Jo-hannesburg area. These factories had relatively large union member-ships of Black and White workers and consequently enabled compari-sons between different race segmentsof the work force. All workers whowere members of the union at these plants were given questionnaires.Questionnaires sent to the rank-and-file members were also accompa-nied by a letter from the general secretary encouraging participationand assuring confidentiality and anonymity. Once the questionnaireshad been completed by the respondents on their own time, question-naires were returned to a collection box at the factory sites. The ques-


5/15

U N I O N LOYALTY 217j U N I O NN S T R U M E N T A L I T Yq~

E X T R I N S I C J O BS A T I S F A C T I O N

~ ] E A R L Y U N IO Ni ~ ~ I S O C I A L I S A T I O N

~ 'T [I N V O L V E M E N T

~L I F ES A T I S F A C T I O NW O R K E T H I CB E L I E F S

R M A L U N IO N

e 1 R e s i dua l s e 2W h i t e U n i on M e m b e r s

U N I O NI N S T R U M E N T A L I T YE X T R I N S IC J O BS A T I S F A C T I O NE A R L Y U N I O NS O C I A L I S A T I O NI N T R I N S I C J O BS A T I S F A C T I O NIO B

U N I O N L O Y A L T Y

J O B !I N V O L V E M E N TL I F ES A T I S F A C T I O NM A R X I S T eB E L I E F S R e s i d u a l s

I I F O R M A L U N I ONP A R T I C I P A T I O N

T2Black nion embersFigure 1. The overidentifledmodelsof union loyalty or Blackand W hite union m embers.(The exogenousvariablesare assumed o be noncausallyrelated.)


6/15

218 CLIVE FULLAGAR AND JULIAN BARLINGTable 1De s c r ip ti v e S ta t i s ti c s a n d Z e r o - O r d e r Co r r e la t io n s fo r th e Ex o g e n o u s a n d En d o g e n o u s Va riab le s

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101. Union loyalty - - 0.62 0.6 1 -0. 66 -0. 37 0.58 0.13 0.57 -0. 06 0.502. Formal participation ~ 0.69 - - 0.56 -0. 46 -0. 29 0.55 0.02 0.44 -0. 10 0.343. Union instrumentali ty 0.68 0.47 - - -0.4 1 -0. 15 0.64 0.08 0.51 0.31 0.054. Extrinsic satisfaction -0.4 4 -0.2 5 -0.1 5 -- 0.63 -0.3 5 0.20 0.38 -0.5 0 0.185. Intrinsic satisfaction -0. 64 -0. 57 -0.3 8 0.54 -- 0.04 0.24 -0. 09 -0.4 2 0.066. Union socialization 0.56 0.44 0.43 -0. 17 -0. 43 m 0.04 0.44 0.27 -0. 037. Job involvement -0.5 0 -0. 46 -0.0 5 0.37 0.60 -0.15 -- - 0.02 -0.0 4 0.228. Life satisfaction -0. 33 -0 .4 4 -0. 12 0.52 0.58 -0. 23 0.49 - - -0. 22 0.039. Marxist-related beliefs 0.48 0.34 0.37 -0. 32 -0. 63 0.33 -0. 28 -0. 32 - - 0.1310. Work ethic beliefs -0. 39 -0. 32 -0. 18 0.39 0.49 -0. 28 0.28 0.47 -0. 17 - -Black union memb ersM 22.03 9.66 26.46 23.25 17 .9 8 25.12 30.32 44.00 39.47 18.87S D 3.02 2.65 4.94 6.52 7.21 5.05 9.15 11.77 8.28 4.90Cronbach's alpha 0.89 0.72 0.84 0.83 0.91 0.80 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.69White union membersM 22.18 9.80 25.80 25.84 22.78 25.64 33.83 55.39 34.80 22. i 7S D 3.38 3.22 5.82 8.34 5.65 6.12 7.55 12.22 7.64 4.42Cron bach's alpha 0.91 0.81 0.90 0.93 0.84 0.85 0.86 0.92 0.83 0.67t values deno ting Black /White differences 0.59 0.41 1. 06 2.97* 3.80* 0.80 2.63* 8.25* 2.93* 3.95*

Note. Zero-order correl ations for Black subjects (n = 169) are given below the diagonal, and those for Whites (n = 139) are given above the diagonal.Blacks: r > 0.15, p < 0.05; r > 0.20, p < 0.01. Whites: r > 0.16, p < 0.05; r > 0.21, p < 0.01.a Formal participation is the measureme nt at Time 2. The remaining variables represent Time 1 measurements.*p 0.05 in all cases).Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s

The means, standard deviations, and reliability coefficientsof he var-ious scales used are presented in Table !. Except where indicated, allscales had a 5-point response format (5 = strongly ag ree/very satisfied,3 = unsure, 1 = strongly disagree/very dissatisfied).E n d o g e n o u s V a r i a b l e s

Forma l participation. This was measured using a seven-item scalethat assessed attitudes about participation in, and knowledge of, unionactivities (Fullagar, 1986). These activities are r egarded as formal be-cause they are im portant for the effective and democratic operation of

the union. They include parti cipation in uni on elections, frequency ofattendance at union meetings, knowledge of the union contract, atti-tudes to grievance filing, and current union status. Previous researchshows significant correlations between self-reported measures of partic-ipation in union activities and independen t assessment by union bra nchmanagers or area organizers (Fullagar, 1986).Union loyalty The Union Loyalty factor derived in previous factoranalytic studies (Fullagar, 1986; Gord on et at., 1980; Ladd et al., 1982)was used to assess union loyalty. In all of these studies, Union Loyaltyaccounted for most of the variance in union commitment and was sta-ble across samples. Union loyalty was measured by nine items that de-noted (a) a sense of pride in being a member of tb e union, (b) a desireto reta in one's mem bership of the union, and (c) positive attitudes to-ward the union and its values. Thi s scale had been validated previouslyon a s ample of Black and White South-African union members (Fulla-gar, 1986).E x o g e n o u s V a r i a b l e s

Perceivedunion instrumentality. This was measur ed by using a seven-item scale concerning the possible benefits that unions could achievefor their membe rs in the areas of unfa ir labor practices, job security,value for members hip fees, working conditions, supervision, and overallbenefits. Items for the present scale were derived from previous unioninstrumentality questionnaires (DeCotiis & LeLouarn, 1981; Kochan,1979) and selected in t erms o f their relevance to th e sample.Job satisfaction. This was measured using Warr, Cook, and Wall's(1980) 15-item Overall Job Satisfaction scale, developed specifically foruse on blue-collar samples. Seven of the items measure intrin sic satis-faction, and eight measure extrinsic satisfaction. Warr et at. (1980) re-port ed satisf actory reliability and validity statistics.Union socialization. Early socialization experiences were assessed byan I l-item scale derived from Gordon et al.'s (1980) measure of social-ization influences. This scale consisted of self-reported experiences of(a) when individuals first joined the union, such as the clarity of the


