The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm

ER
29,3

Workplace and employment

characteristics of Citizens
Advice Bureau (CAB) clients

262

Brian Abbott

Received March 2006

Revised October 2006
Accepted October 2006

Kingston University, Kingston Business School, Kingston upon Thames, UK

Abstract
Purpose There is a paucity of information on the characteristics and reasons for workers
contacting the CAB with employment problems. This paper seeks to fill this gap in peoples knowledge
by providing a detailed profile of the employment and personal characteristics of Citizens Advice
Bureau (CAB) clients.
Design/methodology/approach A total of eight bureaux, from contrasting localities in Greater
London, participated in the research. The data for this paper are derived predominantly from
interviews with CAB clients and reinforced by quantitative data, which were also garnered.
Findings It is argued that the use of the CAB, for employment advice, is rooted in a structural
rather than an attitudinal explanation.
Originality/value There is a growing recognition within the industrial relations literature of the
increasing plurality of sources of representation available to workers. However, very little is known
about those employees seeking advice and representation and the types of issues with which they
approach bureaux.
Keywords Industrial relations, Charities, Employee relations, Employee behaviour
Paper type Research paper

Employee Relations
Vol. 29 No. 3, 2007
pp. 262-279
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/01425450710741748

Introduction
Since the early 1990s, there has been growing awareness of the involvement of
non-traditional industrial relations actors, such as The National Association of
Citizens Advice Bureaux[1] (NACAB) in the employment relationship (Abbott, 1998;
Kessler and Bayliss, 1995; Sisson, 1993). Worker representation is increasingly
characterised by a plurality of sources extending beyond the single channel of trade
unions (Bellemare, 2000; Osterman et al., 2001). To date, references to the work of
NACAB have focused on their involvement in resolving workplace grievances and the
types of issues handled by bureaux (Abbott, 1998; Kessler and Bayliss, 1995).
Grievances typically revolve around terms and conditions, unfair dismissal, and
redundancy, which accounted for over 400,000 enquiries in 2004-05 (NACAB, 2005,
p. 3). The employment issues handled by bureaux are consistent with the types of
issues taken to ACAS and the employment tribunal service (ACAS, 2001, p. 59; Meager
et al., 2002).
Lack of academic interest in this area (exceptions being Abbott, 1998; Abbott, 2004;
Abbott, 2006) combined with a reluctance on the part of CAB clients to provide
personal details, often to preserve their anonymity, makes profiling difficult (Faichnie,
The author would like to thank Stephen Gourlay and Ed Heery and an anonymous referee for
their comments on earlier drafts of this article.

2000, p. 7). Consequently, there is a dearth of information on the characteristics of

workers seeking employment advice from non-traditional sources. In general,
information relating to CAB clients is confined to their workplace characteristics,
which suggest that workers emanate predominantly from non-union and small firms
(Goodridge, 1994).
This research rectifies this gap in our knowledge by providing the first serious
academic study of the workers approaching the CAB for employment advice. In this
respect, the article adopts a bottom-up approach by focusing on the workers rather
than the institution itself. Given the abundance of data on the characteristics of trade
union members and employment tribunal claimants, comparisons will be made
between them and CAB clients (Brook, 2002, p. 346; DTI, 2002a, p. 15; Employment
Gazette, 1994, pp. 22-3; Hartley, 1992, p. 169; Hicks and Palmer, 2004, p. 100). Adopting
a comparative approach will help to determine whether workers contacting bureaux
are similar, or dissimilar, to those traditionally associated with trade union
membership. The article, drawing on qualitative and quantitative data, begins by
identifying the workplace characteristics of CAB clients, including the level of
unionisation, size, sector and the operation of formal procedures of firms generating
employment enquiries. This is followed by a discussion of the employment and
personal characteristics of CAB clients including their occupational status, gender, age
and ethnicity.
The final section of the article discusses whether the use of the CAB can be
attributed to structural factors or worker attitudes. A structural explanation includes
the following workplace indicators; poor management style, the lack of, or ineffective
use of, internal dispute resolution mechanisms, and the absence of trade unions. Where
these structural factors predominate, workers may find themselves exposed to
arbitrary treatment by management. A structural explanation would suggest that
users of the CAB emanate predominantly from certain types of workplaces, such as
small and non-union firms. If the use of the CAB is a function of workers, indicators
will relate to workers attitudes. These include evidence of individualistic beliefs such
as hostility towards trade unions, and an unwillingness to join, or seek union support.
Methodology
The data for this article is based on 22 in-depth, semi-structured, tape-recorded,
face-to-face interviews, lasting between 50 minutes and two-and-a-half hours, with
paid and volunteer CAB advisers located in ten[2] contrasting bureaux in Greater
London.
Once the interviews with CAB advisers had been completed, the research focused on
constructing a detailed profile of the workers using bureaux for employment advice.
The original nature of this research meant that there was no established literature on
the subject to consult. Where data did exist, it was often partial in nature. A problem
with bureau statistics, national and local, is that they only record employment issues,
such as unfair dismissal, without making any reference to the gender, age, or
employment status, of the client (NACAB, 2004, p. 10). The face-to-face interviews with
advisers provided some preliminary indicators of clients characteristics, such as their
gender and the types of problems with which they approached bureaux. To fill these
gaps and generate a detailed profile of the CAB clients, a two-stage research design,
incorporating qualitative and quantitative research methodologies, was adopted.

