(This is a sample cover image for this issue. The actual cover is not yet available at this time.

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached

copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elseviers archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright

Author's personal copy

International Journal of Hospitality Management 34 (2013) 6165

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Journal of Hospitality Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhosman

Breach of psychological contract, organizational cynicism and union

commitment: A study of hospitality industry in Pakistan
Sajid Bashir a, , Misbah Nasir b
a
b

Mohammad Ali Jinnah University, Islamabad, Pakistan

Army Public College of Management and Sciences, Rawalpindi, Pakistan

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Keywords:
Unionization
Cynicism
Collectivism
Pakistan
Aviation
Breach of psychological contract

a b s t r a c t
This study examines the relationship between breach of psychological contract, organizational cynicism
and union commitment among hospitality sector personnel in Pakistan. Data were collected from 279
unionized employees working in different hotels and also from aviation hospitality staff. Findings indicate
that breach of psychological contract results in union commitment among hospitality sector employees
and this relationship is mediated by organizational cynicism. Contrary to expectation collectivism does
not moderate the relationship between organizational cynicism and union commitment. Implications
and future research directions for hospitality management are also discussed.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Employee unions have attracted a plethora of research as
globally unionized employees comprise a considerable portion of
total workplace. Although no common worldwide denition of
unionization exists, generally it symbolizes associations of employees that signify the interests and benets of employees (Chang
and Sorrentino, 1991). Feasibility and achievement of a union
is dependent on the involvement and loyalty of its members
(Fullagar and Barling, 1991; Cohen, 1993; Shore et al., 1994). Unions
have profound impact on employees well being (Krecker and
ORand, 1991) remuneration (Bryson et al., 2004) nancial benets (Kearney and Morgan, 1980) seniority-based benets (Wittmer
et al., 2010) family-friendly policies (Budd and Mumford, 2004)
facilitating employees in legal and ofcial issues (Goslinga et al.,
2000; Budd and Mumford, 2004) and most importantly it provides
a channel to raise voice (Kaufman and Taras, 2000). These factors contribute toward inducement of union commitment among
employees. Researchers have also found that in a unionized environment employee can show dual commitment i.e. employee can
be simultaneously committed to organization and union (Angle and
Perry, 1986; Fullagar and Barling, 1991).
Unionization and hospitality job is generally considered incompatible (Riley, 1985) and unionization has low potential in this
sector (MacFarlane, 1982). However recent actions by organizations like downsizing, mergers and acquisitions have lead to a
feeling that breach of psychological contract has increased among

Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Bashir).
0278-4319/$ see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.02.004

employees (Rousseau, 1989) including those working in hospitality sector (Carbery et al., 2003). Moreover inequity due to low
wages in hospitality sector as compared to other sectors causes
more unionization in this sector (Lowery and Beadles, 1996). The
breach of psychological contract has a decremented effect on
organizational commitment while it can lead to enhanced union
commitment (Turnley et al., 2004). The breach of psychological
contract generates range of negative outcomes in organizational
context which included organizational cynicism (Johnson and
OLeary-Kelly, 2003). Vital constituent of cynicism is viewpoint
that the organization lacks honesty and truthfulness in performing impartial, righteous, moral and sincere acts (Naus et al., 2007).
It indicates employees lack of trust in management (Bateman et al.,
1992) and frustration with the job (Andersson, 1996). Earlier studies consider work place frustration (Klandermans, 1986; Degroot,
2006) and lack of trust in management (Hemmasi and Graf, 1993)
as key determinants of unionization.
Majority of research on employee unionization being conducted
in developed countries having predominantly individualistic societies, their ndings may not have similar implication in collectivist
societies like Pakistan. Recent events in different organizations
including the hospitality industry have necessitated identication
of antecedents of unionization in a cultural perspective. A recent
strike by union of aviation hospitality staff (including air hostesses
and ight stewards) along with their colleagues caused closure of all
the airports in Pakistan causing a loss of billions of rupees. Armed
personnel were deputed to take control of airports, still for days
ights were canceled causing havoc for passengers. These events
have raised a number of concerns in the minds of people about
legitimacy of such acts by employee unions. The causes of such acts
by unionized aviation hospitality employees in underdeveloped

Author's personal copy

62

S. Bashir, M. Nasir / International Journal of Hospitality Management 34 (2013) 6165

countries have received little attention in the extant literature.

