{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019689119170984457, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.397350993377484, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Political Economy of Control

This article argues that the structural inequality literature lacks a theoretical logic capable of rivaling that of its neoclassical counterpart, and that this, rather than its empirical veracity, has served as the major barrier to its broader acceptance. Accordingly, this article attempts to develop an analytical theory that both provides an alternative logic and can be demonstrated empirically. To do so, it argues (in essence) that the main contribution of a structuralist theory should be to logically demonstrate why and how nonmarket, political factors are of central importance to income determination. It then draws on an organizational theory of the firm in industrial relations developed elsewhere to (a) establish the importance of “political economy” in accounting for variation in the willingness of employers to grant favorable terms of employment, and (b) analyze the data from a unique survey of unionized firms.