Workplace and
employment
characteristics
263

ER
29,3

264

The purpose of the quantitative survey was two-fold. First, it was designed to
construct a profile of the users of the employment service of the CAB. Essentially, it
was a tick box questionnaire, on a single sheet, containing questions relating to the
clients age, gender, occupation, the nature of the problem, and whether the firm was
unionised. These criteria were then used to select clients for interview. Second, the
quantitative survey provided a means of identifying potential interviewees. This
method was adopted due to issues of client confidentiality, which prevented the
researcher from contacting clients directly. Indeed, one of the guiding principles of the
CAB is the provision of confidential advice (NACAB, 1999a).
A total of 240 survey questionnaires were completed. Five bureaux insisted on
completing the questionnaire on behalf of the researcher. The main reason for this was
client confidentiality. In contrast, three bureaux agreed to let the researcher transfer
information from clients files directly to the survey questionnaire. All quantitative
schedules were coded and entered onto SPSS by the researcher.
Regardless of who completed the quantitative schedule, the researcher or CAB
worker, all bureaux insisted on contacting clients, selected for interview by the
researcher, in the first instance. The contact details of clients agreeing to be
interviewed were forwarded to the researcher, who then arranged an interview, the
bulk of which took place in the clients home. A total of 40 in-depth, semi-structured,
tape-recorded, face-to-face interviews, lasting between 35 and 90 minutes, were
conducted. The discussion below is based almost exclusively on the face-to-face
interviews with CAB clients and reinforced by data from the quantitative survey and
the face-to-face interviews with CAB clients.
Workplace characteristics
Research suggests that clients approaching bureaux emanate predominantly from
non-union and small firms (Goodridge, 1994; NACAB, 2003, p. 14). Beyond these broad
statements, there is virtually no supporting evidence. A key aim of this section is to
evaluate the accuracy of such statements. Industrial relations in non-union firms have,
in recent years, been portrayed negatively and variously described as sweat shops,
bleak houses and black holes (Guest and Conway, 1999; Rainnie, 1989; Sisson,
1993). These terms generally refer to the lack of either a trade union presence, or
human resource management policies, or organisations that are both non-union and
have poor employment practices (Guest and Conway, 1999, p. 370). Dundon et al. (2005,
p. 316) however, caution against dismissing employee relations practices in non-union
firms as being inferior to those in unionised firms.
The quantitative survey[3] and face-to-face interviews revealed that 82 and 88 per
cent of CAB clients respectively worked in a non-union firm. This is consistent with the
views of bureau advisers, as 95 per cent reported that the majority of workers
approaching the CAB emanated from non-union firms. Advisers estimates of the
proportion of clients approaching them from a non-union firm ranged from between 85
and 99 per cent. For example, one adviser commented I should think that the majority
of people we see are not members of trades unions. The high proportion of workers
approaching the CAB emanating from non-union firms is consistent with studies
suggesting that employee relations in non-union firms are characterised by an absence
of human resource management and employee relations policies (Guest and Conway,
1999; Sisson, 1993).

The low level of workplace unionisation reflects the historically low levels of union
membership in the South East, where the research took place (Brook, 2002, p. 350).
Union membership has traditionally been low in the service sector, where the bulk of
CAB clients worked (Blyton and Turnbull, 2004, p. 10) (see Table I). Workers, based on
the quantitative survey, were concentrated in three sectors; real estate (20 per cent),
wholesale and retail (19 per cent) and hotels/restaurants (14 per cent). The
concentration of clients in services is unsurprising, as it reflects the high concentration
of service-based jobs in Greater London (Cully et al., 1999, p. 19; McOrmond, 2004,
p. 25).
Although the primary data reinforced the view that CAB clients worked
predominantly in non-union firms it contradicted claims that those firms tend to be
small. The organisations, for which CAB clients worked were extremely heterogeneous
in terms of size (see Table II).
The smallest business, a shop selling equipment, such as wheelchairs, to people
with disabilities typified many of the characteristics associated with small firms. It
employed three people, was family-owned, and the owner was the interviewees uncle,
who took an active part in the day-to-day management of the firm (Cully et al., 1999,
p. 253). There were, however, much larger organisations, such as a multi-national oil

Workplace and
employment
characteristics
265

Per cent
Servicesa
Manufacturing
Construction
Total
nb

Quantitative survey

Interviews with CAB clients

85.3
10.6
4.1
100.0
217

87.5
12.5
0
100.0
40

Notes: The industry categories are based on the Standard Industry Classification of Economic
Activities 1992 (SIC 92). Clients accounts of the industry sector in which they worked were coded
using SIC 92 and condensed into the above categories. aServices conflates a number of categories
including real estate, wholesale and retail, hotels/restaurants, education and private households with
employed persons; bn = 217 in relation to the quantitative sample, as 23 cases containing no data were
excluded. Percentages do not sum to 100 due to rounding.
Source: Quantitative survey of CAB clients and face-to-face interviews with CAB clients

Table I.
Industry sector of CAB
clients

Per cent
Micro 0-9
Small 10-49
Medium 50-249
Large 250
Total
n

Quantitative survey

Interviews with CAB clients

16.4
28.1
10.1
45.3
100
128

22.5
20.0
15.0
42.5
100
40

Notes: Definitions based on the Department of Trade and Industry categorisations (www.sbs.gov.uk)
Source: Quantitative survey, face-to-face interviews with CAB clients. n = 128 as 112 cases
containing no data were excluded. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding

Table II.
Size distribution of
businesses from which
CAB clients emanated

ER
29,3

266

exploration company employing over 50,000. Indeed, clients were equally likely to
emerge from a large firm as they were from a small firm. As expected, a large
percentage of cases were from small firms. These are typically non-union and have
been characterised as sweatshops. They also lack procedural formality and account for
most employment tribunal cases (Brook, 2002, p. 346; DTI, 2002a, Table 3.3; Rainnie,
1989). More surprising was that nearly 50 per cent of cases were from larger non-union
organisations. Since these workers have access to human resource specialists and trade
union representatives. Of course, some large firms lack effective union presence.
Furthermore, if the human resource function is concentrated on hard human resource
management strategies, then they may have neglected their traditional welfare role,
resulting in workers contacting non-traditional actors for employment advice (Blyton
and Turnbull, 2004; Meager et al., 2002, p. 179).
What the findings from this research suggests is the need for effective
representative structures in large and small firms, as a common factor in all of these
firms, regardless of size, was the absence of trade unions (see below). At the same time,
data from this research reinforces the concerns expressed in relation to the efficacy of
non-union voice mechanisms (Butler, 2005; Gollan, 2002; Terry, 1999).
Management attitudes towards trade unions
The attitude of management has been identified as an important factor influencing the
level of unionisation and the willingness of employees to unionise (Freeman, 1995,
p. 524; Upchurch et al., 2002, p. 138). Freeman and Rogers (1999, p. 86) suggest that the
biggest single deterrent to unionisation is management hostility. Resistance to trade
unions is particularly common in small firms with a working owner-manager, and
among non-union firms in Greenfield sites (Cully et al., 1999, p. 269). Management
opposition towards trade unions, however, is not confined to small firms. According to
Kersley et al. (2006, p. 115), 77 per cent of managers indicated that they would rather
consult their employees directly than through a union. A possible explanation for this
approach to managing employees is the influence of human resource management and
its emphasis on individualism in the employment relationship, which may take the
form of direct communications and hostility to trade unions (Blyton and Turnbull,
2004; Kelly, 1998, p. 62). According to the CAB clients interviewed management
displayed an outright opposition to unionisation, an approach that is often associated
with union suppression (Blyton and Turnbull, 2004). An interviewee, working in a
multi-national organisation as an operations manager, described how his employer
actively discouraged unions by limiting information relating to them:
[. . .] Its just from going around talking to people; its just the sense from within the
organisation. Youd never see any union literature anywhere in the building; on none of the
notice boards or anything like that. Theres no information about these unions are present at
this office location, these unions are here, you can join if you wish to join, call this number or
speak to this person, heres the local shop steward. Nothing, absolutely nothing . . . In fact, I
always got the impression that if I joined a union then it would be a black mark against me . . .