7/15

U N I O N L O Y A L TY 2 1 9u n io n ' s g o a l s; (b ) p e rce iv ed s t r en g th o f th e u n io n ; ( c ) wh e th e r th e u n io nsu p p o r ted , en co u rag ed , o r ig n o red th e n ew u n io n m emb er ; (d ) wh e th e rth e in d iv id u a l h ad rece iv ed an y su p p o r t in t e rms o f u n io n ac tiv it ie s , an dso fo rth . I t ems h ad a 3 -p o in t r e sp o n se fo rma t (2 = yes, 1 = no, 0 = can "tremember).Alienation. This was operat ion alized using Ka nung o 's (1982) 10-i t em Jo b In v o lv em en t q u es t io n n a i re ( J IQ) . Ad o p t in g a mo t iv a t io n a l ap -p ro ach , K an u n g o co n ce iv ed o f a l i en a tio n an d in v o lv em en t a s b e in g a to p p o s i te en d s o f th e sam e co n t in u u m . T h e sca le ex h ib it s h ig h in te rn a lan d tem p o ra l s tab il ity . Th e co n v e rg en t an d d i sc r imin an t v a l id i ty o f th eJIQ is a lso sa t isfactory .Life satisfaction. Th is was measu red u s in g War r e t a l ' s (1 9 8 0) 1 5 -i tem scale , which assesses sa t isfact ion with such l ife aspects as the indi-v id uar s l iv ing space, s ta te o f health , educ ation , family and soc ia l li fe,an d v a r io u s p o l i ti c a l f ac to r s su ch a s th e p re sen t g o v e rn m en t , mo ra l s t an -d a rd s , f r eed o m an d d em o cracy in th e co u n t ry , an d th e s ta te o f l aw an dorder. Th e scale was s tandard ized o n a sam ple o f b lue-co llar workers.Work beliefs. Two b e l ie f sy stems w ere a sse ssed b y u s in g Bu ch h o lz ' s( 1978a, 1978b) me asures o f the wor k e th ic and M arxis t-re la te d beliefs .These scales consis ted of 7 and 11 i tems, respectively . Th e for me r mea-sured th e belie f that work is good in i tse lf , that i t offers d ignity to theperson, and tha t success is a result of personal effort . The M arxis t scalea s se s sed th e b e l ie f th a t w o rk i s fu n d amen ta l to h u ma n fu l f i l lmen t b u tth a t th e man n e r in w h ich wo rk i s cu r ren t ly o rg an ized en tai l s ex p lo i ta -t io n o f th e wo rk e r b y m an ag em en t o r th e ru l in g c la s s. B u ch h o lz (1 97 8 b)fo u n d th a t th e i t ems o f th e se two b e l ie f sy s tems lo ad ed o n two o r th o g o -nal factors.On e p o ss ib le so u rce o f measu rem en t e r ro r i s th e so le r e l ian ce o n se l f-rep o r t q u es t io n n a i re s . Th e p o ss ib i l i ty o f measu rem en t e r ro r o cc u r r in gwas red u ced in th e p re sen t s tu d y th ro u g h th e u se o f b o th n eg a tiv elyan d p o s i t iv e ly p h ra sed i t ems , th e v a r ia t io n o f r e sp o n se fo rma ts , an d th eseparat ion of scales in the quest ion naire .

A n a l y t i c P r o c e d u r e sThe m ajor s ta tis tica l p roced ure us ed in th is s tudy was path analysis

(Du ncan , 1975; Heise , 1975). For path analysis to be app lied valid ly,th e re la t io n sh ip s b e tween v a r iab le s wi th in th e p ro p o sed mo d e l h av e tobe theoretica l ly just if ied and thei r d irect io n previously specified (Bil-l ings & Wroten , 1978; Jam es, M ulaik , & B rett , 1982). Because the l i ter-a tu re i s eq u iv o ca l in t e rm s o f th e d i rec t io n o f th e re la t io n sh ip b e tweenu n io n lo y a l ty an d p a r t i c ip a t io n in u n io n ac t iv i ti e s , we co mp u ted c ro ss -lagged regression analyses. The cross-lagged regression model is espe-c ia l ly ap p l icab le to su rv ey - ty p e d a ta in wh ich m easu reme n ts h av e b eenmad e o n th e same sam p le an d th e sam e v a r iab le s at two d i f fe ren t t imes(Heise, 1970).

Cross-lagged regression analysis has a numb er of assump tions thatmust be sa t isf ied to ensure i ts appropria te use . These include the exis-tence of l inear re la t ions, homoscedastic i ty, and n oncoll ineari ty .2 Al lth e se a s su mp t io n s we re sa ti sf ied . In ad d i t io n , v a r io u s a s su m p t io n s su r -ro u n d in g th e cau sa l p ro cesse s b e in g ex am in ed w ere u p h e ld . T h ese in -c lu d ed th e a s su mp t io n s th a t th e s t ru c tu re o f th e cau sa l r e la t io n s re -ma in ed co n s tan t o v e r t ime , th e re we re n o in s tan tan eo u s cau sa l e ffect s,an d th e t im e lag s b e tween th e v a r iab le s we re th e same .

Hav in g e s tab l i sh ed th e cau sa l r e la t io n sh ip b e tween u n io n c o m mit -men t an d fo rma l p a r t i c ip a t io n in u n io n ac t iv it i e s , we u sed th e se twov a r iab le s a s en d o g en o u s v a r iab les in th e p a th an a ly t ic mo d e l . Ag a in , th eassum ptions underly ing path analysis w ere tes ted and sa t isfied . Thes einclude d wheth er (a) the re la t ions betwe en the variables were l inear , (b)n o n co Uin ea r i ty ex is ted , ( c) r e s id u a l v a r iab le s we re n o t co r re la ted w i theach o ther , (d) a l l scales used were re l iable , and (e) a l l variables weremeasu red o n a t l e a s t an in te rv a l s cale .

To a sce r ta in th e mo d e ra t in g e f fect s o f p e rce iv ed u n io n in s t ru men ta l -i ty, we calcula ted m odera ted m ult ip le regression analyses . W e chose th is

tech n iq u e in p re fe ren ce to d iv id in g th e samp le in to su b ca teg o rie s o f th emo d e ra to r v a r iab le an d u n d e r tak in g sep a ra te p a th an a ly se s fo r th e segroups. The la t ter method for assessing moderator effects has severala s so c ia ted p ro b lems , e sp ec ia l ly i f th e m o d e ra to r i s n o t a n o m in a l v a r i -ab le . Fo r ex amp le , a rb i t r a r ily d e te rm in ed su b g ro u p s in c rease th e p ro b -ab i l i ty o f o b ta in in g sp u r io u s re su l ts . In ad d i t io n , b y red u c in g co n t in u -o u s d a ta in to d i sc re te su bg rou p s, measu remen t in fo rm a t io n i s lo s t, th estrength of the re la t ionships is underest imate d , an d the decrease in sam-ple s ize , necessi ta ted by subg roup analysis, r educe s the powe r of s ta t is t i-ca l tes ts (Cohen, 1978; Stone, 1986; Zedeck, Cranny, Vale , & Smith ,1971).

To a sse ss wh e th e r p e rce iv ed u n io n in s t ru men ta l i ty mo d e ra ted th e re -la t io n sh ip b e tween u n io n lo y a l ty an d i t s an teced en ts , we ca lcu la tedseven mu lt ip le regression equation s. Un ion loyalty was regressed h ierar-ch ica l ly o n to th e re sp ec t iv e an teced en t v a r iab le , th e mo d e ra to r v a r iab le(p e rce iv ed u n io n in s t ru men ta l i ty ) , an d an in te rac t io n te rm co n s i s tin g o fth e c ro s s -p ro d u c t o f th e an teced en t v a r iab le an d u n io n in s t ru men ta l i ty(Stone, 1986). To contro l for the effects of the remain ing antece dents onunion loyalty , we treated the se variables as covaria tes and entere d theminto the regression equatio n f irs t (Holahan & M oos, 1981). We fo lloweda s im i la r p ro cess to a sce r ta in th e m o d e ra to r e f fec ts o f p e rce iv ed u n io nin s t ru men ta l i ty o n th e re la t io n sh ip b e tween u n io n lo y a l ty an d p a r t i c i -pation in un ion activ i ties .