This paper addresses the deciency by focusing the question Does
breach of psychological contract and employee cynicism lead to
an intention to join union in hospitality industry? The ndings of
this paper will have important implications for hospitality industry as it will provide a step forward in terms of integrating effect
of breach of psychological contract, organizational cynicism and
union commitment. It aims to advance literature on hospitality
industry both theoretically and empirically by clarifying the role
of cultural orientation (collectivism) in underrating the aforementioned relationship.
2. Theoretical underpinning and hypothesis
2.1. Breach of psychological contract, organizational cynicism
and union commitment
Employers failure to fulll its obligations can be major cause
of employees frustration and subsequent unionization. Social
exchange theory (Blau, 1964) lends support to explain the
phenomena in much detail which suggests that relationships
between individuals are dened through mutual social obligations.
Action of one party directs the reaction of the other party through
reciprocity (Cropanzano and Mitchell, 2005). Individual remains
satised in case there is a balanced exchange (Wayne et al., 1997)
commonly referred to as psychological contract in an organizational context (Rousseau, 1995). When employers fail to maintain
a balance by not fullling its obligation, breach of psychological
contract occurs (Morrison and Robinson, 1997) which can result in
job dissatisfaction, turnover intention, negative behaviors (Tekleab
et al., 2005) organizational cynicism (Johnson and OLeary-Kelly,
2003; Andersson, 1996) and union commitment (Turnley et al.,
2004). Thus the frustration aggression theory can be used to theoretically relate breach of psychological contract with unionization
providing the support for our rst hypothesis:
H1. Breach of Psychological contract is positively associated with
union commitment among hospitality sector employees.
Andersson (1996) denes cynicism in general as both a general
and specic attitude, characterized by frustration, hopelessness,
and disillusionment, as well as contempt toward and distrust of a
person, group, ideology, social convention or institution (p. 1398).
Dean et al. (1998) consider organizational cynicism is a negative
attitude toward ones employing organization, comprising three
dimensions: (1) a belief that the organization lacks integrity; (2)
negative affect toward the organization; and (3) tendencies to disparaging and critical behaviors toward the organization that are
consistent with these beliefs and affect (p. 345). Cynicism is an
attitude comprising of an emotional element of negative feelings
and disappointment as well as a conviction of doubt (Andersson
and Bateman, 1997). Ferris et al. (1998) consider organizational
cynicism as perceptions of self-centeredness, exploitation, misuse,
partiality and nepotism at work.
Various factors are attributed toward development of organizational cynicism among employees, e.g. it can be an outcome of
employees emotional responses Cole et al. (2006) perceptions of
psychological contract violation (Pugh et al., 2003) fake manifestation (Helm, 2004) lack of trust in management (Kim et al., 2009)
biased employment decisions (Davis and Gardner, 2004) organizational change (Avey et al., 2008; Clarke, 1999) perceived injustice
(Thompson et al., 1999; FitzGerald, 2002) disappointment from
work and exhaustion (Cartwright and Holmes, 2006) poor work
environment (Simbula and Guglielmi, 2010) and high executive
compensation (Andersson and Bateman, 1997). Breach of Psychological contract affects the employees belief and ultimately causes
changes in attitude and behavior (Robinson, 1996; Morrison and

