Industrial Relations, Comparative Research and the Language Challenge

1558

The late Roger Blanpain, a leading figure in comparative labour law and industrial relations, has posited that “one of the main difficulties, which presents a real pitfall for the comparative scholar, is the fact that identical words in different languages might have different meanings, while the corresponding terms may embrace wholly different realities” (2010: 16).

Language does indeed have much bearing on comparative research, for contrasting outlandish notions entails knowledge of both the systems under scrutiny and the language of the countries covered. This holds even truer in the domains referred to above, where most terminology identifying practices and institutions is frequently crafted out of negotiation processes. After all, the battle of ideas is often carried out through a battle of words (Hyman, 2007a) instantiated in collective bargaining, social dialogue and concertation.

shutterstock_332846459 As one might expect, comparative research in labour law and industrial relations is first and foremost confronted with translation challenges. Expressing concepts which pertain to another legal system in a different language is a stiff task, for they are context-bound and only rarely value-neutral. The relevant literature is replete with instances of ambiguous translations in these fields. By way of example, it would be highly misleading, though it is often done, to translate the Italian notion of ricollocazione as outplacement. Outplacement refers to measures put in place to head off workers’ dismissal and exit from the labour market while still at work. Conversely, relevant legislation (Decreto Legislativo n. 150 of 14 September 2015) refers to ricollocazione as a set of targeted initiatives implemented to help workers who have been out of work for at least four months to re-enter the market, also by means of intensive job-search support. Accordingly, the English expression job reintegration is put forward, for it seems to better convey the Italian notion of ricollocazione (i.e. returning to work following a period of unemployment through targeted support). Still on the Italian – English pair, caporale is another term that might be ambiguous when translated into English. In Italy’s industrial relations system, this wording denotes individuals who illegally hire labourers to employ them in agriculture or in the building sector. In the UK, gangmasters – which is the formulation that is usually adopted to render the Italian notion – would perform the same activity. However, following the passing of the 2004 Gangmaster Licensing Act, gangmasters in the UK can now do their work legally, as long as they have a license. This is far from the case in Italy, where the work of caporali is still forbidden by the law. For this reason, unauthorised gangmasters would be a far better translation for caporali, as this formulation helps to draw a distinction between licensed and unlicensed labour providers.

Arguably, examples of misleading renderings when comparing labour law and industrial relations practices abound also in other languages. Hyman (2005) recalls that translating shop steward – i.e. a union rep appointed by members in the workplace – into French would be complicated, for no equivalent exists in the French reality and neither délégué syndical nor délégué du personnel would do, for these terms denote different forms of representation. The rendering of context-based industrial relations terms would be arduous the other way around, too. For instance, conveying the meaning of cadre or prud’homme in English might be challenging, because of the peculiar structuring of France’s technical and managerial workforce.

Similarly, Singam and Koch (1994) take the views that the German Gewerkschaft is not the same as the British “union”. However, while the former is usually (and functionally) translated as “trade union”, this rendering fails to convey the particular organisation of the German bodies representing workers. The same can be said of the German Arbeitgeberverban, which is translated as “employers’ association” into English, though some major differences can be detected as regards their organization. As the authors postulate, the examples below point out “the inherent difficulties of translating culture-specific terms and the limits placed on translation” in the domains examined (Singam and Koch: 1994, 1).

shutterstock_204451612Compounding the picture are other language issues, which of course are not exclusive to the fields under examination but might hamper understanding of industrial relations and labour law practices cross-nationally all the same. One is that of faix amis, that is similar words in different languages that only apparently convey the same meaning. One might note for example that the English syndicate is not the same as the Italian sindacato. The former can refer to any organizations combined to promote a common interest, while the latter – which has the same meaning as the English ‘trade unions’ – is concerned with an association of workers in a trade, group of trades, or profession, formed to protect and further their rights and interests (Oxford Dictionary, 2016). Another textbook example of faix amis would be the French salarié, which means any employee, whereas in English a salaried worker is a white-collar worker and their pay is a salary (while salaire in French is a wage). Conversely, a white-collar worker in French is employé, while in English anyone employed is an employee.