R e s u l t sT h e m e a n s , s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s , r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c ie n t s , a n d

i n t e r c o r r e l a ti o n s o f a ll v a r ia b l e s i n t h e p r o p o s e d m o d e l a r e p r e -s e n t e d i n T a b l e 1 . A l t h o u g h t h e r e w e r e s i g n i f i c an t c o r r e l a t i o n sb e t w e e n t h e e x o g e n o u s v a r i a b l e s i n t h e s t u d y , t h e s e d i d n o t s a t -i s fy t h e c r i t e r i o n f o r m u l t i c o l l i n e a r i t y ( r > 0 . 8 0 , L e w i s - B e c k ,1 9 8 0) . F u r t h e r m o r e , i t i s b e y o n d t h e s c o p e o f p a t h a n a l y s i s t oa n a l y z e t h e r e l a t i o n s h ip s b e t w e e n e x o g e n o u s v a r i a b l e s ( P e d h a -z u r, 1 9 8 2 ). E v e n t h o u g h s h o p s t e w a r d s w e r e i n c l u d e d i n t h es a m p l e , t h e r e w e r e i n s u f f i c i e n t n u m b e r s ( n = 8 3 ) t o a s s e s s as e p a r a t e p r o c e s s m o d e l o f u n i o n l o y a l t y f o r u n i o n o f f i c e rs . N e v -e r th e l e ss , k n o w n - g r o u p v a l i d it y w a s c o n f i r m e d i n t h a t s h o ps t e w a r d s w e r e f o u n d t o b e s i g n i f ic a n t l y m o r e l o y a l t o t h e u n i o n ,t ( 3 0 3 ) = 7 . 3 8 , p < 0 . 0 1 , a n d m o r e a c t i v e in u n i o n a c t i v i ti e s ,t ( 3 0 3 ) = 4 . 3 7 , p < 0 . 0 1 , t h a n r a n k - a n d - f i l e m e m b e r s .

C r o s s - L a g g e d R e g r e s s i o n A n a l y s i sB e f o r e c o m p u t i n g t h e p a t h a n a ly s e s, w e c a l c u l a t e d s e p a r a t e

c r o s s - l a g g e d r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s t o a s c e r t a i n t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h er e l a t io n s h i p b e t w e e n u n i o n l o y a l ty a n d f o r m a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n f o rB l a c k s a n d f o r W h i t e s . W e u s e d c r o s s - l a g g e d r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e sr a t h e r t h a n c r o s s - l a g g e d p a n e l c o r r e l a t i o n s b e c a u s e o f t h e r e -s t r i c t iv e a s s u m p t i o n s ( e . g. , s t a t i o n a r i t y a n d s y n c h r o n i c i t y ) ,a p p l i c a b i l i t y t o u n i d i r e c t i o n a l c a u s a l i t y o n ly , a n d t h e h i g h p r o b -a b i l i t y o f b o t h T y p e I a n d T y p e I I e r r o r s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h c r o s s -l a g g e d p a n e l c o r r e l a t i o n s ( R o g o s a , 1 9 8 0 ; S t o n e , 1 9 8 6) . C r o s s -l a g g e d r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y se s , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , a s s es s t h e p l a u s i -b i l it y o f b o t h u n i - a n d b i d i r e c t io n a l c a u s a l i t y a n d a r e b a s e d o nt h e l e ss r e s t r i c t i v e a s s u m p t i o n s o f o r d i n a r y l e a s t s q u a r e s r e g r e s -s i o n ( li n e a r i t y , ad d i t i v it y , m u l t i c o l l i n e a r i t y , a n d u n c o r r e l a t e d

2 In th e p re sen t s tu d y , m u l t i co l l in ea r i ty was ju d g ed to ex i s t i f z e ro -o rd e r co r re la t io n s b e tween v a r iab le s we re g rea te r th an o r eq u a l to 0 .8 0(Lewis-Beck, 1980).


8/15

220 CLIVE FU LLAGA R AND JULIAN BARLINGTable 2Cross-Lagged Correlation and Regression Analysis for Union Members

Static Cross-lagged RegressionReliabilities correlations correlations coefficientsVariable r~x2 ryjy2 r~,y~ r~y2 r~ty~ rytx x,y= y~x2

White membersUnion loyalty (x) 0.66*Formal participation (y) 0.53* 0.57* 0.59* 0.62* 0.34* 0.20* -0. 07Black mem bersUnion loyalty (x) 0.52*Form al parti cipati on (y) 0.52* 0.52* 0.56* 0.69* 0.45* 0.67* 0.01Note. x] = lo yalty at Tim e 1; x2 = loya lty at Tim e 2; y~ = parti cipa tion at Tim e 1; Y2 = p artic ipati on atTime 2.* p < 0 . 0 1 .

residua ls; e.g., Bat em an & S trasser, 1984). In all the analysescomp uted, these assum ption s were sa t isf ied .

The resul ts of the c ross - lagged regress ion analyses a re p re-s e n te d in Ta b le 2. Fo r bo th B la c k a nd W hi te me m be rs , a un id i -re c t iona l c a us a l i n fe re nc e f rom un ion loya l ty to fo rm a l pa r t i c i -pa t ion i s j us t i fi e d , s uppor t ing the d i re c t iona l r e l a t ions h ip p ro -pos e d in the m ode l , na me ly , t ha t un ion loya l ty l e a ds to fo rma lpart ic ip a t ion in union ac t iv i t ies (Blacks , z = 7 .28, p < 0 .01;Whites , z = 2 .23, p < 0 .05) . Moreover , the re la t ionsh ip be tweenunion loyal ty and p art ic i pa t io n was s ignif icant ly s t ronger forB la c k un ion m e mbe rs tha n fo r W hi te un ion me m be rs (z = 4 .84 ,p< 0 .01 ) .Path Analyses

Pa th pa ra me te r s we re c a l c u la t e d by re g re ss ing a t t i t ude s o fun ion loya l ty a t T ime I a nd pa r t i c ipa t ion in fo rma l un ion a c t iv -i t i es a t T ime 2 on to s c o res o f e x t r in s i c a nd in t r in s i c job s a t is fa c-t ion, union ins t rumen ta l i ty , ear ly soc ia l iza t ion experiences , jo binvolvemen t , l i fe sa t is fac t ion, and work be l ie fs a t Tim e 1 . In a l la na lys e s, the da ta f rom B la c k and W hi te un ion me m be rs we rea na lyz e d s e pa ra t ely to s e e i f r a c e m ode ra te d the p ropos e dmode l . To c ompa re the pa ra me te r s o f the mo de l s be twee n B la c ka nd W hi te me m be rs , we c a lc u la t e d uns ta nda rd iz e d re g re ss ionparam eters as wel l as s tandardiz ed regress ion coeff ic ients (Ped-hazur , 1982). Th ere a re pro blem s associa ted with the use ofs t a nda rd iz e d re g re s sion c oe f fi c ie n t s whe n c ompa r in g pa ra m e -ters in two samples . Any differences in s tandardized measuresacross d ifferent samples may be a t t r ibutable to d ifferences invariance compared to d ifferences in e ffec ts (Pedhazur , 1982;Schoenberg, 1972). S tanda rdize d pa th coeff ic ients can be usedon ly to c om pa re the e f fec ts o f p re d ic to r va r i a b le s on a c r i t e r ionvariable in a pa th analys is com pute d on a s ingle sample . 3