Robinson, 1997) and induces organizational cynicism (Andersson,

1996; Johnson and OLeary-Kelly, 2003; Dean et al., 1998).
Frustration results in aggressive behavior (Dollard et al., 1939).
A reaction of this frustration can be employee joining the union
(Klandermans, 1986). Study by Kuruvilla et al. (1990) also established impact of frustration-aggression on employee unionization.
Many activities carried out by the employee unions like strikes are
termed as militant activities (Monnot et al., 2011) which obviously
fall under the category of aggressive behavior. Through this study
we argue that since dominant feature of organizational cynicism
is employee frustration (Andersson, 1996), which results hostility
(Fleming and Spicer, 2003). Thus we further argue that organizational cynicism acts as a mediator between breach of psychological
contract and unionization providing the necessary support for our
second hypothesis:
H2. Organizational Cynicism mediates the relationship between
breach of psychological contract and union commitment among
hospitality sector employees.
2.2. Role of culture
Another important dimension which can affect the relationship
between cynicism and union commitment is culture. Employee
unionization is characterized by association and collective bargaining (Chang and Sorrentino, 1991) and this association among
employees can differ in different cultures. America being highly
individualistic society (Hofstede, 1980) unionization might not
result in employees natural inclination to work collectively. Based
on above analogy Kelly and Kelly (1994) found that collectivism
predicts prospective participation in union activities. The argument is further strengthened by various studies (e.g. see Aryee
and Chay, 2001) that unionization in predominantly American context (Individualistic culture) may not have similar implications in
Asian context (Collectivist culture). Similarly in his seminal work
on union commitment Klandermans (1986) recommended three
theoretical approaches for studying union commitment which are
frustration-aggression, cost-benet analysis and interactionism.
The third approach which considers the reaction of social group
resembles with (Hofstede, 1980, 1983, 1994, 2001) concept of
individualism versus collectivism in different cultures. The social
groups reaction to union commitment can vary in different cultures. Thus sufcient theoretical support exits to take into account
collectivism for studying the relation ship between organizational
cynicism and union commitment.
H3. Collectivism moderates the relationship between organizational cynicism and union commitment among hospitality sector
employees in a collectivist culture.
Theoretical Framework:
Breach of
Psychological
Contract

Organizational
Cynicism

Union
Commitment

Collectivism

3. Methodology
3.1. Instrumentation
The Questionnaire for Organizational Cynicism was adopted
from Dean et al. (1998). A six item scale adopted by Kelloway
et al. (1992) was used to measure Union Commitment while Breach
of Psychological Contract was measured using a ve item scale

Author's personal copy

S. Bashir, M. Nasir / International Journal of Hospitality Management 34 (2013) 6165

developed by Robinson and Morrison (2000). Collectivism was

measured using a nine item scale developed by Oyserman (1993).
All the items were measured on a ve point Likert scale with 1
representing strongly disagree and 5 representing strongly agree.

The population for this research was the employees serving in

hospitality sector organizations in which inuence of employee
unions is quite strong. The sample consisted of staff mainly working in aviation hospitality like air hostesses and ight stewards.
In addition hospitality staff working in various hotels in Pakistan
also constituted the sample. Since unionization does not exist and
discouraged in small hotels in Pakistan, data was collected only
from those ve/four star hotels and aviation hospitality staff where
unionization is allowed under certain constraints. Data was collected using judgmental sampling method as it helped to pick from
sample the individuals who were active members of the employee
unions.
Initially, 340 questionnaires were distributed and 285 were
received back. Out of these questionnaires 6 were incomplete and
were omitted. Consequently 279 questionnaires were used for the
study, representing a response rate of 82%. The respondents were
asked not to mention their name or the name of their organization anywhere on the questionnaire to ensure condentiality. In
order to get honest and true information from the respondents, the
questionnaires were kept anonymous.
3.3. Sample characteristics
The sample constitutes 90% males and 10% females. The ratio of
females in the sample is low because of the cultural norms of the
country. In Pakistani culture, it is not considered a good thing for
women to join any political activities like protests and strikes, thus
female workers have limited representation in employee union in
hospitality sector of Pakistan. In terms of qualication, 6.1% of the
respondents possessed a degree of Master of Philosophy or Master
of Science, 17.9% of the respondents had Masters Degree, 27.2%
were graduates, 26.2% with education up to intermediate level and
22.6% had done matriculation. The sample consists of respondents
belonging to different age groups. 10% were between the age of 20
and 25 years, 19.7% between 26 and 30 years, 16.8% between 31
and 35 years, 30.8% between 36 and 40 years and 22.6% were of the
age of 40 or above. Respondents only belonged to non-managerial
positions since in majority of organizations managerial employees
cannot participate in union activities.

