| Abstract: | This study used a moderated cross-level design to predict union commitment among 355 union survivors after layoffs. Survivors experiencing varying degrees of layoffs at 15 job sites judged the legitimacy of the company's layoff explanation. In each case, the account implicated the union as the agent responsible for the layoff decision. Company records were used to aggregate layoff severity within job site. Survey measures were used to assess retrospective belief in the account and commitment to the union after the layoff event. Based on interactional justice theory, a significant interaction was predicted between layoff severity and belief in the account as related to postlayoff union commitment. Survivors with higher levels of belief in the account were expected to be less committed to the union than those with moderate or lower levels of belief under more severe layoffs. Moderated regression analyses of overall commitment supported the expected interaction. Regression analyses of commitment components revealed that only willingness to work for the union was affected by the interaction. Additional analyses, in which the willingness to work component was regressed onto layoff severity within high to low belief subgroups, were also consistent with the prediction. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings for company and union officials in managing union survivors are discussed. |