The a na lys e s fo r bo th B la c k a nd W hi te un ion me m be rs fo l -lowed convent ional pa th procedures . Thus , a jus t - ident i f iedmode l wa s c ompu te d f i r s t . The o ry - t r imming wa s the n c on -duc te d , a nd pa ths we re de le t e d a c c o rd ing to th re e c r i t e ri a . F i r s t ,pa ths were de le ted i f they were s ta t is t ica l ly ins ignif icant (p >.05) . Second, because there is no agreement tha t the f i rs tme thod fo r de le t ing pa ths i s t he m os t a de qua te c r i t e r ion , con -ceptua l ly meanin gful bu t s ta t is t ica l ly ins ignif icant pa ths were

re ta in ed ( i .e ., fl > 0 .05; Bi l l ings & Wro ten, 1978). T hird , pa th swere de le ted tha t were s ta t is t ica l ly s ignif icant but were not ina c c o rda nc e w i th the hypo the s i z e d mode l . An ove r ide n t i f i e dmode l wa s the n c omp u te d , a nd the goodne s s o f f it o f the ove r-ident i f ied mod el was tes ted in two ways . Firs t , the obta i ned an dobserved corre la t ion s should no t d i ffe r by mo re than 0 .05. Sec-ond , Spe c h t ' s Q fo rmula , wh ic h a pp rox im a te s the x 2 d i s t r ibu -t ion, was ca lcula ted .Black union members. Once the pa th coeff ic ients for the jus t -ide n t i f ie d mode l fo r B la c k un ion me m be rs we re c a lc u la t e d ,th re e o f the n ine hypo the s i z e d re l a tions h ips be twe e n e xoge nousvariables and fo rmal par t ic ipa t io n were s ta t is t ica lly s ignif icant :(a ) Union loyal ty was pos i t ive ly re la ted to form al par t ic ipa t io nin unio n ac t iv i t ies ( f l = 0 .67); (b) perce ived union in s t rum enta l-i ty was pos i t ive ly re la ted to form al par t ic ipa t ion (f l = 0 . I0) ; and(c) ear ly union soc ia l iza t ion experiences were a lso pos i t ive ly re -la ted to part ic i pa t ion in un ion ac t iv i t ies ( f l = 0 .15) . Cons is ten tw i th the h ypo the s i z e d mode l o f un ion loyal ty , t he pa th be twe e nun ion pa r t i c ipa t ion a nd e a r ly s oc ia l i z a tion e xpe ri e nc e s wa s de -l e t ed . The pa ths f rom the re m a in ing va r i a b le s were a l so de le t e df rom the ju s t - ide n ti f i e d mode l .

S ix o f the e igh t hypo the s i z e d re l a t ions h ips be twe e n the e xog-enous variables and union loyal ty were s ignif icant : perce ivedunion ins t ru men ta l i ty (f l = 0 .35) , ear ly soc ia l iza t ion experi -ences with the union (f l = 0 .24) , M arxis t - re la ted work be l ie fs(f l = 0 .14) , in t r ins ic job sa t is fac t ion (f l = -0 . 25 ) , extr ins ic jobs a t i sfa c t ion ( fl = -0 .19 ) , a nd job invo lve me n t ( f l = -0 .2 l ) . A l -though the F tes t for the regress ion coeff ic ients for li fe sa t is fac-t ion was not s ignif icant (p > 0 .05) , i t was s ti l l regarded a s ameanin gful p a th (R 2 change = 0 .07, f l > 0 .05; Bi l l ings & Wr o-ten, 1978).

To assess the extent t o whic h the overident i f ied mod el de-p ic t e d in F igu re 1 f i t te d the da ta, t he o r ig ina l a nd re p ro duc e dc or re l a t ions were c om pa re d to s e e if a ny obs e rve d d i f fe re nc e swere ins ignif icant (i .e .,


9/15

U N I O N L O Y A LT Y 2 2 1m o d e l w a s c o n d u c t ed . U s i n g t h e p r o p o r t i o n s o f t h e o b s e r v eda n d r e p r o d u c e d c o r r e l a t io n ma t r ix e s , i t wa s p o s s ib le to c a lc u -l a t e a c h i - s q u a r e s t a t i st i c w i th d e g r e e s o f f r e e d o m e q u a l to th en u m b e r o f o v e r id e n t i f y in g r e s t r i c t io n s ( i .e ., t h e n u m b e r o f p a th sde le ted ; Pedhazur , 1982; Spech t , 1975) . Pe dh azu r (1982) r e fe r sto th e Q s t a t i s ti c a s a me a s u r e o f th e g o o d n e s s o f fi t f o r a n o v e r -id e n t i fi e d m o d e l . T h e c lo s e r Q i s to u n i ty , t h e b e t t e r th e f it . Ont h e d a t a c o l l e ct e d fr o m B l a c k u n i o n m e m b e r s , Q w a s e q u a l t o0 .96 , 2(8 , N = 169) = 3 .45 . On th e bas is o f bo th these tes ts o fg o o d n e s s o f f it , th e r e f o r e , i t wa s c o n c lu d e d t h a t th e o v e r id e n t i -f l ed mo d e l p r e s e n te d in F ig u r e 1 f i t te d th e d a ta f o r B la c k u n io nm e m b e r s .White union members. Ag a in , th r e e o f th e h y p o th e s iz e d v a r i -a b le s we r e sig n i fi c a n t ly a s s o c ia te d w i th p a r t i c ip a t io n in f o r m a lu n io n a c t iv it i es : u n io n lo y a l ty (/3 = 0 . 2 4 ) , u n io n in s t r u m e n ta l -i ty ( /3 = 0 .23) , and ear ly soc ia l iza t ion exper iences ( /3 = 0 .19) .As w i th th e B la c k s a mp le , o n ly p a th s b e twe e n u n i o n p a r t i c ip a -t i o n a n d u n i o n l o y a l t y a n d p e r c ei v e d u n i o n i n s t r u m e n t a l i t ywe r e r e t a in e d , a s th e s e we r e th e o r e t i c a l ly c o n s i s t e n t w i th th eh y p o th e s iz e d m o d e l . S ix o f th e e ig h t h y p o th e s iz e d r e l a t io n s h ip sb e twe e n th e e x o g e n o u s v a r i a b le s a n d u n io n lo y a l ty in th e ju s t -id e n t i f i e d mo d e l we r e s u p p o r te d : p e r c e iv e d u n io n in s t r u me n -ta l i ty ( /3 = 0 .20) , ex tr ins ic sa t is fac t io n ( /3 = -0 . 43 ) , ea r ly soc ia l-iza t ion exper iences ( /3 = 0 .19) , job involvement ( /5 = 0 .08) , l i f esa t is fac t ion ( /3 = 0 .18) , and work e th ic be l ie f s ( /3 = 0 .12) . Ac-c o r d in g ly , al l o f th e s e v a r i a b le s we r e r e t a in e d in p r o d u c i n g th eju s t - id e n ti f i e d m o d e l .

