The Warwick Industrial Relations (IR) academics, George Bain and Hugh Clegg, were key movers in founding the Modern Records Centre (MRC) & attracting the unique collection of trade union and employers' records. In the late 1960s, after his crucial role on the 1965-68 'Donovan' Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers' Associations, Clegg was recruited from Nuffield College, Oxford to become a founding professor in what became Warwick Business School. He won SSRC funding to bring the Industrial Relations Research Unit (IRRU) to Warwick, which became the national centre for the field, with a global reputation, at a time when IR was arguably the central UK domestic issue. Leadership of the IRRU passed to George Bain, then Willy Brown. After retirement, Clegg then used the MRC for the final two volumes of his landmark A History of British Trade Unions since 1889 (Oxford University Press 1985, 1994). Based on interviews with the archivist, Richard Storey, George Bain and other members of the 'Warwick School', my paper will discuss: (1) the formation of Warwick School IR; (2) Bain & Clegg's influence on the MRC; and (3) Clegg's writing on trade union history. In 2003, I co-edited a study of academic IR Understanding Work & Employment (OUP) & for the past 20 years I've published widely on Hugh Clegg. My full biography with Routledge is now out.

PurposeThis paper presents an historical reconstruction of the radicalisation of Alan Fox, the industrial sociologist and a detailed analysis of his early historical and sociological writing in the classical pluralist phase.Design/methodology/approachAn intellectual history, including detailed discussion of key Fox texts, supported by interviews with Fox and other Biographical sources.FindingsFox’s radicalisation was incomplete, as he carried over from his industrial relations (IR) pluralist mentors, Allan Flanders and Hugh Clegg, a suspicion of political Marxism, a sense of historical contingency and an awareness of the fragmented nature of industrial conflict.Originality/valueRecent academic attention has centred on Fox’s later radical pluralism with its “structural” approach to the employment relationship. This paper revisits his early, neglected classical pluralist writing. It also illuminates his transition from institutional IR to a broader sociology of work, influenced by AH Halsey, John Goldthorpe and others and the complex nature of his radicalisation.

Our paper examines how the work of Mick Marchington integrated older forms of employee participation with newer patterns of employee involvement. The paper shows how Employee Involvement and Participation (EIP) is central to contemporary Human Resource Management (HRM) in four distinct ways: first is the 'theoretical' integration of pluralism into newer HRM approaches; second is the 'practical' insights gained from what was happening at organisational level; third is the contributions to ongoing 'policy debates' about fair work; and finally, his emphasis on 'context-sensitive methods' link macro, meso and micro developments. We refer to three specific projects and related periods: a Department of Employment funded project during the late 1980s and early 1990s which developed the waves and escalator concepts of EIP; a Chartered Institute of Personnel Development project concerned with employee voice and management choice in the 2000s, which gave insight to multiple meanings of EIP and strategic choice; and research concerned with the notion of fair voice from comparative cases studies across different liberal market economies from 2008 onwards. By reflecting on these research projects and periods we present a potential framework that offers continued longevity for the future study of HRM.

British Journal of Industrial RelationsEarly View REVIEW ESSAY The TUC and social democratic trade union leadership in twentieth century Britain: Bevin, Citrine and after. Ernest Bevin: Labour's Churchill, by Adonis, Andrew, Biteback, London, 2020. Walter Citrine: Forgotten Statesman of the Trades Union Congress, by Dr Moher, Jim, JGM Books, London, 2021. Peter Ackers, Corresponding Author Peter Ackers peter.ackers1@virginmedia.com Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia Email: peter.ackers1@virginmedia.comSearch for more papers by this author Peter Ackers, Corresponding Author Peter Ackers peter.ackers1@virginmedia.com Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia Email: peter.ackers1@virginmedia.comSearch for more papers by this author First published: 23 October 2021 https://doi.org/10.1111/bjir.12648Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Early ViewOnline Version of Record before inclusion in an issue RelatedInformation

Alan Fox's frames of reference has sparked over half a century of debate between employment relations/human resource management pluralists, radicals and unitarists. But the notion of industrial relations pluralism itself continues to be highly disputed. This commentary tracks the journey from classical pluralism to neo-pluralism, then addresses three articles that offer a variety of radical pluralist alternatives. A fourth paper discussed, suggests a quantitative approach to testing Fox's frames, but this article makes a case for retaining the qualitative, case study method. A fifth explores the revival of paternalism on the border between unitarism and pluralism. Overall, the article argues that classical pluralism, based on trade unions and collective bargaining, is now outdated, but that neo-pluralism is capable of carrying forward its pragmatic, institutional spirit to explore the empirical complexity of contemporary employment relationships around the world. Finally, the discussion of employment relations pluralisms needs to re-engage with the wider political pluralism debate about liberal democratic societies and market economies.