It was also reported that workers attempting to unionise would be sacked. For
example, an interviewee who worked as a warehouse manager commented:
Youd be out if you went to the union, youd just be out straightaway. Its that type of
company, middle ages sort of thing . . . no one would even dare do it, because they know they

would be just kissing goodbye to their job, simple as that . . . Its not the type of company to
tolerate a union, it had a market stall mentality, where it just did what it wanted, when it
wanted to do it, and if you suffered you suffered . . .

Three respondents, in separate organisations, and contrasting sectors, reported

attempts to unionise that were resisted by management. One employee, working for a
catering company on Eurostar, outlined a recruitment drive organised by the
Transport and Salaried Staff Association (TSSA) at the beginning of 1998. Despite 50
per cent of the workforce voting in favour of joining the union, the employer refused
recognition. As a result, the respondent and his colleagues relinquished their
membership. Another interviewee, working in a fitness centre, described how a couple
of years prior to the interview, an employee attempted to establish a union and was
sacked. The introduction of statutory union recognition in 1999 offers employees
seeking collective representation greater protection, as long as certain criteria are
satisfied (Dickens and Hall, 2003, p. 38). In this respect, the Employment Relations Act
(1999) may have made it more difficult for managers to suppress workers demands for
collective representation.
The approach of managers to trade unions, identified above, is consistent with what
has variously been described as macho management and hard HRM. Key features
of this management style, which are often associated with the late 1980s and 1990s, are
a reassertion of managements prerogative and opposition to trade unions (Kelly, 1998;
Blyton and Turnbull, 2004).
The existence and use of formal procedures
When problems arise in the workplace employees can attempt to resolve them by
activating internal grievance procedures. Interviews with CAB clients suggested a
high level of procedural formality with 60 per cent reporting that the organisation they
were in dispute with had a formal grievance and discipline procedure. In contrast, 38
per cent reported that there were no formal procedures in place. Similar studies have
suggested a much lower level of procedural formality with only 28 per cent of
employment tribunal applicants and 51 per cent of employers indicating that formal
procedures were in place for dealing with problems (DTI, 2002a, p. 21).
Formal procedures alone, however, do not guarantee employee protection, as they
may not be used, or where they are used they may be applied ineffectively. In a survey
of employment tribunal applicants 66 per cent indicated that procedures had only been
used in part or not at all (DTI, 2002a, p. 22). The findings from this research also
suggested that formal procedures were not always followed. For example, 42 per cent
of CAB clients, interviewed reported that procedures were in place for resolving
conflict, indicated they were not used to resolve their problem. For example, a personal
assistant to the director, working in a multi-national organisation, indicated that
formal procedures were in place, but were not followed in her case. She remarked:
Obviously, my ex-company dont go by the book, they dont do things how they should do
them.

These findings are consistent with the work of Earnshaw et al. (1998, p. ii). This
research concluded that the existence of dismissal procedures had little impact on the
likelihood of a firm being subjected to an employment tribunal claim, the crucial factor
being the consistent and effective application of procedures. The high incidence of

Workplace and
employment
characteristics
267

ER
29,3

268

non-union workers approaching bureaux also supports research suggesting that

grievance and disciplinary procedures are more likely to be followed in unionised firms
(DTI, 2002a, p. 23).
To promote the effective use of internal procedures, the Employment Act (2002)
requires employees, in certain circumstances, to raise grievances with their employer
before applying to a tribunal, and for tribunals to take this into consideration when
calculating awards (DTI, 2002b, p. 152). Superficially, the Act appears balanced.
However, it ignores the power imbalance in the employment relationship (Hyman,
1975; Kelly, 1998; Heery, 2000). As illustrated by this research, employers often ignored
workers requests to resolve the issue and used their power to simply dismiss people
without warning. Encouraging workers in this type of environment to pursue internal
procedures appears impractical. Even where procedures for resolving conflict exist,
their value, from an employee perspective, is likely to be limited if they have no
independent representative to advise them (Cully et al., 1999; DTI, 2001, p. 14).
Where unions are present they help to counteract management power, as the threat
of collective action, to protect the interests of the individual, or group, acts as a
deterrent. In contrast, where workers attempt to protect their interests individually, or
lack a collective identity, as was the case of most of the CAB clients, they are much
more exposed to employer power, as they do not have the resources to mobilise against
management making them much more vulnerable (Kelly, 1998, p. 4).

Informality
Despite the existence of formal procedures, 90 per cent of CAB clients interviewed
indicated that informal talks with their immediate manager were the main mechanism
for resolving workplace problems. This is consistent with the findings of Dundon et al.
(2005, p. 316) who also emphasis the importance of informal voice mechanisms.
A total of 70 per cent of the clients attempted to resolve their problem informally
prior to contacting the CAB. Of those, 89 per cent suggested that negotiations were
unproductive/unhelpful. The primary reason for this was that management was not
interested in discussing the issue with them. This finding reflects the power imbalance
in the employment relationship when employees attempt to negotiate individually and
directly with their employer (Heery, 2000, p. 39; Hepple, 1987, p. 13). Indeed, the
possession of power is associated with the ability of an individual, or group, to make a
difference to, or influence, management decision making and their working
environment (Hyman, 1975, p. 26). Clearly, the workers participating in this research
lacked power, as they were unable to make a difference to management, despite
attempting to do so. For example, a graphic designer commented:
They [employer] just didnt want to know. They said were a big company, youre a nobody,
basically get lost. . . in so many words that was the attitude . . .