Besides translation challenges strictly speaking and issues resulting from false friends, the use of different “Englishes” – among which is that used as Eurospeak – might also affect our appreciation of non-national institutions in comparative labour law and industrial relations. For instance, what is known as direct discrimination in the UK – i.e. when someone is treated less favourably because the person belongs to one of the protected groups – is frequently referred to as disparate treatment in the US (Blanpain et al., 2007). Conversely, positive discrimination – i.e. giving an advantage to those groups in society that are often treated unfairly because of their racesex – is known as reverse discrimination or affirmative action across the pond (ibid.). Still, compassionate leave, that in the UK is time off from work to deal with the death of a close relative, can be termed bereavement leave in the US.

shutterstock_120673561The examples above might lead one to think that linguistic problems in comparative analysis bear relevance only at the highest levels of abstraction. This is far from the case, especially in today’s labour market, where massive changes in global migration patterns have generated a growing multilingual and multicultural workforce. Misinterpretations of rules and practices cross-linguistically might give rise to ambiguities and confusion as regards workers’ union rights, health and safety, and working conditions. The practical implications of coming to terms with increasingly multilingual staff was thoroughly dealt with in Industrial Relations in Multilingual Environments at Work – IR-Multiling a project funded by the European Commission, in which I participated on behalf of ADAPT.  The study, which ended in December 2016, tried to address the most serious challenges stemming from a linguistically diverse workforce which are faced by multinational companies.

Accordingly, language plays a major role at the time of contrasting industrial relations and labour law notions cross-nationally. For this reason, Hyman and Gumbrell-McCormick warn us that “serious comparative research requires the capacity at least to read the languages of the countries covered” (2013, VII). While this is certainly true, it is likewise important to understand how and what to compare. Echoing once again Blanpain “in order to compare what is in fact comparable, one needs to compare the functions institutions perform rather than institutions themselves” (2010, 13). An examination from a linguistic and conceptual standpoint is therefore advisable, enabling the comparative scholar to become familiar with the core of notions currently in use.

 


1aPietro Manzella

Pietro Manzella is a Senior Research Fellow at the Association for International and Comparative Studies in the Field of Labor Law and Industrial Relations (ADAPT, www.adapt.it). His research focuses on linguistic issues arising from misleading translations in comparative analysis involving labour practices and concepts. His research interests also include comparative labor law and industrial relations, translation studies, cross-cultural communication, linguistics, language and the law. Email address: pietro.manzella@adapt.it.

 

 

 

Sources

  • Blanpain, Roger, Bisom-Rapp, Susan, Corbett, William R., Josephs, Hilary K., Zimmer, Michael J. 2007. The Global Workplace – International and Comparative Employment Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Blanpain, Roger, Blake, Jim. 2010. Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations in Industrialized Market Economies. The Netherlands: Kluwer International.
  • Hyman, Richard. 2005. Words and Things: The Problem of Particularistic Universalism. Comparaisons internationales des politiques sociales, enjeux épistémologiques et méthodologiques/Cross-national Comparison of Social Policies: Epistemological and Methodological Issues, edited by Jean-Claude Barbier, Michele Letablier 191-208. Brussels: Peter Lang.
  • Hyman, Richard. 2007a. How Can Trade Unions Act Strategically?. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research 13(2). 193-210.
  • Hyman, Richard, Gumbrell-McCormick, Rebecca. 2013. Trade Unions in Western Europe – Hard Times, Hard Choices. Oxford. Oxford University Press.
  • Manzella, Pietro. 2016. Le parole del lavoro: Il “caporalato” in lingua inglese. Bollettino ADAPT 3 ottobre 2016, available at http://www.bollettinoadapt.it/le-parole-del-lavoro-il-caporalato-lingua-inglese/ (accessed on 10 December 2016).
  • Manzella, Pietro, Spattini Silvia. 2016. Appunti per un glossario ITA – ENG /1: assegno di ricollocazione e job re-integration voucher. Bollettino ADAPT 31 ottobre 2016, available at: http://www.bollettinoadapt.it/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Appunti-per-un-glossario-ITA-%E2%80%93-ENG-1-assegno-di-ricollocazione-e-job-re-integration-voucher.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2016).
  • Oxford Dictionary (online version). Available at https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/trade_union (accessed on 8 December 2016).
  • Singam, Ponnahi, and Koch, Karl. 1994. “Industrial Relations – Problems of German Concepts and Terminology for the English Translator”. Lebende Sprachen, XXXIX(1). 158-162.