Table 1 presents the correlation between variables. The control variables i.e. gender, age and tenure are negatively associated
with union commitment while breach of psychological contract
and organizational cynicism are also signicantly associated with
union commitment (Tables 2 and 3).
Table 1
Correlation analysis and reliabilities of measures (in parentheses).

BPC
OCY
Collectv
Un Com

SD

3.26
2.94
3.99
3.05

0.696
0.561
0.859
0.906

Predictors

Organizational
cynicism

Union commitment
R2

R2

R2

Breach of psychological contract (BPC)

Step 1
.005
Control variables
Step 2
BPC

R2

.099

0.176** .035

.031

0.126** 0.114

Organizational cynicism
Step 1
Control variables

.016

0.123

Step 2
Organizational cynicism

0.31**

0.222

0.099**

Control variables: age, gender, tenure; n = 279.

**
p < .01.

Table 3
Moderated and mediated regression analysis.
Predictors

Union commitment

Moderator analysis
Collectivism
Step 1
Control variables

R2

R2

0.123

Step 2
Organizational cynicism
Collectivism

0.29**
0.20**

0.263

0.14**

Step 3
Org cynicism collectivism

0.29

0.265

0.001

Mediator analysis
Main effects: breach of psychological contract
Step 1
Control variables

0.123

Step 2
Breach of psychological contract

0.137

Mediation: organizational cynicism

Step 1
Control variables

0.123

.014**

Step 2
Organizational cynicism

0.31**

0.222

.099**

Step 3
Breach of psychological contract

0.06

0.226

0.004

Control variables: age, gender, tenure; n = 279.

**
p < .01.

4. Results and discussion

Mean

Table 2
Regression analysis for outcomes.

3.2. Population and sample

63

1
(0.86)
0.179**
0.090
0.149*

2
(0.911)
0.126*
0.317**

(0.82)
0.225**

(0.79)

BPC = breach of psychological contract; OCY = organizational cynicism; Collectv = collectivism; Un Com = union commitment; n = 279.
*
P < .05.
**
p < .01.

In general a good support was found for majority of hypothesis.

Especially the full mediation of organizational cynicism provides us
a new dimension in explaining union commitment among hospitality personnel. Though Pakistan is considered a highly collectivist
society, this collectivism plays no role in moderating the relationship between organizational cynicism and union commitment.
The rst hypothesis which examined relationship between
breach of psychological contract and union commitment was
accepted. The strong negative relationship between these variables
further strengths the ndings of studies (e.g. see Turnley et al.,
2004) that breach of psychological contract enhances union commitment. The strikes by aviation hospitality staff can be attributed
to the feeling that organization is not fullling its part of psychological contract. These strikes can be an act of reciprocity in which
employees engage in subversive actions as retaliation to organizational policies. Hence hospitality sector employees have shown