I n t e s t in g th e g o o d n e s s o f fi t o f th e ju s t - id e n t i f i e d m o d e l , 5 o fth e p o s s ib le 1 7 r e p r o d u c e d c o r r e l a t io n s d i f f e re d b y mo r e th a n0 . 0 5 f r o m th e o b s e r v e d c o r r e l a t io n s . T h i s w o u ld a p p e a r to s u g -g e s t th a t th e d a ta d o e s n o t f it th e o v e r id e n t i fi e d mo d e l . T h e r e a -s o n f o r th i s ma y b e d u e to th e d e le t io n o f f o u r p a th s th a t we r eme anin gfu l ( i . e ., /3 > 0 .05) . However, the ch i- sq uare for goo d-ness -of - f i t s ta t is t ic p rovided a contra ry ind ica t ion , 2(8 , N =139) = 14 .62 , p < 0 .01 . T he Q ra t io was 0 .90 , whi ch is c lose tou n i ty a n d s u g g e st s th a t th e o v e r id e n t i fi e d m o d e l f i tt e d th e d a ta .C o mp a r i so n o f th e M ed ia ted M o d e l o rB la cks a n d W h i tes

T h e r e we r e s ig n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s b e twe e n th e B la c k a n dW h i te s a mp le s in b o th th e d i r e c t io n ( n e g a t iv e o r p o s i t iv e ) a n ds t r e n g th o f th e r e l a t io n s h ip s b e twe e n a n te c e d e n t v a r i a b le s a n du n io n lo y a l ty ( se e F ig u r e 2 ) . S ta t is t i ca l t e s t s we r e c o m p u te d toa s c e r t a in wh e th e r th e u n s ta n d a r d iz e d r e g r e s sio n c o e f fi c i e n ts fo rth e two s a mp le s a d d e d s ig n i fi c a n t ly to th e s u m o f s q u a r e s ( R 2c h a n g e = 0 . 0 8 , p < 0 . 0 5 ) o f th e o v e r id e n t if i e d mo d e l ( P e d h a z u r ,1 9 8 2 , p p . 4 3 8 - 4 4 2 ) . T h e u n s ta n d a r d iz e d r e g r e ss io n c o e ff i c ie n t swe r e s ig n i f i c a n t ly d i f f e r e n t o n f o u r p a th s ( s e e F ig u r e 2 ) : ( a )Am o n g B la c k me mb e r s , d i s s a ti s f a c tio n w i th in t r in s i c a s p e c t s o ft h e j o b w e r e m o r e i m p o r t a n t d e t e r m i n a n t s o f u n i o n l o y a l tyth a n f o r th e i r W h i te c o u n te r p a r t s ; ( b ) wh e r e a s g r e a te r jo b a l i e n -a t i o n w a s n e g a ti v el y r e la t e d t o u n i o n l o y a l ty a m o n g W h i t eme mb e r s , j o b a l i e n a t io n wa s f o u n d to f a c i l i t a t e lo y a l ty to th eu n i o n a m o n g B l a c k m e m b e r s ; ( c ) th e b e l i e f i n t h e w o r k e t h i cw a s a c a u s al p r e d i c t o r o f c o m m i t m e n t f o r W h i t e m e m b e r s , b u tn o t f o r B l ac k m e m b e r s ; a n d ( d ) a m o n g B l a c k u n i o n m e m b e r s ,Ma r x i s t - r e l a t e d b e l i e fs p r e d ic t e d u n io n lo y a l ty , wh e r e a s a m o n gW h i te wo r k e r s th e s e b e li e f s d id n o t p r e d ic t l o y a lty .

Mod erated Mult ip le RegressionT h e mo d e r a te d mu l t ip l e r e g r e s s io n a n a ly s e s in d ic a te d th a t

p e r c e iv e d u n io n in s t r u m e n ta l i ty wa s a s ig n i fi c a n t mo d e r a to r inf o u r o u t o f th e s e v e n r e la t io n s h ip s b e twe e n a n te c e d e n t v a r i a b le sa n d u n io n lo y a l ty . M o r e s p e ci fi ca lly, p e r c e p t io n s o f u n io n in -s t r u m e n t a l i t y w e r e f o u n d t o m o d e r a t e t h e r e l at i o n s h ip b e t w e e na t t i tu d e s o f lo y a l ty a n d e x t r in s i c jo b s a t i sf a c t io n , F ( 3 , 2 9 4 ) - -23 .60 , p < 0 .01 , R 2 chang e = 0 .03 ; ea r ly soc ia l iza t io n exper i-ences , F(3 , 29 4) = 17 .19 , p < 0 .01 , R 2 chan ge = 0 .02 ; l if e sa t is -f a c t io n , F ( 3 , 2 9 4 ) = 8 . 9 4 , p < 0 . 0 1 , R 2 c h a n g e = 0 . 0 1 ; a n d wo r ke th ic be l ie f s, F(3 , 294) = 7 .76 , p < 0 .01 , R 2 chan ge = 0 .01 .S imi la r mo d e r a to r e f f e c t s we r e n o t f o u n d f o r th e r e l a t io n s h ip sb e twe e n u n io n lo y a l ty a n d in t r in s i c jo b s a t i s f a c t io n , F ( 3 ,2 9 4 ) = 0 . 0 3 , p > 0 . 0 5 ; jo b in v o lv e me n t / a l i e n a t io n , F ( 3 , 2 9 4 ) =0 .69 , p > 0 .05 ; and M arxis t - re la te d w ork bel ie f s, F (3 , 294) =2 . 4 3 , p > 0 . 0 5 . P e r ce iv e d u n io n in s t r u m e n ta l i ty wa s a ls o f o u n dto mo d e r a te th e r e l a t io n s h ip b e twe e n u n io n p a r t i c ip a t io n a n du n io n lo y a l ty , F ( 3 , 2 9 4 ) = 2 7 . 8 8 , p < 0 . 0 1 , R 2 c h a n g e = 0 . 0 5 .

T o d e te r min e th e m e a n in g o f th e a b o v e mo d e r a to r e f fe ct s, i no th e r wo r d s , t h a t h ig h l e ve ls o f p e r c e iv e d u n io n in s t r u me n ta l i tys t r e n g th e n e d th e r e l a t io n s h ip b e twe e n th e p r e d ic to r v a r i a b le sa n d u n io n lo y a lty , t h e in d e p e n d e n t o r a n te c e d e n t v a r i a b le s a n dt h e m o d e r a t o r ( p e r c ei v e d u n i o n i n s t r u m e n t a l it y ) w e r e d i c h o t o -miz e d b y u s in g a m e d ia n s pl it . A n a ly s e s o f c o v a r i a n c e we r ec o m p u te d , c o n t r o l l in g f o r th e e f fe c ts o f th e o th e r a n te c e d e n tv a r i ab le s . Be c a u s e s u b g r o u p a n a ly s i s e n ta il s a lo s s o f in f o r m a -t io n a n d a c c u r a c y , we u s e d th e r e s u lt s o f th e a n a ly se s o f c o v a r i -a n c e m e r e ly to a s c e r t a in th e m e a n in g o f th e in t e r a c t io n e f fe ct .As c a n b e s e e n f r o m T a b le 3 , p e r c e iv e d u n io n in s t r u me n ta l i tymo d e r a te d th e r e l a t io n s h ip s b e twe e n u n io n lo y a l ty , e x t r in s i cjob sa t is fac t ion , l i f e sa t is fac t ion , ea r ly un ion soc ia l iza t ion , andMarxis t be l ie f s , a s hypothes ized .

