Devolved Corporatism: Fictive Kinship at the Nexus Between Paternalist and Neoliberal Labour Relations
EDN: FHJXWK
Abstract
Historically, corporatist arrangements have been seen as a way of representing interest groups — in both democratic and non-democratic contexts. Furthermore, social cohesion can be thought of in terms of supply and demand side resources and mechanisms for which corporatism represents a possible vehicle of expression. While the Russian state has generally only paid lip-service to corporatist forms, this article explores the generation ‘from below’ of ersatz work-place incorporation of citizens — attempts to address their needs for representation through the dramatic front and back-stage work within enterprises short of trade unionism. After sketching the history of paternalistic, enterprise relations, the article focusses on the post-2022 context. Based on long-term ethnographic evidence, the author proposes a variety of types of quasiincorporating moments in contemporary waged work in Russia. Three case studies reflect a desire among workers to evoke fictive kinship with their enterprises and the differing stances of employers. These are categorized as possibly generalizable types, from ‘supplicant incorporation’ in new workplaces after 2022; Neoliberal paternalism as ‘fictive kinship’, and ‘realist scepticism’ about corporatist offerings. Articulation of devolved corporatism via metaphors of, or approximating relations of fictive kinship is strongly inflected by paternalist models of interaction extant from the Soviet period. The particular labour paradox in Russia (structural strength yet associational weakness) may lead to the emergence of a devolved corporatism. The paradox, understandable to both workers and employers alike may provoke further the articulation through symbolic interaction and affective modes of fictive kinship.
References
1. Kagarlitskii B. (2008) Neurosis in the office. View: business newspaper (http://www.vz.ru/columns/2008/4/7/157651.html). (in Russ.)
2. Lebskii M. (2021) The USSR’s working class: life under conditions of industrial paternalism. Moscow: Gorizontal. (in Russ.)
3. Levinson A. (2007) About how workers at our western factories are thinking of returning to the VPK. Otechestvennye zapiski, 4(37), pp. 94–108 (in Russ.)
4. Makarenko B. I. (2011) Neocorporatism in Contemporary Russia. Comparative Politics, 2, pp. 90–96. (in Russ.)
5. Prokhorov A. (2011) Russian model of governance. Moscow: Zhurnal Ekspert. (in Russ.)
6. Temnitskii A. L. (2011) Independence in work as a factor in the formation of the subjectivity of workers in Russia. Sociological research, 12, pp. 35–43. (in Russ.)
7. Abramov R. (2014) The history of sociological research on occupations and professions in the USSR 1960–80s: Ideological frameworks and analytical resources” (April 28, 2014). Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BRP 40/SOC/2014, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2430178 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2430178
8. Alasheev S. (1995) Informal relations in the Soviet system of production. In S. Clarke (Ed.), Management and industry in Russia: Formal and informal relations in the period of transition. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 29–71.
9. Ashwin S. (1998) Endless patience: Explaining Soviet and Post-Soviet social stability. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 31(2), pp. 187–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-067X(98)00006-3
10. Ashwin S. & Clarke S. (2002) Russian trade unions and industrial relations in transition. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave.
11. Bizyukov P. (1995) The mechanism of paternalistic management of the enterprise: The limits of paternalism. In S. Clarke (Ed.) Management and industry in Russia: Formal and informal relations in the period of transition. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 99–127.
12. Bunce V. & Echolls III J. M. (1980) Soviet politics in the Brezhnev Era: “Pluralism” or Corporatism? In D. R. Kelley (Ed.), Soviet Politics in the Brezhnev Era. New York: Praeger, рр. 1–26.
13. Burawoy M. & Lukács J. (1992) The radiant past: Ideology and reality in Hungary’s road to capitalism. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
14. Cherkaev X. (2023) Gleaning for Communism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
15. Clarke S. (Ed.) (1995) Management and industry in Russia: Formal and informal relations in the period of transition. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
16. Clarke S. (Ed.) (1996) The Russian Enterprise in Transition. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
17. Clarke S. (2007) The development of capitalism in Russia. London/New York: Routledge.
18. Clarke S., Fairbrother P., Burawoy M., & Krotov P. (1993) What about the workers? Workers and the transition to capitalism in Russia. London: Verso.
19. Collier S. J. (2011) Post-Soviet social: Neoliberalism, social modernity, biopolitics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
20. Cook L. (1993) The Soviet social contract and why it failed: Welfare policy and workers’ politics from Brezhnev to Yeltsin. London and Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21. Crouch C. (1985) Corporatism in industrial relations: A formal model. In W. Grant The political economy of corporatism. MacMillan, pp. 63–88.
22. Crowley S. (2004) Explaining labor weakness in Post-Communist Europe: Historical legacies and comparative perspective. East European Politics & Societies, 18(3), рр. 394– 429. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325404267395
23. Friedman E. (2014) Insurgency trap: Labor politics in Postsocialist China. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
24. Gorbach D. (2020a) Industrial hegemony and moral economy in a Ukrainian metalworking city. Politix, 132(4): pp. 49–72.
25. Gorbach D. (2020b) Changing patronage and informality configurations in Ukraine: from the shop floor upwards. Studies of Transition States and Societies, 1: 3–15. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-69223-1
26. Haynes M. (2006) Rethinking class power in the Russian factory 1929–1991. Working Paper Series, Management Research Centre, Wolverhampton University Business School.