Author's personal copy

64

S. Bashir, M. Nasir / International Journal of Hospitality Management 34 (2013) 6165

more commitment toward union which is in fact a reaction for

perceived breach of psychological contract.
The present study suggests that relationship between breach
of psychological contract and union commitment cannot be fully
explained unless organizational cynicism is not taken into account
lending support to accept second hypothesis. Studies have highlighted that the contract violation does affect the employees belief
and ultimately causes changes in attitude and behavior (Robinson,
1996; Morrison and Robinson, 1997) including development of
organizational cynicism (Andersson, 1996; Johnson and OLearyKelly, 2003; Thompson and Hart, 2006). Breach of Psychological
Contract enhances organizational cynicism and decreases organizational commitment as both constructs are negatively associated
(Dean et al., 1998). Employees lesser commitment with the organization can be a cause of more commitment with the union as
Festinger (1957) suggests organizational and union commitment
cannot coexist simultaneously. Hence the ndings of present study
help to explain how breach of psychological contract ultimately
results in union commitment through organizational cynicism.
Pakistan is considered a collectivist society (Hofstede, 1980) but
contrary to expectation, third hypothesis was not accepted as the
present study suggests that collectivism does not moderate the
relationship between organizational commitment and union commitment. It was assumed like other organizations in a collectivist
society, the hospitality sector employees should have a normal tendency to work in groups which can inuence relationship between
organizational cynicism and union commitment. But the results
indicate that cynical employees in hospitality sector do not show
commitment toward unions because of collectivist culture rather
there are other reasons which explain the strength of the relationship. One possible explanation can be explained in terms of
frustration aggression theory (Dollard et al., 1939), an employee
having organizational cynicism will tend to join unions regardless
of the culture prevalent in that society as they join unions in a reaction to different organizational actions. Thus a cynical employee
would show more commitment toward union in any culture having
individualism or collectivism.
These ndings contribute signicantly in our understanding
of union commitment among hospitality sector employees in an
underdeveloped country where limited knowledge exists about
these phenomena. The ndings can help the decision makers in
hospitality sector to devise such strategies which can reduce feeling
of breach of psychological contract. Most of the employees in their
informal discussions pointed out to authors that false promises by
management about career prospects and other benets ultimately
result in breach of psychological contracts. Since the entire hospitality industry in Pakistan is facing the challenge of survival due to
law and order situation and terrorism in the country, organizations
need to be careful in making promises with the employees. Among
aviation sector hospitality employees strong political inuence by
political parties of the country is causing great deal of inequity
in from of favoritism and unjust distribution of organizational
rewards. More and more employees are showing more commitment to unions for protection of their rights. However this situation
is quite alarming for management of hospitality sector as Drucker
(1949) pointed out that conicting interests of management can
damage management and unions unless such an environment is not
promoted where employees can be committed to unions without
abandoning commitment to organizations.

5. Limitations and future research directions

Although these ndings help us to better understand union commitment among hospitality industry in Pakistan, there are certain
limitations which must be addressed by the future researchers.