D i s c u s s i o nUn io n lo y a l ty h a d a s ig n i f ic a n t e ff e c t o n b e h a v io r a l p a r t i c ip a -

t io n r e g a r d le s s o f th e r a c e o f b lu e - c o l l a r wo r k e rs . As u n io n lo y -a l t y c o n s t i tu t e s a m a j o r c o m p o n e n t o f u n i o n c o m m i t m e n t , t h ea b o v e c a u s a l f in d in g i s c o n s i s t e n t w i th th e p r e d ic t io n th a t a f f ec -t iv e c o m m i t m e n t ( a) c o n t r i b u te s t o t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f b e h a v -io r a l in d ic e s o f c o m m i tm e n t ( F u l l a g ar , 1 9 8 6 ; Go r d o n e t a l. ,1 9 80 ), ( b ) s u p p o r t s th e th e o r e t i c a l c a u s a l a s s u m p t io n s u n d e r ly -i n g a t ti t u d i n al a p p r o a c h e s t o c o m m i t m e n t ( c f. M o w d a y e t a l. ,1 9 82 ), a n d ( c) in d ic a te s th a t th e a s s o c ia t io n b e twe e n th e s e twov a r i a b le s i s g e n e r a li z a b le f r o m wh i te - c o l l a r wo r k e r s to b lu e - c o l -la r workers .

T h e f a ct t h a t s u c h a t t i t u d es o f c o m m i t m e n t a s l o y a l t y c a u s eu n io n p a r t i c ip a t io n s u g g e s t s th a t u n io n lo y a l ty i s a n e s s e n t i a lu n io n v a r i a b le ( G o r d o n e t a l ., 1 9 8 0 ) in th a t i t is i n flu e n t i a l i nd e t e r m i n i n g v o l u n t a r y p e r f o r m a n c e i n a c ti v it i es t h a t e n s u r e t h eu n i o n ' s a t t a i n m e n t o f i ts g o a ls . T h e p r e d i c t io n o f d iv e rs e u n i o n -r e l a t e d b e h a v io r s , s u c h a s v o t in g b e h a v io r ( e . g . , De Co t i i s &Le Lo ua rn , 1981; Za lesny , 1985) and gr ievanc e f il ing (e.g ., Al len& Ke a v e n e y , 1 9 8 3 ; Da l to n & T o d o r , 1 9 8 2) , ma y b e e n h a n c e d i ft h e i m p o r t a n c e o f u n i o n l o y a l t y as a n i n d e p e n d en t , a n t e c e d e n tv a r i a b le i s a c c o u n te d f or . F u r th e r m o r e , i f l o y a l ty c a u s es g r e a te rp a r t i c ip a t io n in u n io n a c t iv it i es , t h e n i t ma y b e c r u c ia l f o r im-p r o v in g u n io n e f fi ci en c y. T h e u n io n ' s p o we r i s d e p e n d e n t o n i t s


10/15

2 2 2 C L I V E F U L L A G A R A N D J U L I A N B A R L I N G

I

~ zoo

i

~, z ~

) ~ ~ '

, I ~ . ~ , ' ~ ~ ~


11/15

U N I O N L O Y A LT Y 2 2 3T a b le 3Adjusted Mean Scores o r U nion Lo yal tyfor Signi ficant Moderator E f fects

Moderator variable:Perceived unio ninstrumentalityAntecedent variableand level High LowExtrinsic job satisfactionHigh 25.56 23.05Low 26.67 21.12Early union socializationHigh 25.75 24.23Low 25.17 20.99Life satisfactionHigh 24.89 23.73Low 26.29 21.30Wo rk ethic beliefsHigh 25.69 23.16Low 25.56 20.74

a b i li t y t o i m p o s e s a n c t i o n s o r t h r e a t e n t h e i m p o s i t i o n o f s a n c-t io n s th r o u g h b o y c o t t s , s tr ik es , o r s lo wd o wn s .

I n b o t h B l a c k a n d W h i t e s a m p l e s , w e f o u n d t h a t t h e p e r c e p -t i o n o f th e i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y o f th e u n i o n i n a c h i e v i n g ce r t a ing o a l s wa s a s ig n if i c a n t a n d s t r o n g p r e d ic to r o f b o th lo y a l ty toth e u n io n a n d b e h a v io r a l p a r t i c ip a t io n in u n io n a c t iv i t ie s . T h i ss u p p o r t s p r e v io u s f in d in g s o f a s t r o n g r e l a t io n s h ip b e twe e n in -s t r u m e n t a l i t y a n d o t h e r a s p ec t s o f u n i o n i z a t i o n s u c h a s p r o p e n -s i ty to u n io n iz e , p o s i tiv e u n io n v o te , a n d f a v o r a b le u n io n a t t i -tu d e s ( B ig o n es s & T o si , 1 9 8 4 ; De Co t i i s & L e L o u a r n , 1 9 8 1 ;Yo u n g h lo o d e t al . , 1 9 8 4) . T h e r e s u l t s in d ic a t in g th a t p e r c e iv e du n i o n i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y i s a m o d e r a t o r o f se v er a l o f t h e r e l a t io n -s h ip s b e twe e n u n io n lo y a l ty a n d i t s a n te c e d e n t s a r e d i s c u s s e dlater.

Va r io u s s tu d ie s h a v e in d ic a te d f a i rly c o n s i s t e n t n e g a t iv e c o r -r e l a t io n s b e twe e n e x t r in s i c jo b s a t i s f a c t io n a n d p r o - u n io n v o t -in g ( De Co t i i s & L e L o u a r n , 1 9 8 1 ; Ko c h a n , 1 9 79 ). Ho we v er ,th e s e s tu d ie s ma y n o t b e r e p r e s e n ta t iv e o f u n io n iz e d wo r k e r s ,a s o n ly a s ma l l p e r c e n ta g e ( 3 % to 5 %) a r e in v o lv e d in u n io ne lec t ions (Berger, Olson , & B oud reau , 1983). N ever the less , d is -s a t i s fa c t io n w i th e x t r in s i c jo b c h a r a c te r i s t i c s wa s a c a u s a l p r e -d i c t o r o f u n i o n l o y a l t y a m o n g B l a c k a n d W h i t e u n i o n m e m b e r sin th e p r e s e n t s a m p le . O u r f in d in g s s ug g e s t th a t r a c e i s a n im -p o r t a n t m o d e r a t o r o f t h e j o b s a t i s f a c t i o n - u n i o n l o y a l t y r el a -t io n s h ip . F o r e x a mp le , e x t r in s i c jo b d i s s a t i s f a c t io n wa s as t ro n g e r p r e d ic t o r o f u n i o n l o y a l ty f o r W h i t e t h a n f o r B l a ckm e m b e r s , w h e r e as a m o n g B l a c k u n i o n m e m b e r s i n t r in s i c d is -s a t i s fa c t io n wa s a l s o a s ig n i f i c a n t c a u s e o f lo y a l ty to th e u n io n .No s imi la r r e l a t io n s h ip b e twe e n in t r in s i c jo b d i s s a t i s f a c t io na n d u n i o n l o y a l t y w a s f o u n d f o r W h i t e u n i o n m e m b e r s .

