Explore the vast range of titles available.

This paper explores the dynamic by which \"labourism\" potentially undermines \"mutualism\" by examining the experience of Westfund under Australian Labour Party governments. The principle of self-help and the act of organising to provide mutual benefits have strong traditions in the labour movement. Westfund was a health fund established in 1953 by the Western District Branch of the Miners' Federation in Lithgow New South Wales, largely to provide medical benefits to miners. Organised labour historically has also campaigned for state provision of welfare services. In Australia, the notion of \"Labourism\" refers to a particular approach adopted by organised labour whereby they represented their interests directly in the political sphere through the Australian Labor Party. When the labour movement achieved its aim of a more universal health care system under the Whitlam ALP government, Westfund chose to work within the system in order to survive. Mutualism and labourism co-existed. The subsequent introduction of Medicare by the Hawke ALP government brought changes which created a more threatening business environment for health funds. In this instance to mitigate the danger it posed to their business, Westfund chose to oppose more aggressively aspects of the universal health system. Westfund weakened its institutional ties to the labour movement, and became more autonomous from its roots as a mutual.

At the time of the founding of the industry superannuation funds, the Australian retirementsavings market was dominated by insurance mutuals. In the early 1980s, less than half the workforce was covered by occupational superannuation and unions saw the insurance mutuals, created in the nineteenth century, as part of the problem in this widespread market failure. When establishing industry-wide schemes, union leaders largely eschewed the language associated with the \"old\" mutuals that had become key pillars of the established financial sector. In framing their appeal to members, the trustees and managers of the industry funds appealed instead to new expressions, such as \"all profit to members.\" Industry funds also developed a model of 50/50 employer/employee trusteeship or \"equal representation\" not as an ideological prescription, but as a pragmatic way of dealing with opposition to the schemes by employers. The trustees and managers of industry superannuation funds contrasted rather than associated themselves with the \"old mutuals\" which, at the time, were not seen as reflecting the unions' ideal of an industrial partnership. However, with the decline and demutualisation of the largest old insurance mutuals in the 1990s, the industry funds began to appropriate the language of mutualism. This appropriation took place within the context of a perceived need to maintain a collective identity and purpose in the changing superannuation marketplace.

This paper discusses mutualism and its links to labourism. It is argued that rather than being contradictory, mutualism is incorporated into union activities in a range of ways beyond formal mutual and cooperative institutions, dependent on contextual differences in the labour movement. Using the case of mutual union and company involvement in the development of a public hospital in a single industry town in New Zealand during the 1960s and 1970s, we find evidence that the goals of management and the unions converged despite tensions at the site of production, and notions of cooperation for the benefit of workers and the wider community were brought to bear. As the workplace was an essential part of the town, the union's interests were not limited to the workplace, but formed part of the social fabric of the town. Through this case, we see that engaging in mutualistic activities does not always demonstrate a weakening union agenda, but rather a method unions may employ towards improved worker welfare. Additionally, this example reminds us that union members are members of wider communities, families and societies, and that the boundaries between worker welfare in the workplace and those outside the workplace are not always easily drawn.

Professor of Business and Labour History at the University of Sydney School of Business. The labour and co-operative movements are collective organisations that have similar roots and share a strong emphasis on democratic practices that seek to ensure the best for their community. There is both alignment and tensions in their relationship. Consumer co-operatives have supported unions and provided support to striking workers. However, co-operatives are also businesses that need to ensure financial survival. This has the potential to place co-operatives in conflict with organised labour particularly regarding labour costs. Workers may also have greater commitment to the organisation given that they are also part owners, particularly in the case of worker co-operatives. The co-operative ideal of \"political neutrality\" has also complicated the relationship between co-operatives and the labour movement. This paper will focus on some areas of alignment and tension between the labour movement and consumer retail and worker co-operatives drawing primarily on the Australian, Canadian, New Zealand, UK and US experience.

Chapter 4 focuses on the country’s cooperative movement. Over the last two decades, Dominican savings and credit cooperatives have become increasingly important. The chapter discusses how these business ventures are organized, and how they function economically and politically. It seeks particularly to show three things. First, the Dominican cooperativa, or cooperative, is a shifting entity—an open, elastic category. Second, Dominican cooperatives are regarded by the members as empresas, or business firms—but firms with a social, more human purpose. Put differently, today’s Dominican cooperative is more an instrumentality of insertion into the interstices of capitalist time as a survival strategy. The glue of the cooperative is the will for shared help. Third, these enterprises represent a certain political—democratic—hope. Most of them seek to train their members in a more inclusive way of running affairs. At their best, cooperatives’ practices challenge the nation’s ingrained, authoritarian political patterns.