27. Hinz S. & Morris J. (2016) Trade unions in transnational automotive companies in Russia and Slovakia: Prospects for working-class power. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 23(1): 97–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959680116676718
28. Humphrey C. (2002) The unmaking of Soviet life: Everyday tconomies in Russia and Mongolia. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
29. Humphreys M. & Watson T. (2009) Ethnographic practices: From “writing-up ethnographic research” to “writing ethnography”. In S. Ybema, D. Yanow, H. Wels and F. Kamsteeg (eds), Organizational ethnography studying the complexities of everyday life. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 40–55. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446278925.n3
30. Kordonsky S. G. (2016) Socio-Economic Foundations of the Russian Post-Soviet Regime. The Resource-Based Economy and Estate-Based Social Structure of Contemporary Russia. transl. J. Kazantseva. Stuttgart: ibidem-Verlag.
31. Kulaev M. (2020) Trade unions, transformism and the survival of Russian authoritarianism. PhD Dissertation. Johan Skytte Institute of Political Studies, University of Tartu. University of Tartu Press.
32. Lankina T. V. (2022) The estate origins of democracy in Russia: From imperial bourgeoisie to Post-Communist middle class. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Lankina T. V. & Libman A. (2021) The two-pronged middle class: The old bourgeoisie, new state-engineered middle class, and democratic development. American Political Science Review, 115(3): pp. 948–966. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000305542100023X
34. LeCompte M. D. & Goetz J. P. (1982) Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research Spring, 52(1): pp. 31–60.
35. Li T. M. & Ferguson J. (2018) Beyond the “proper job:” Political-economic analysis after the century of labouring man. Working Paper #51. Institute for Poverty, Land And Agrarian Studies http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12894.54085
36. Manuilova A. (2022) Biopolitics of Authoritarianism. The case of Russia, in M. Piasentier and S. Raimondi (eds), Debating Biopolitics: New perspectives on the government of life, Northampton, MA and Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 151–70. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800887978.00017
37. Mandel D. (2004) Labour after Communism: Auto workers and their unions in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. Montreal, ON: Black Rose Books.
38. Morris J. (2016) Everyday Post-Socialism: Working-class communities in the Russian margins. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
39. Morris J. (2021) From prefix capitalism to neoliberal economism: Russia as a laboratory in capitalist realism. Sociology of Power, 33(1): pp. 193–221.
40. Morris J. (2024) The “socialist” experiment, in G. Gall (ed). The handbook of labour unions. Agenda Publishing.
41. Morris J. (2025) Everyday politics in Russia: From resentment to resistance. London: Bloomsbury.
42. Morris J. & Hinz S. (2017) Free automotive unions, industrial work and precariousness in provincial Russia. Post-Communist Economies, 29(3): pp. 282–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14631377.2017.1315000
43. Morrison C. (2008) A Russian factory enters the market economy. London and New York: Routledge. Morrison C., Croucher R., & Cretu O. (2012) Legacies, conflict and “path dependence”in the former Soviet Union. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 50(2): pp. 329–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.2010.00840.x
44. Morrison C., Bizyukov P., Ilyin V., Kozina I., & Petrova L. (2023) Sociology, labour and transition in post-Soviet Russia: A view from within. Capital & Class, 47(2): pp. 211–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/03098168231171814
45. Moser E. (2016) The logic of the Soviet organisational society. Forum Internationale Wissenschaft.
46. Moskovskaya A., Oberemko O., Silaeva V., Popova I., Nazarova I., Peshkova O., & Chernysheva M. (2013) Development of professional associations in Russia: A research into institutional framework, self-regulation activity, and barriers to professionalization (November 21, 2013). Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BRP 26/ SOC/2013, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2357974
47. Munck R. (2013) The precariat: A view from the South. Third World Quarterly, 34(5): 747–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2013.800751
48. Nielsen F. (1986/2006) The eye of the whirlwind. Russian identity and Soviet nation-building. Quests for meaning in a Soviet metropolis [Unpublished MS]. Available online: http://www.anthrobase.com/Txt/N/Nielsen_F_S_03.htm#200_Chapter%20Two:%20Life%20on%20the%20Islands
49. Ost D. (2000) Illusory corporatism: tripartism in the service of neoliberalism. Politics and Society, 28(4).
50. Padavic I. & Earnest W. R. (1994) Paternalism as a component of managerial strategy. The Social Science Journal, 31(4): pp. 389–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/0362-3319(94)90031-0
51. Pospielovsky D. (1970) The “link system” in Soviet agriculture. Soviet Studies, 21(4): 411–35. https://www.jstor.org/stable/149972
52. Rogers D. (2015) The depths of Russia: Oil, power, and culture after Socialism. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
53. Sahlins M. (2011) What kinship is (part one). Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 17(1): pp. 2–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9655.2010.01666.x
54. Schneider D. M. (1984) A critique of the study of kinship. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
55. Stasch R. (2009) Society of others: kinship and mourning in a West Papuan place. Berkeley: University of California Press.
56. Strathern M. (1988) The gender of the gift: problems with women and problems with society in Melanesia. Berkeley: University of California Press.
57. Ticktin H. (1992) Origins of the crisis in the USSR: Essays on the political economy of a disintegrating system. London: Routledge.
58. Unger J., & Chan A. (1995) China, corporatism, and the East Asian model. The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs, 33: 29–53. https://doi.org/10.2307/2950087
59. Varga M. (2014) Worker protests in Post-communist Romania and Ukraine: Striking with tied hands. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press.
60. Willerton J.P. (1992)Patronage and politics in the USSR.New York: Cambridge University Press.
Review
For citations:
Morris J. Devolved Corporatism: Fictive Kinship at the Nexus Between Paternalist and Neoliberal Labour Relations. Sociology of Power. 2025;37(1):36-61. EDN: FHJXWK
Views:
170
Email this article 