Review Table 12.2

How can you explain the huge disperity between bargaining coverage and union diversity in some countries?

TABLE 12.2 Labor Relations around the Globe: Union Membership # Contract Coverage

Country	Bargaining Coverage	Union Density
Korea	12%	10%
United States	12	11
Japan	15+	18
Canada	29	29
United Kingdom	30	25
South Africa	33	30
Czech Republic	47	13
Germany	58	18
Australia	60	17
Brazil	60	25
Spain	70	17
Sweden	90	68
France	90+	8
Finland	90+	69
Belgium	95	55
Austria	95+	27

Notes: Figures are circa 20122014. + indicates a lower-bound estimate.Source: Jelle Visser, "ICTWSS Data Base. Version 5.1 (Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies, University of Amsterdam, 2016).

At the same time, labor relations around the globe are similar in other respects. The contemporary pressures on labor, management, and government are universal: globalization, financialization, decentralization, and flexibility. Moreover, the fundamental issues of labor relations are constant across all countries. The objectives of the employment relationship are efficiency, equity, and voice; there is a need to balance labor rights and property rights; and labor relations outcomes are determined by the environment and individual decision making. The U.S. New Deal labor relations system is one possible method of pursuing these objectives, but the comparative study of labor relations in other countries reveals many alternative possibilities. Therefore, this chapter outlines the labor relations systems of a number of representative countries. There are innumerable ways to order these countries, so to avoid confusion the tour here proceeds geographically from North America to Europe to Asia. The chapter concludes by revisiting the question of globalization: In an integrated world economy, is it possible to have unique national labor relations systems, or does integration force convergence of national institutions?