Emotion management and solidarity in the workplace: A call for a new research agenda

an article by Jordan McKenzie and Roger Patulny (University of Wollongong, Australia), Rebecca E Olson (University of Queensland, Australia), Alberto Bellocchi (Queensland University of Technology, Australia) and Kathy A Mills (Australian Catholic University, Australia) published in The Sociological Review Volume 67 Issue 3 (May 2019)

Abstract

Research focusing on the management of emotion features prominently in studies of employee attrition, gender inequality and workplace satisfaction, but rarely in research on worker solidarity.

Against a backdrop of increasing individualisation within late modern society, research about workplace management of emotion has become bifurcated along sociological or organisational psychology lines.

Within the sociology literature, management of emotion is theorised as a commercialised, relational and (often) alienating experience. Within organisational psychology literature and research, the emphasis is on harnessing individual traits and skills (e.g. emotional intelligence) to regulate emotions for increased productivity and employee retention.

In this article, the authors call for a new research agenda that prioritises the examination of solidarity between workers alongside the analysis of emotion management. This call is based in a critical reading of the sociological and organisational psychology scholarship addressing the management of emotions.

Through the example of teaching work, the authors provide a critique of scholarship on workplace strategies that promote highly individualised understandings of managing emotions through resilience training and other simplified techniques. They argue that workplaces should recognise the dangers of uncritically adopting individualised strategies for managing emotions, and propose a research agenda that seeks to understand how emotion management can affect worker solidarity.

---

Social policy and transitions to training and work for disabled young people in the United Kingdom: neo-liberalism for better and for worse?

an article by Scott Yates (De Montfort University, Leicester, UK) and Alan Roulstone (Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK) published in Disability & Society Volume 28 Issue 4 (June 2013)

Abstract

Although New Labour distanced itself from the neo-liberal ‘underclass’ discourses of its predecessors, its approach to disabled young people maintained key aspects of neo-liberalism, particularly an emphasis on individuals’ human capital, aspirations and self-investments as causes of and solutions to disabled young people’s unemployment.

This is also apparent in early Coalition government statements.

Since the 1990s, policies have focused on providing individually-tailored advice, developing individuals’ skills, and motivating appropriate self-investment.

We examine recent evidence that highlights a number of problems with this focus. Notably,

• it entails a simplistic and individualised notion of ‘barriers’ to employment that cannot account for the complex impacts of disablement and inequality;
• moves towards open-market models of training and work support create perverse incentives that divert support away from those most in need;
• employment success is dependent on unpredictable local opportunity structures; and
• the focus on paid employment undermines other social contributions made by disabled young people.

---