T h e s ig n i f i c a n t l i n k b e twe e n in t r in s i c jo b s a t i s f a c t io n a n du n i o n l o y a l t y a m o n g B l a c k m e m b e r s m a y b e b e c a u s e B l a c kwo r k e r s , u n l ik e W h i te wo r k e r s, a r e u n a b le to in f lu e n c e th e n o n -e c o n o m i c a sp e c ts o f th e i r w o r k i n g e n v i r o n m e n t t h r o u g h o t h e rm o r e in f o r ma l , i n d iv id u a l i st i c , o r e mp lo y e r - in i t i a t e d p r o g r a m s .Ce r ta in ly , B la c k u n io n m e m b e r s we r e mo r e d i s sa t i sf i ed w i th th esoc ia l and po l i t ica l aspe c ts o f the ir l ives, t (302) --- 8 .23 , p < 0 .01 ,a n d th i s d i s s a t i s f a c t io n wa s f o u n d to b e a s ig n i f i c a n t c a u s e o f

u n io n lo y a l ty . By u s in g H i r s c h ma n ' s ( 1 9 7 0 ) E x i t , Vo ic e , a n dL o y a l t y c o n c e p t a s a n e x p l a n a t o r y f r a m e w o r k , w e n o t e t h a tW h i te , a f f lu e n t wo r k e r s h a v e g r e a te r a c c e s s to th e e x i t - a n d - e n t r ym e c h a n i s m , o w i n g t o g r e a t e r e x er c is e o f f r e e d o m o f c h o i c e a n dm o b i l i t y i n t h e S o u t h A f r i c a n c o n t e x t. F o r t h e m a j o r i t y o f B l a ckwo r k e r s , o n th e o th e r h a n d , th e u n io n v o ic e is p e r h a p s th e o n lyc h a n n e l o f p a rt i c i p a ti o n i n a d e m o c r a t i c p r o c e ss .

A s ig n i f i c a n t a n d r e l a t e d f in d in g wa s th a t jo b a l i e n a t io na mo n g B la c k wo r k e r s c a u s e d s t r o n g e r u n io n lo y a l ty , wh e r e a sW h i te w o r k e r s wh o we r e in v o lv e d in th e i r j o b s w e r e mo r e l ik e lyt o d e v e l op l o y a lt y t o t h e u n i o n . U n l i k e B l a c k u n i o n m e m b e r s ,W h i t e u n i o n m e m b e r s h a ve m o r e o p p o r t u n i ty t o b e c o m e i n -v o lv e d in o r g a n iz a t io n a l p r o c e s s e s. I t ma y b e th a t , f o r W h i tew o r k er s, i n v o l v e m e n t i n t h e u n i o n a n d o n e ' s j o b a r e a s s o c ia t e di n a m a n n e r s i m i l ar t o t h e c o n c e p t o f d u a l a l l eg i an c e ( M a r t in ,1 9 8 l ; S ta g n er , 1 9 5 6 ). A t t a c h me n t to th e u n io n wa s p r o b a b lyp e r c e iv e d a s e s s e n t i a l t o p r o te c t in g wo r k o p p o r tu n i t i e s p r o -v id e d b y th e e mp lo y in g o r g a n iz a t io n . I t is a l so p o s s ib le th a td u a l a l l e g i a n c e i s n o t a c o m m o n p h e n o m e n o n a t t h e l o w e r ,m o r e a l i e n a te d l ev e ls o f th e o r g a n iz a t io n a l h i e r a r c h y b e c a u s eth e r e i s l e ss o p p o r tu n i ty f o r wo r k e r s f o r o r g a n iz a t io n a l in v o lv e -m e n t a n d th e s a t i s f a ct io n o f in t rin s i c n e e d s .

T h e mo d e l s p r e s e n te d h e r e s u g g e s t th a t th e r e a r e p r o c e s s e so c c u r r in g th a t h a v e a d i r e c t a n d in d e p e n d e n t e f f e c t o n B la c kwo r k e r s ' u n io n lo y a l ty . T h e f in d in g s in d ic a te th a t a t t i t u d e s to -w a r d u n i o n s a r e s t r u c t u r e d b y t h e n a t u r e o f t h e w o r k s it u a t io n( wh ic h i s d i f f e r e n t f o r B la c k a n d f o r W h i te wo r k e r s in S o u thAf r i c a ) . F u r th e r mo r e , th e d i s t in c t io n in p r e v io u s r e s e a r c h b e -twe e n b lu e - c o l l a r a n d w h i t e - c o l l a r wo r k e r s a n d th e d e c i s io n tos u p p o r t u n i o n i z a t i o n m a y b e s i m p l is t ic i n t h a t , a m o n g b l u e -co l la r workers , d if fe rences in leve l o f p r iv i lege and rac ia l c lassm a y p r o d u c e d i f f e re n t p r o ce s s m o d e l s o f a t t a c h m e n t t o l a b o ro r g a n iz a t io n s . T h i s i s n o t o n ly i l l u s t r a te d in th e d i f f e r en c e s inr e l a t io n s h ip s b e twe e n u n io n lo y a l ty a n d e x t r in s i c a n d in t r in s i cjo b s a t i s f a c t io n a n d jo b in v o lv e me n t b u t a l s o in th e d i f f e r e n tb e l i e f s y s t e ms th a t p r e d ic t e d u n io n lo y a l ty f o r B la c k a n d f o rW h i te wo r k e r s .

I t c o u ld b e a r g u e d th a t B la c k wo r k e r s ma n i f e s t a h e ig h te n e dc la s s c o n s c io u s n e s s o win g to ( a ) a s h a r e d h i s to r y o f mig r a n t l a -b o r a n d u p r o o t e d n e s s , ( b ) th e i r t e n u o u s o c c u p a t i o n p o s i t io n ,a n d ( c ) th e i r me mb e r s h ip o f a c l a ss th a t i s d i s c r imin a te d a g a in s tb o th a t wo r k a n d in s o c ie ty ( L e g g et t , 1 9 6 8) . C la s s c o n s c io u s n e s swa s c l e a r ly e v id e n t in th e r e s p o n s e s o f B la c k wo r k e r s to th eM a r x i s t - Re la te d B e l ie f s s c a le . F o r e x a mp le , m a n y i t e m s o n th eM a r x i s t - Re la te d Be l i ef s sc a le a s se s s e d a t t i tu d e s a b o u t th e e x i s -t e n c e o f a s o c ie ty in w h ic h c l a ss e s h a v e c o n f l i c t in g in te r e s ts , a n dth e m a te r i a l a n d s o c ia l d i s a d v a n ta g e s o f b e in g a me m b e r o f th ewo r k in g c l a s s th a t g iv e r is e to c o l l e ct iv e in t e r e s ts th a t h a v e to b ep u r s u e d c o ll ec tive ly . T h e r e s u l t, t h a t a m o n g B la c k u n io n m e m -b e r s Ma r x i s t - r e l a t e d ( b u t n o t wo r k e th ic ) b e l i e f s we r e s t r o n gp r e d ic to r s o f u n io n lo y a l ty , s u p p o r t s th e n o t io n th a t B la c kw o r k e r s a r e m o r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e p o l i t i c a l d i m e n s i o n o fu n io n o r g a n iz a t io n . On th e o th e r h a n d , th e f in d in g , th a t wo r ke th ic ( b u t n o t Ma r x i s t - r e l a t e d ) b e l i e f s we r e s ig n i f i c a n t c a u s a lp r e d i c to r s o f at t it u d e s o f c o m m i t m e n t a m o n g W h i t e w o r k er s,s u gg e st s t h a t a t t a c h m e n t t o t h e u n i o n w a s p r o b a b l y d u e t o i t sb e in g p e r c e iv e d a s e ss e n t ia l t o p r o te c t in g w o r k o p p o r tu n i t i e s .

