10.2190/WR.14.2.c R5V788W80W16665J 3 Unsatisfactory Working Conditions and Voice: An Analysis Involving Employees in Sweden 157 173 20100719 20100719 20100719 20100719 R5V788W80W16665J.pdf http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=R5V788W80W16665J 2 Bengt Furåker University of Gothenburg, Sweden From the classic distinction by Albert Hirschman between exit, voice, and loyalty, we can infer that employees who are dissatisfied with their working conditions have two "active" options: they can either leave their employer or raise their voices against conditions they consider to be bad. In this article—based on a 2006 survey among employees in Sweden—I ask to what extent dissatisfied workers raise their voices and, if they do so, which ways do they choose. Another task is to explore how willingness to leave the job, loyalty, and other factors influence what people do. Also, I discuss whether various forms of voice can be characterized as collective or as individual. The available data show that employees in Sweden most often speak to managers about workplace failings. Other common steps entail talking to workmates and raising issues at staff meetings, while only 10% call in union representatives. Most people do more than one thing, and complaints are thus likely to be spread among the workers. Many factors are important in employees' decisions as to which kinds of action they choose. Those who want to switch to another workplace have a greater propensity to bring up problems with workmates and to contact union representatives, whereas strong loyalty or organizational commitment is associated with a lesser propensity to take these actions. On the other hand, loyalty has no significant effects on people's inclination to speak to managers or to discuss issues at staff meetings. In these cases, another factor becomes the most crucial: fear of criticizing unsatisfactory working conditions. Employees who are afraid of expressing their disapproval are less inclined to talk to managers and to bring up complaints at staff meetings.

Bauman, Z. 2001. The individualized society. Cambridge: Polity.

Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. 2002. Individualization. London: Sage.

Bengtsson, M., & Berglund, T. Forthcoming. Negotiating alone or through the union? Swedish employees' attitudes in 1997 and 2006. Economic and Industrial Democracy.

Furåker, B. 2005. Sociological perspectives on labor markets. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Furåker, B., & Berglund, T. 2003. Are the unions still needed? On employees' views of their relationship to unions and employers. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 24: 573-594.

Gallie, D., White, M., Cheng, Y., & Tomlinson, M. 1998. Restructuring the employment relationship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hirschman, A. O. 1970. Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kjellberg, A. 1998. Sweden: Restoring the model? In A. Ferner & R. Hyman (Eds.), Changing industrial relations in Europe (2nd ed.): 74-117. Oxford: Blackwell.

Kjellberg, A. 2009. Fackliga organisationer och "industrial relations." In T. Berglund & S. Schedin (Eds.), Arbetslivet: 241-286. Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur.

Lysgaard, S. 1961. Arbeiderkollektivet: En studie i de underordnedes sosiologi. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

Pakulski, J., & Waters, M. 1996. The death of class. London: Sage.

Phelan, C. (Ed.). 2007. Trade union revitalisation: Trends and prospects in 34 countries. Bern: Peter Lang.

Sverke, M., & Hellgren, J. 2001. Exit, voice and loyalty reactions to job insecurity in Sweden: Do unionized and non-unionized employees differ? British Journal of Industrial Relations, 39: 167-182.

Visser, J. 2006. Union membership statistics in 24 countries. Monthly Labor Review, January: 38-49.

Yates, M. D. 1998. Why unions matter. New York: Monthly Review Press.