Echoing this point, a receptionist described how her employer would vanish every
time she attempted to discuss her problem with him:
[. . .] he [employer] gave me the run around such a lot, and you couldnt get him, you couldnt
get him on the phone, you couldnt get him in the office, Id make an appointment and hed
break that . . . you got absolutely nowhere with him.

Discussions were described as going full circle as management were unwilling to

compromise, invariably they had already made their decision. For example, a manager
who appealed against his dismissal stressed:
[. . .] an appeal hearing was held and I presented new evidence at the appeal hearing. But the
decision was just upheld and I got the impression it was really a rubber stamp of the original
decision, it was something process wise they were duty bound to go through. There was no
way they were going to change the decision.

Workplace and
employment
characteristics
269

Employment-related characteristics of CAB clients

CAB literature suggests that clients seeking advice and support emerge from the more
disadvantaged sections of society (NACAB, 1999a, p. 4). This section sets out to
determine whether this extends to workers seeking employment advice. In order to do
this the discussion focuses on the occupational and employment status of clients, along
with their qualifications and earnings.
Occupational status
Table III reveals that CAB clients emanate from a diverse range of occupational
backgrounds. The CAB has a broad appeal cutting across occupational boundaries,
very much like the early general unions. The high concentration of clients in
elementary occupations, such as cleaning, catering and security reflects the low level of
unionisation within this group (Brook, 2002, p. 350). Workers in these occupations are
unlikely to have access to effective representative structures, and may lack the skills,
confidence, and power to represent themselves. Their inability to influence
management actions is indicative of their vulnerability and powerlessness within
the employment relationship (Hyman, 1975). Indeed, workers in the elementary
occupations were least likely to have qualifications (Begum, 2004, p. 227). In this
environment, workers are likely to seek alternative sources of advice from
Per cent
Interviews with CAB
Quantitative survey
clients
Managers and senior officials
Professional occupations
Associate professional and technical occupations
Administrative and secretarial occupations
Skilled trades occupations
Personal services occupations
Sales and customer service occupations
Process, plant and machine operatives
Elementary occupations
Total
n

10.1
5.9
8.7
15.2
14.2
11.0
9.6
5.0
19.8
100.0
217

10.0
10.0
10.0
20.0
2.5
17.5
5.0
7.5
17.5
100
40

Notes: Occupational categories based on SOC20. n = 217 as 23 cases containing no data were
excluded. Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding
Source: Face-to-face interviews with CAB clients and the quantitative survey of CAB clients

Table III.
Occupational
backgrounds of CAB
clients

ER
29,3

270

non-traditional organisations, such as the CAB. This finding supports the notion of the
representation gap, which bureaux are helping to bridge by offering advice and
information to workers without union representation (Towers, 1997).
In contrast, professional workers were one of the occupations least likely to
approach the CAB. This may reflect the high level of trade union density and
educational attainment within this group, and that the professional occupations were
most likely to have a degree, or equivalent, as their highest qualification. Consequently,
professionals are likely to have access to representative structures and posses the
confidence to represent their own interests, reducing the need to approach
organisations such as the CAB (Begum, 2004, p. 231; Brook, 2002, p. 350).
Given the low level of union membership within the sales and customer service
occupations, it was surprising that people within these occupations did not feature
more prominently. One of the characteristics of people working in sales and customer
service occupations is that they are young (Begum, 2004, p. 230; Brook, 2002, p. 350).
Consequently, these workers are likely to be more mobile, preferring to find another job
than pursuing a grievance. The young age of people working in sales occupations may
also suggest that the CAB, like trade unions, also has difficulties in appealing to young
workers.
Employment status and histories of CAB clients
The quantitative and qualitative data revealed that 84 and 85 per cent of CAB clients
respectively were employed on a full-time basis. Union membership is also
considerably higher among full-time employees than part-time employees, reflecting
another area of overlap between CAB clients and union members (Sneade, 2001, p. 437).
The employment status of CAB clients also mirrored those of employment tribunal
applicants, with 84 per cent being employed on a full-time basis (DTI, 2002a, Table 3.2).
CAB clients also demonstrated considerable stability, with 72 per cent working for
the firm with which they were in dispute for more than a year. There was, however,
enormous variety in relation to clients length of service, the longest being an airport
cleaner, employed for 27 years, and the shortest an administrator employed for one
month. The average length of employment for CAB clients was 5.8 years. The mean for
employment tribunal applicants was seven years (DTI, 2002a, Table 3.2). CAB clients
also mirror trade union members in that contact with bureaux, like union membership,
was greatest among clients with the longest service histories (Sneade, 2001, p. 438).
Qualifications and earnings
A total of 68 per cent of CAB clients reported having formal qualifications and 32 per
cent reported that they had no formal educational qualifications. The low level of
educational achievement is consistent with research suggesting that more than a third
of UK workers have low skills (Department for Education and Skills, 2002, p. 4). In
addition, this research contained a high proportion of workers employed in elementary
occupations which contain the greatest number of people with no qualifications
(Begum, 2004, p. 232). There was not only considerable variety in relation to the
possession of qualifications, but also the type of qualifications. These ranged from an
administrator with a Pitman typing qualification to an operations manager, working
for a multi-national organisation, with a doctorate in environmental biology.