F in a lly , u n io n s o c ia l i z a t io n e x p e r i e n c e s p o s i t iv ely in f lu e n c e db o t h l o y a l t y t o t h e u n i o n a n d b e h a v i o r a l p a rt i c i p a ti o n i n u n i o n


12/15

224 CLIVE FULLAGAR AND JULIAN BARLINGa c t iv i ti e s i n b o t h B l a c k a n d W h i t e s a m p l e s . T h i s i s c o n s i st e n twi t h p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h t h a t h a s f o u n d a n a s s o c i a t i o n b e t we e nsoc ia l i za t ion var iab les and un ion loy a l ty (Go rdo n e t a l. , 1980) .So c i a l iz a t io n p r o c e s s e s b e c o m e c r u c i a l f o r t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n o fi n f o r m a t i o n , v a l u e s , a n d r o l e s t o t h o s e m e m b e r s w h o h a v e n o th a d t r a d e u n i o n e x p e r i e n c e . Va n M a a n e n ( 1 9 7 8 ) h a s i d e n t if i edv a r i o u s t a c t ic s o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s o c i a li z a ti o n . F u t u r e r e s e a r c hs h o u l d f o c u s o n wh i c h o f t h e s e f a c to r s a re m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e f o rlabor organiza t ions , espec ia l ly as unions usua l ly have l imi tedorganiz in g and adm ini s t ra t ive fac i li t ies and few tra in in g s ta ff .

So f ar , f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f p a r s i m o n y , t h e p r o p o s e d p a t h m o d e li n d i c a t e s d i r e c t l i n k s b e t we e n a n t e c e d e n t v a r i a b l e s a n d u n i o nl o y al ty . Th e r e s u lt s o f t h e m o d e r a t e d m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s io n s s u g -g e st th a t a m o r e c o m p l e x m o d e l o f u n i o n l o y a l ty is m o r e a p p r o -p r i a t e a n d t h a t p e r c e i v e d u n i o n i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y m o d e r a t e s t h er e l a t i o n s h i p b e t we e n v a r i o u s a n t e c e d e n t f a c t o r s a n d a t t i t u d e so f l o y a l t y t o t h e u n i o n . Fo r e x a m p l e , d i s s a t is f a c ti o n wi t h e x t r i n -s i c j o b c o n d i t i o n s d o e s n o t n e c e s s a ri l y p r e d i c t g r e a t e r u n i o nloya l ty . Th e re la t ionship i s con t ingen t on the indiv idua l perce iv-i n g th e u n i o n a s i n s t r u m e n t a l i n a c h i e v i n g e x tr i n s ic o u t c o m e s .Th i s wo u l d s u g g e s t t h a t t h e m o d e r a t i n g r o l e o f u n i o n i n s t r u -m e n t a l i t y i n r e s e a r c h o n u n i o n m e m b e r s h i p ( Br e t t , 1 9 8 0 ) e x -t e n d s t o o t h e r p r o c e s s e s o f a t t a c h m e n t t o l a b o r o r g a n i z a t io n s .I n a g r e e m e n t wi t h t h i s d i ss a t is f a c ti o n m o d e l o f u n i o n i z a t i o n(Al len & Keaveney, 1983; Bre t t , 1980) , d i ssa t i s fac t ion wi tho n e ' s l i f e c i r c u m s t a n c e s o n l y l e a d s t o l o y a l t y t o t h e u n i o n i ft h e l a t t er i s p e rc e i v e d a s b e in g i n s t r u m e n t a l i n a t t a i n i n g s u c he x t r in s i c o u t c o m e s a s b e t t e r wa g e s a n d g r e a t e r j o b s e c u ri t y , b o t ho f wh i c h a f f e c t o n e ' s s t a n d a r d o f l iv in g .

Simi la r ly , the e f fec ts o f ear ly soc ia l i za t ion ex per iences on a t t i -t u d e s o f u n i o n l o y a l t y a r e m o d e r a t e d b y p e r c e p ti o n s o f u n i o ni n s t ru m e n t a l i t y . I n o t h e r wo r d s , u n i o n m e m b e r s ' e a r l y a d o p t i o no f t h e i r m e m b e r s h i p r o l e f a c il i ta t e s p s y c h o l o g i c a l a t t a c h m e n tt o t h e u n i o n w h e n t h e y p e r c e iv e t h e ir b e h a v i o r s a n d t h e u n i o na s in s t r u m e n t a l t o t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f v a l u e d o u t c o m e s .

W e a l s o f o u n d t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t we e n wo r k e t h i c b e -l ie fs a n d u n i o n l o y a l t y wa s c o n t i n g e n t o n t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r -c e p t i o n o f u n i o n i n s t r u m e n t a l it y . W o r k e t h i c b el i ef s a r e m o r ep r e d i c ti v e o f u n i o n l o y a l t y a m o n g t h o s e wo r k e r s wh o p e r c ei v et h e u n i o n a s b e i n g i n s t r u m e n t a l t o m a i n t a i n i n g t h o s e e x t r i n s i cf a c to r s , s u c h a s j o b s e c u r i t y a n d s t a tu s , t h a t a r e i n t r i c a te l yb o u n d u p w i t h t h e c o n c e p t o f th e w o r k e th i c.

Ho we ve r, t h e m o d e r a t i n g e f fe c t o f p e rc e i v e d u n i o n i n s t r u -m e n t a l i t y d i d n o t g e n e r a li z e t o a l l o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h ip s b e t we e nt h e e x o g e n o u s v a r ia b l e s a n d u n i o n l o y a lt y . Fo r e x a m p l e , t h e r e -l a t io n s h i p s b e t we e n i n t r i n s ic j o b s a t is f a c ti o n , j o b i n v o l v e m e n t /a l i ena t ion , w ork e th ic bel ie fs , an d un ion lo ya l ty were unaf fe c tedb y t h e l e ve l o f p er c e i v e d u n i o n i n s t r u m e n t a l it y . Th i s i s p r o b a b l ya t t r ib u t a b l e t o i n a d e q u a c i e s i n t h e c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n a n d o p e r -a t i o n a l iz a t i o n o f u n i o n i n s t r u m e n t a l it y . T h e i n s t r u m e n t u s e di n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y t o m e a s u r e u n i o n i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y wa sb a s e d o n o t h e r m e a s u r e s o f in s t r u m e n t a l i t y i n t h e l i te r a t u r e a n da s s es s e d a t ti t u d e s r e g a r d i n g t h e u n i o n ' s a b i l i t y t o a c h i e v e e x -t r in s i c g o a l s. Th i s o p e r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f in s t r u m e n t a l i t y m a yp r o v i d e a l i m i t e d p e r s p e c t iv e o f t h e u n i o n ' s i n s t r u m e n t a l it y , e s -p e c i a ll y in t h e c o n t e x t o f So u t h A f r i c a , wh e r e m a n y wo r k e r sp e r c ei v e u n i o n s a s b e in g i n s t r u m e n t a l t o a c h i e v i n g m o r e i n t r i n -s ic outc om es (Webs ter , 1979). A s a resu l t, w e d id n ot f ind a s ig-n i f i c a n t i n te r a c ti v e e f f ec t o f p e r c e iv e d u n i o n i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y o n

t h e r e l a t io n s h i p b e t we e n u n i o n l o y a l t y a n d i n t r in s i c j o b s a t i s-fac t ion , a l i ena t ion , and Marxi s t - re la ted be l i e f s . The present in-s t r u m e n t a l i t y s c a l e d i d n o t a s se ss p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e u n i o n ' sa b i l it y t o c h a n g e i n t r i n s i c j o b c o n d i t i o n s , i m p r o v e j o b i n v o l v e -m e n t , r e d u c e a l i e n a t i o n , a n d a l t e r t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f wo r k t ot h e g r e a t e r b e n e f i t o f wo rk e r s.

A Longitudinal Test of a Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Union Loyalt

Documents

Transcript of A Longitudinal Test of a Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Union Loyalt