Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/325857 
Authors: 
Year of Publication: 
2025
Citation: 
[Journal:] ILR Review [ISSN:] 2162-271X [Volume:] 78 [Issue:] 5 [Publisher:] SAGE Publications [Place:] Thousand Oaks, Calif. [Year:] 2025 [Pages:] 780-805
Publisher: 
SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, Calif.
Abstract: 
Employers seek to transform labor power into labor by implementing multiple forms of labor control. These multiple control practices, however, may not obtain consent but rather resistance from workers. Why do employers’ multiple control practices fail, and how is this failure related to workers’ acts of resistance? The author draws on existing research to classify employers’ control practices into three categories—technical, organizational, and ideational—and argues that these practices contradict each other systematically and give rise to resistance. An ethnographic study at factories in China shows that employers’ control practices impose conflicting demands on workers. These tensions create the basis, grievance, and mentality for workers’ acts of resistance. This article provides a unified theoretical framework for analyzing contradictions within labor control and contributes to a long tradition of Chinese factory life ethnographies.
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article
Document Version: 
Published Version

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.