The salary range of CAB clients was also diverse, ranging from a part-time cleaner
earning 3,640 per annum gross, to a manager earning 60,000 per annum. The
average annual gross income of CAB clients working full-time was 17,051. This is
less than the average annual gross earnings of full-time employees, 20,919, for the tax
year 1998-1999, which broadly corresponds to the period in which the face-to-face
interviews occurred. The average annual earnings of CAB clients is also considerably
lower than the average for the London region (27,040) where clients participating in
this survey worked. There was greater consistency between the average earnings of
part-time workers participating in this research (5,976) and the national average,
which was 6,676 for the tax year 1998-1999 (Nichol and Bird, 1999, p. 642). The
contrast between the earnings of full-time employees participating in this research, and
the average for London, can partly be explained by the fact that workers employed in
the higher paying occupations, such as finance, feature less prominently in this
research (Nichol and Bird, 1999, p. 650).
Certainly, clients were vulnerable, in that they worked predominantly in
non-union firms, without the power to challenge management decisions, which
exposed them to arbitrary treatment by management (see earlier). However, the
profiles of CAB clients, in this research, do not conform to the notion of vulnerable
workers, typically associated with part-time, casual or temporary employees (Meager
et al., 2002, p. 211). CAB clients demonstrated considerable employment stability and
the majority were employed on a full-time, permanent basis, with at least one
qualification. This is not to deny that vulnerable workers contact bureaux, however,
greater recognition needs to be given to the heterogeneous employment characteristics
of CAB clients. The generalist nature of the advice agency may help to explain its wide
client base and appeal.
The employment status and stability of the clients participating in this research,
may explain why they featured prominently, as these employees are likely to have
more to lose in terms of entitlements than workers with a more transient work history.
Therefore, they are possibly going to be more motivated to seek help. It could also be
that the most vulnerable workers receive the least protection, because they do not have
the necessary qualifying period necessary to acquire employment rights. As a result,
their contact, with the CAB, is likely to be of a one-off nature making it difficult to
identify and contact these clients.
Personal characteristics of CAB clients
There is considerable information on the personal characteristics of trade union
members and employment tribunal applicants, but a paucity of information on the
workers contacting the CAB (Brook, 2002, p. 1; Hicks and Palmer, 2004, p. 100). This
section overcomes this gap in our knowledge by identifying the gender, age, and
ethnicity of clients approaching the CAB with employment problems.
Gender profile
Profiling clients by gender revealed that women were just as likely as men to contact
the CAB. The quantitative survey revealed that 53 and 47 per cent of CAB clients were
men and women respectively. This is consistent with the gender split of the workforce
as a whole, which is roughly equally divided between men and women (Kersley et al.,
2006, p. 25). The 40 face-to-face interviews with CAB clients, revealed a slightly

Workplace and
employment
characteristics
271

ER
29,3

272

different profile, with 60 per cent being female and 40 per cent male. A recent survey of
callers to the Low Pay Units employment advice helpline reported a similar profile,
60.4 per cent of callers were women and 39.6 were men (Faichnie, 2000, p. 5). These
findings are consistent with the work of Meager et al. (2002, p. 183), who suggest that
women are more likely to seek advice when confronted with an employment problem.
It is possible that the women approached to participate in the research were more open
and receptive about discussing their problems. The higher concentration of women in
this research and in the Low Pay Units survey, questions the assumption that those in
low paid occupations will not challenge management decisions or pursue their rights.
Often, the assumption is that only those in high paid jobs, with a stable employment
history, will take action as they have most to lose.
The gender profile of CAB clients was similar to that of trade union members,
in that both sexes were just as likely to contact the respective agencies. Take-up
of union membership among women has generally been lower than among men,
though density levels for men and women are now identical at 29 per cent (Brook,
2002, p. 1; Hicks and Palmer, 2004, p. 100; Waddington and Whitston, 1997, p. 524).
There was greater contrast, however, between CAB clients and employment
tribunal applicants, with 60 per cent of tribunal applicants being men (DTI, 2002a,
Table 2.1). It may be that women, particularly where they have children, do not proceed
to a full hearing, because of the protracted nature of the tribunal process, instead
choosing to settle, or do nothing. The often lower status and salary of female
occupations may also act as a deterrent to pursuing an employment tribunal claim.
Age
Workers of all ages contacted the CAB for employment advice. The quantitative
survey and face-to-face interviews revealed similar age ranges of between 17 and 70,
and 21-67 respectively, which was remarkably similar to that of employment tribunal
applicants, which ranged from 16-65 (DT1, 2002a, Table 3.1). The quantitative survey
data revealed an average age of 38 while CAB clients interviewed had a higher average
age of 44.6.
Older workers are more likely to contact the CAB than younger workers, with 57.5
per cent of clients interviewed being over 40. Research also suggests that union
membership is highest among older workers, 35 per cent of employees aged 50 and
over were union members, compared with just 11 per cent of employees aged 16-24
(Kersley et al., 2006, p. 109; Hicks and Palmer, 2004, p. 101). Likewise, employment
tribunal applicants also tend to be older, with approximately two-thirds over 35 (DTI,
2002a, Table 3.1). Waddington and Whitson (1997, p. 535) suggest that older workers
are more likely than younger workers to contact a union and seek protection because
they have more to lose financially. For example, employees earnings increase with age,
reaching a maximum of 441.4 per week for 40 to 49-year-olds, but declining thereafter
(Nichol and Bird, 1999, p. 651).
Knowledge/awareness of employment rights might also be greater among older
workers because of their longer work histories. Research conducted by Meager et al.
(2002, p. 32) suggests that there is no distinctive pattern of self-assessed
awareness/knowledge increasing with age, though confidence appears higher among
older respondents. Relatedly, levels of informed awareness (measured by whether or

