public servants as ‘knights’ with a distinctive public service ethos comprising
a strong commitment to the public interest and a willingness to sacriWce immediate
personal gain in pursuing broader welfare goals (Perry and Porter 1982 ).
There is some evidence indicating that public sector employees are somewhat
distinctive from those in the private sector. Crewson ( 1997 ) suggests that public
servants in the USA are driven more by intrinsic than extrinsic rewards. It is a view
whichWnds some support in the UK, where research amongst municipal workers
indicates that a social exchange ideology is complemented by a public service
orientation (Coyle Shapiro and Kessler 2004 ).
23.3 Traditional Approaches
.........................................................................................................................................................................................
These features of the public sector and its workforce have encouraged the develop-
ment of approaches to public service employment regulation which are distinguish-
able from those in the private sector. Beaumont ( 1992 )diVerentiates between two
approaches, termed the ‘sovereign employer’ and the ‘model employer’ approach,
which have underpinned employment relations in the public sector from at least the
inception of the modern welfare state in the immediate post-Second World War
period to the 1980 s. The longevity of these approaches has ensured the development
of embedded institutions for the regulation of the employment relationship.
The sovereign employer approach is founded on state control in shaping HR
practice. Under such an approach collective bargaining, incorporating the sanction
of industrial action, is often absent or modiWed, so removing this threat. France is
an illustration of this approach with the government retaining ultimate authority
to unilaterally determine pay and working conditions for established civil servants
(fonctionnaires) (Bordogna and Winchester 2001 : 54 ). Germany is an example of a
modiWed sovereign employer model with a division between public employees
with, and those civil servants (Beamte) without, collective bargaining rights.
The model employer approach is based on the state setting an example to other
employers on how employees should be treated. The UK provides an example of
such an approach and it is reXected in tangible beneWts including high levels of job
security, good pensions and sick-leave beneWts, and a willingness to recognize trade
unions. Indeed, more generally, one legacy of this approach is that in many
countries trade union density is frequently higher amongst public than private
sector employees. In Italy, public sector union density of 45 percent is around 10
percent higher than in the economy as a whole (Bach et al. 1999 ). The gap is
substantially wider in the UK ( 60 percent compared to less than 20 percent in the
private sector (DTI 2005 )) and most marked in the USA with public sector union
hrm and the new public management 473