not the individual could name any piece of employment legislation), peaked in the 36-45
age group, with those in the youngest and oldest groups the least informed.
Ethnicity
The ethnic profile of CAB clients, derived from the quantitative survey, revealed that
72 per cent[4] were white and 28 non-white[5]. These figures are remarkably similar to
the face-to-face interviews conducted with CAB clients, which indicated that 73 per
cent of respondents were white and 27 per cent non-white. The high proportion of
respondents participating in this research categorised as non-white can be explained
by the greater concentration of ethnic minorities in urban areas, such as Greater
London, which was the focus of this research (Twomey, 2001, p. 30).
Although union density was marginally higher for white workers than for all other
ethnic workers combined, 29 and 26 per cent respectively (Brook, 2002, p. 346; Hicks
and Palmer, 2004, p. 332), the latter may feel more comfortable contacting the CAB
because they have a higher proportion of advisers than trade unions from different
ethnic backgrounds. At the same time, bureaux provide advice in a range of languages
including; Hindi, Urdu and Somali (NACAB, 1999b, p. 8). It is NACAB policy for
bureaux to reflect the ethnic mix of the local community. This helps to overcome
problems of representativeness, which is an issue confronting many trade unions.
CAB clients attitudes towards trade unions
To explain why workers contact the CAB for employment advice, the previous sections
focused on identifying their workplace and personal characteristics. This section
concentrates on the attitudes of CAB clients; are they individualists with attitudes
predisposing them to contact the CAB? Do they possess an ingrained hostility towards
trade unions, preferring to resolve their problems through non-union channels? Do
CAB clients possess strong beliefs in their ability to influence their own workplace
problems? To evaluate this, the discussion below focuses on CAB clients attitudes
towards trade unions.
The level of trade union membership
The quantitative survey and face-to-face interviews indicated that 85[6] and 95 per cent
of CAB clients respectively were not members of a trade union. In addition, 62 per cent
of CAB clients interviewed reported never having been union members. The rise in
never-membership is well documented. However, the number of workers who have
never been a trade union member, identified in this research, is considerably higher
than those reported in the Workplace Employee Relations Survey, 1998 and 2006,
which recorded levels of 45 and 49 per cent respectively (Cully et al., 1999; Kersley et al.,
2006). The concentration of never-membership in this research may reflect the
service occupations of the participants, which has traditionally experienced low levels
of union membership (Kersley et al., 2006). A third of clients reported being past
members of trade unions, such as the General, Municipal and Boilermakers Union, the
National Union of Seafarers (now the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport
Workers) and EQUITY. These findings echo research revealing that 78 per cent of
employment tribunal applicants were not trade union members (DTI, 2002a, Table 3.2).
In this respect, CAB clients and employment tribunal applicants are
remarkably similar.

Workplace and
employment
characteristics
273

ER
29,3

274

Attitudes to joining a trade union

Evidence of non-union membership alone provides insufficient information to conclude
that CAB clients approached bureaux because they are individualists with anti-union
attitudes. This is particularly the case, as indicated earlier, where structural factors
impede unionisation, as it could be that clients possess favourable attitudes towards
collectivising, but the environment of the firm makes this problematic. Indeed, 72 per
cent of CAB clients interviewed reported that they would consider joining a trade
union, which supports research identifying a desire among non-union workers to act
collectively (Bacon, 1999, p. 13; Dickson et al., 1988; Freeman and Rogers, 1999, p. 81;
Gollan, 2002, p. 320).
CAB clients, expressing an interest in joining a trade union, often did so because
they were viewed as mechanisms by which employees could resolve and air their
grievances. Respondents also viewed unions as providing collective support, and
protection in the event of a workplace problem. For example, one interviewee, working
for a modelling agency, remarked:
Yes. I think its good, [joining a union] because you get a kind of back-up. If you have a union
youre not on your own, you have a group of people who have the same problems and
experiences as you . . . As an individual its difficult to fight big organisations, whereas if you
come as a group its safety in numbers.

CAB clients also identified unions as ensuring procedural equity, acting as a check
against the arbitrary use of management power. Echoing this, a former member of the
actors union EQUITY, commented:
I would have gone straight to the union . . . From past experience, they get things done and I
think when theres a union there management tend to tread a bit more carefully, they look into
procedures a bit closer than they would normally.

Just under a fifth of clients suggested that their problem would either have been
resolved at an earlier stage, or would not have occurred, if there had been a union
presence. Developing this point, a respondent working in the information technology
sector, reported:
[. . .] if thered been a union I doubt that they wouldve tried the tactics they tried, because they
wouldve known that I would be able to find out very quick that they were empty threats . . .
They [employer] were trying to take advantage of my ignorance and they assumed, rightly,
that I wouldnt know my legal position, but they assumed wrongly that I wouldnt be able to
find out.

These findings are consistent with research identifying the reasons why workers join
trade unions (Waddington and Kerr, 1999, p. 195; Waddington and Whitson, 1997,
p. 521). At the same time, they reinforce studies on the role and functions of trade
unions, such as a counterbalance against management power (Freeman and Rogers,
1999, p. 79; Heery, 2000). Indeed, Knight and Latreille (2000, p. 546) suggest that
employers are likely to be more circumspect in the use of workplace sanctions where
union density is high. Relatedly, Meager et al. (2002, p. 179) suggest that union
members are less likely than non-union members to experience employment problems.
This may be attributed to the unions ability to influence the design and operation of
procedures, and a higher level of awareness/knowledge of rights among union
members, placing employees in a stronger position to challenge management

(Meager et al., 2002, p. 207). Similarly, Harcourt et al. (2004) suggest that a union
presence is associated with greater legislative compliance, offering workers greater
protection from discriminatory treatment. By collectivising workers are better placed
to counteract managements power, as they are in a stronger position to influence
management actions and decisions (Hyman, 1975, p. 27).

Workplace and
employment
characteristics

Willingness to seek trade union help

In addition to the majority of CAB clients indicating that they would have joined a
trade union, 93 per cent reported that if there had been a trade union present when their
problem occurred, they would have approached the union for advice. Again,
demonstrating willingness among CAB clients to have their problem resolved
collectively rather than individually. Indeed, a number of respondents described
examples of workers attempting to unionise, only to be resisted by management (see
earlier). One interviewee, working for a high street retailer, reported:

275

If there was one [union] in place I wouldve been a member and I wouldve certainlyve used
them as the first port of call.

Similarly, another respondent, working as a receptionist, commented:

Absolutely, yeah, theyre the first people I would have gone to. But in my circumstances there
was nobody to go to, nothing was in place.

This is consistent with the findings of Gallie (1996), who argues that a prime reason why
people do not join is because there is no union presence in the workplace. Findings from
this research support the work of academics, who argue that employees are not becoming
less collective in their work orientations; it is just that the work environment is not
conducive to collectivising (Kelly, 1998; Williams, 1997). Or put another way structural
factors and not attitudinal, as illustrated by this research, explain why workers contact
the CAB and not trade unions when they encounter employment problems.
Conclusions
This article has provided a detailed insight into the workplace, employment and
personal characteristics of CAB clients, along with their attitudes towards
collectivising. The purpose of this approach was to establish whether workers
contacting the CAB were different from those associated with trade union membership
and whether the use of the CAB employment service was a function of workplaces or
workers.
The workplaces from which workers originated were predominantly non-union and
mirrored those non-union workplaces which have been characterized as a black holes
and bleak houses (Guest and Conway, 1999; Sisson, 1993). Although workers were
just as likely to emerge from large firms as from small firms, what was surprising was
that nearly 50 per cent of cases were from large firms. Internally, the management style
was often characterised by a disregard for procedural formality, hostility towards
trade unions and a harsh approach to dealing with employees. This manifested itself in
a reluctance to discuss the employees problem, or to follow formal procedures where
they existed. The ineffective application of workplace procedures, combined with the
absence of trade unions, removed key mechanisms for ensuring that employees are
treated equitably. Due to these structural factors the internal resolution of grievances

ER
29,3

276

by workers may be problematic. Consequently, CAB clients had to resolve their

problem beyond the workplace. The data from this research suggests that workers
approach the CAB primarily because of structural factors, such as the absence of trade
unions and the lack of, or ineffective use of, dispute resolution mechanisms. This is
consistent with research identifying deficiencies associated with non-union voice
mechanisms (Butler, 2005; Gollan, 2002).
The personal characteristics of CAB clients revealed considerable heterogeneity, in
terms of age, length of service, salary and qualifications. In this respect, the appeal of
the CAB was extremely broad, attracting both vulnerable and more able workers.
There was also considerable overlap between the users of the CAB and trade union
members in terms of their age, gender, ethnic background and length of service.
Therefore, CAB clients were remarkably similar to trade unionists. Given the
similarities, CAB clients were not seeking an alternative to trade unions, as their
personal and employment profile matched those of union members. In addition, their
attitudes point to receptiveness to unions, not hostility. What CAB clients were looking
for was protection, advice and representation, functions traditionally provided by trade
unions.
A further objective of this article was to establish whether the use of the
employment service of the CAB can be attributed to attitudinal factors. Although the
majority of interviewees worked in non-union organizations, there was virtually no
evidence to suggest that CAB clients were anti-union, or viewed unions as irrelevant.
Indeed, CAB clients indicated that they would consider joining a trade union and that
they would have contacted a union about their problem if there were one present.
Reasons for not being a union member were not rooted in predisposed attitudes, such
as an ingrained anti-unionism or individualism. This research suggests that there was
a desire to challenge management and act collectively, but internal organisational
factors made this problematic. Workers contacting the CAB did so primarily because
of structural factors rather than because they had a proclivity to act individually.
Notes
1. In January 2003 the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux (NACAB) adopted the
name Citizens Advice. However, throughout this paper the old operating name NACAB will
be used (NACAB, 2003).
2. During the fieldwork two bureaux withdrew from the project due to work pressures.
3. This figure has been arrived at by excluding those cases, 117, where no response was
recorded for this questions. Some bureaux refused to allow the researcher to conduct the
interview at this stage of the research because of issues of client confidentiality.
Consequently, CAB advisers completed some of the quantitative questionnaires who may
have forgotten to ask the question. It is also plausible that the client may not have known
whether the firm was unionised.
4. This figure has been arrived at by excluding the 85 cases where no information on the
clients ethnic background was provided. Some clients may have refused to provide this
information, or the adviser completing the form may have forgotten to ask this question.
5. The non-white category is a composite category including, Black, Asian, and Chinese
respondents.
6. This figure has been arrived at by excluding those cases, 156, where no information was
provided in relation to this question.

References
Abbott, B. (1998), The new shop stewards the Citizens Advice Bureaux?, Employee Relations,
Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 610-27.
Abbott, B. (2004), Worker representation through the Citizens Advice Bureaux, in Healy, G.,
Heery, E., Taylor, P. and Brown, W. (Eds), The Future of Worker Representation, Palgrave
Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 245-63.
Abbott, B. (2006), Determining the significance of the Citizens Advice Bureau as an industrial
relations actor, Employee Relations, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 435-48.
Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (2001), Annual Report, 2000-01, ACAS, London.
Bacon, N. (1999), Union derecognition and the new human relations: a steel industry case study,
Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Begum, N. (2004), Employment by occupation and industry, Labour Market Trends, Vol. 112
No. 6, pp. 227-34.
Bellemare, G. (2000), End users: actors in the industrial relations system?, British Journal of
Industrial Relations, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 383-405.
Blyton, P. and Turnbull, P. (2004), The Dynamics of Employee Relations, Palgrave Macmillan,
Basingstoke.
Brook, K. (2002), Trade Union Membership: An Analysis of Data from the Autumn 2001 Labour
Force Survey, DTI, London, pp. 343-53.
Butler, P. (2005), Non-union employee representation: explaining the efficacy of the voice
process, Employee Relations, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 272-88.
Cully, M., Woodland, S., OReilly, A. and Dix, G. (1999), Britain at Work, Routledge, London.
Department for Education and Skills (2002), Developing Workforce Skills: Piloting a New
Approach, HM Treasury, London, April.
Dickens, L. and Hall, M. (2003), Labour law and industrial relations: a new settlement?, in
Edwards, P. (Ed.), Industrial Relations Theory and Practice, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 124-56.
Dickson, T., McLachlan, H.V., Prior, P. and Swales, K. (1988), Big blue and the unions: IBM,
individualism and trade union strategy, Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 2 No. 4,
pp. 506-20.
DTI (2001), Resolution: Improving Dispute Resolution in Britain, Department of Trade and
Industry, London.
DTI (2002a), Findings from the 1998 Survey of Employment Tribunal Applications (Survey of
Applicants and Employers), Employment Relations Research Series 13, Department of
Trade and Industry, London.
DTI (2002b), Moving Forward: The Report of the Employment Tribunal System Taskforce,
Department of Trade and Industry, London.
Dundon, T., Wilkinson, A., Marchington, M. and Ackers, A. (2005), The management of voice in
non-union organizations: managers perspectives, Employee Relations, Vol. 27 No. 3,
pp. 307-19.
Earnshaw, J., Goodman, J., Harrison, R. and Marchington, M. (1998), Industrial tribunals,
workplace disciplinary procedures and employment practice, Employment Relations
Research, Series 2, DTI, London.
Employment Gazette (1994), The 1992 Survey of Industrial Tribunal Applications, Employment
Department, London, pp. 21-8.
Faichnie, C. (2000), Easier Said than Done, Enforcing Rights at Work, Greater Manchester Low
Pay Unit, Manchester.

Workplace and
employment
characteristics
277

ER
29,3

278

Freeman, R.B. (1995), The future of unions in decentralized collective bargaining systems:
US and UK unionism in an era of crisis, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 33
No. 4, pp. 519-36.
Freeman, R.B. and Rogers, J. (1999), What Workers Want, ILR Press/Cornell University Press,
Ithaca, NY.
Gallie, D. (1996), Changing Forms of Employment: Organisations, Skills and Gender, Routledge,
London.
Gollan, P. (2002), So whats the news? Management strategies towards non-union employee
representation at News International, Industrial Relations Journal, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 316-31.
Guest, D. and Conway, N. (1999), Peering into the black hole: the downside of the new employment
relations in the UK, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 367-89.
Goodridge, C. (1994), In work out of pocket, Occasional Paper 5, National Association of
Citizens Advice Bureaux, London.
Harcourt, M., Wood, G. and Harcourt, S. (2004), Do unions affect employer compliance with the
law? New Zealand evidence for age discrimination, British Journal of Industrial Relations,
Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 527-41.
Hartley, J.F. (1992), Joining a trade union, in Hartley, J.F. and Stephenson, G.M. (Eds),
Employment Relations, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 163-83.
Heery, E. (2000), Trade unions and the management of reward, in White, G. and Drucker, J.
(Eds), Reward Management: A Critical Text, Routledge, London, pp. 54-83.
Hepple, B. (1987), Industrial Tribunals, Justice, London.
Hicks, S. and Palmer, T. (2004), Trade union membership: estimates from the Autumn 2003
labour force survey, Labour Market Trends, Vol. 112 No. 3, pp. 99-101.
Hyman, R. (1975), Industrial Relations: A Marxist Introduction, Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Kelly, J. (1998), Rethinking Industrial Relations, Mobilisation, Collectivism and Long Waves,
Routledge, London.
Kersley, B., Alpin, C., Forth, J., Bryson, A., Bewley, H., Dix, G. and Oxenbridge, S. (2006), Inside
the Workplace: Findings from the 2004 Employment Relations Survey, Routledge, London.
Kessler, S. and Bayliss, F. (1995), Contemporary British Industrial Relations, Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Knight, K.G. and Latreille, P.L. (2000), Discipline, dismissals and complaints to employment
tribunals, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 533-55.
McOrmond, T. (2004), Changes in working trends over the past decade, Labour Market Trends,
Vol. 112 No. 1, pp. 25-35.
Meager, N., Tyers, C., Perryman, S., Rick, J. and Willison, R. (2002), Awareness, Knowledge and
Exercise of Individual Employment Rights, Employment Relations Research, Series 15,
Department of Trade and Industry, London.
NACAB (1999a), Annual Report, 1998-99, National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux,
London.
NACAB (1999b), Trends and Statistics in Citizens Advice Bureaux, 1997-98, National
Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux, London.
NACAB (2003), Annual Report, 2002-03, National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux, London.
NACAB (2004), Annual Report, 2003-04, National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux, London.
NACAB (2005), NACAB Annual Report, 2004-05, National Association of Citizens Advice
Bureaux, London.

Nichol, C. and Bird, D. (1999), Patterns of pay: results of the 1999 new earnings survey, Labour
Market Trends, Vol. 107 No. 12, pp. 641-52.
Osterman, P., Kochan, T.A., Locke, R. and Piore, M.J. (2001), Working in America, a Blueprint for
the New Labour Movement, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Rainnie, A. (1989), Industrial Relations in Small Firms: Small Isnt Beautiful, Routledge, London.
Sisson, K. (1993), In search of HRM, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 201-10.
Sneade, A. (2001), Trade union membership 1999-2000: an analysis of data from the certification
officer and the labour force survey, Labour Market Trends, Vol. 109 No. 9, pp. 433-56.
Terry, M. (1999), Systems of collective employee representation in non-union firms in the UK,
Industrial Relations Journal, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 16-30.
Towers, B. (1997), The Representation Gap, Change and Reform in the British American
Workplace, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Twomey, B. (2001), Labour market participation of ethnic groups, Labour Market Trends,
Vol. 109, pp. 29-41.
Upchurch, M., Danford, A. and Richardson, M. (2002), Research note: profiles of union
workplace representatives: evidence from three unions in south-west England, Industrial
Relations Journal, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 127-40.
Waddington, J. and Kerr, A. (1999), Trying to stem the flow: union membership turnover in the
public sector, Industrial Relations Journal, Vol. 30 No. 33, pp. 184-96.
Waddington, J. and Whitston, C. (1997), Why do people join unions in a period of membership
decline?, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 515-46.
Williams, S. (1997), The nature of some recent trade union modernisation policies in the UK,
British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 495-514.
Further reading
Abbott, B. (1993), Small firms and trade unions in services in the 1990s, Industrial Relations
Journal, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 308-17.
Clark, J. and Winchester, D. (1994), Management and trade unions, in Sisson, K. (Ed.), Personnel
Management: A Comprehensive Guide to Theory and Practice in Britain, Blackwell,
Oxford, pp. 694-723.
Sisson, K. (1994), Personnel management: paradigms, practice and prospects, in Sisson, K. (Ed.),
Personnel Management: A Comprehensive Guide to Theory and Practice in Britain,
Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 3-52.
About the author
Brian Abbott is a Senior Lecturer at Kingston University in Industrial Relations and
Organisational Behaviour. To date, he has researched a range of topics including employee
relations in small firms, compulsory competitive tendering and the role of new industrial
relations actors. His current research interests build on his PhD, which focused on the
employment activities of the Citizens Advice Bureaux, particularly their employment advice.
Developing this theme his main area of research currently focuses on the role of civil society
organisations within the employment relationship. Of particular interest is the effectiveness of
non-traditional actors in providing workers with voice. Dr Abbott can be contacted at:
B.Abbott@Kingston.ac.uk
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Workplace and
employment
characteristics
279