The data was collected from a limited sample, a larger and more
diverse sample can provide more comprehensive information on
the issue. Similarly it will be useful to collect data longitudinally.
Moreover the data was collected mainly from four/ve star hotels,
a large number of employees work in smaller hotels as well; future
researchers should also consider their opinion to have more robust
ndings.
References
Andersson, L.M., 1996. Employee cynicism: an examination using a contract violation framework. Human Relations 49 (11), 13951418.
Andersson, L.M., Bateman, T.S., 1997. Cynicism in the workplace: some causes and
effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior 18, 449469.
Angle, H.L., Perry, J.L., 1986. Dual commitment and labor-management relationship
climates. The Academy of Management Journal 29 (1), 3150.
Aryee, S., Chay, Y.W., 2001. Workplace justice, citizenship behavior and turnover
intentions in a union context: examining the mediating role of perceived union
support and union instrumentality. Journal of Applied Psychology 86, 154160.
Avey, J.B., Wernsing, T.S., Luthans, F., 2008. Can positive employees help positive
organizational change? Impact of psychological capital and emotions on relevant attitudes and behaviors. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 44 (1),
4870.
Bateman, T.S., Sakano, T., Fujita, M., 1992. Roger, me, and my attitude: lm propaganda and cynicism toward corporate leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology
77 (5), 768771.
Blau, P.M., 1964. Exchange and Power in Social Life. Wiley, New York.
Bryson, A., Cappellari, L., Lucifora, C., 2004. Does Union Membership Really Reduce
Job Satisfaction? British Journal of Industrial Relations 42, 439459.
Budd, J.W., Mumford, K., 2004. Trade unions and family-friendly policies in Britain.
Industrial and Labor Relations Review 57 (2), 204222.
Carbery, R., Garavan, T.N., OBrien, F., McDonnell, J., 2003. Predicting hotel managers
turnover cognitions. Journal of Managerial Psychology 18, 649679.
Cartwright, S., Holmes, N., 2006. The meaning of work: the challenge of regaining
employee engagement and reducing cynicism. Human Resource Management
Review 16, 199208.
Chang, C., Sorrentino, C., 1991. Research summaries. Monthly Labor Review, 4653.
Clarke, M., 1999. Management development: a new role in social change? Management Decision 37 (10), 767777.
Cohen, A., 1993. Work commitment in relation to withdrawal intentions and union
effectiveness. Journal of Business Research 26, 7590.
Cole, M.S., Bruch, H., Vogel, B., 2006. Emotion as mediators of the relations between
perceived supervisor support and psychological hardiness on employee cynicism. Journal of Organizational Behaviour 27, 463484.
Cropanzano, R., Mitchell, M.S., 2005. Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary
review. Journal of Management 31 (6), 874900.
Davis, W.D., Gardner, W.L., 2004. Perceptions of politics and organizational cynicism:
an attributional and leadermember exchange perspective. The Leadership
Quarterly 15, 439465.
Dean Jr., J.W., Brandes, P., Dharwadkar, R., 1998. Organizational cynicism. Academy
of Management Review 23 (2), 341352.
Degroot, T., 2006. Modeling demand for unionization with nontraditional data analysis methods. Social Indicators Research 79 (2), 275289.
Dollard, J., Doob, L., Miller, N., Mowrer, O., Sears, R., 1939. Frustration and Aggression.
Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
Drucker, P.F., 1949. The New Society: The Anatomy of the Industrial Order. Harper
& Brothers, New York.
Ferris, G.R., Arthur, M.M., Berkson, H.M., Kaplan, D.M., Cook, G.H., Frink, D.D., 1998.
Toward a social context theory of the human resource management organization effectiveness relationship. Human Resource Management Review 8 (3),
235264.
Festinger, L., 1957. A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
FitzGerald, M.R., 2002. Organizational cynicism: its relationship to perceived organizational injustice and explanatory style. Doctoral Dissertation, Division of
Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati.
Fleming, P., Spicer, A., 2003. Working at a cynical distance: implications for power,
subjectivity and resistance. Organization Articles 10 (1), 157179.
Fullagar, C., Barling, J., 1991. Predictors and outcomes of different patterns of organizational and union loyalty. Journal of Occupational Psychology 64, 129143.
Goslinga, S., Hellgren, J., Chirumbolo, A., Witte, H.D., Nswall, K., Sverke, M., 2000.
How union membership mitigates the negative consequences of job insecurity:
a test in the Netherlands, Italy and Sweden. In: Paper presented at the 27th
International Congress of Psychology in Stockholm 2000.
Helm, A., 2004. Cynics and skeptics: consumer dispositional trust. Advances in Consumer Research 31, 345351.
Hemmasi, M., Graf, L.A., 1993. Determinants of faculty voting behavior in union
representation elections: a multivariate model. Journal of Management 19 (1),
1332.
Hofstede, G., 1980. Motivation, leadership, and organization: do American theories
apply abroad? Organizational Dynamics, 4263.
Hofstede, G., 1983. The cultural relativity of organizational practices and theories.
Journal of International Business Studies 14, 7589.

Author's personal copy

S. Bashir, M. Nasir / International Journal of Hospitality Management 34 (2013) 6165
Hofstede, G., 1994. Management scientists are human. Management Science 40 (1),
413.
Hofstede, G., 2001. Cultures Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Johnson, J.L., OLeary-Kelly, A.M., 2003. The effects of psychological contract breach
and organizational cynicism: not all social exchange violations are created equal.
Journal of Organizational Behavior 24, 627647.
Kaufman, B.E., Taras, D.G., 2000. Nonunion Employee Representation. ME Sharpe,
Armonk, NY.
Kearney, R.C., Morgan, D.R., 1980. Unions and state employee compensation. State
& Local Government Review 12 (3), 115119.
Kelly, C., Kelly, J., 1994. Who gets involved in collective action? Social psychological
determinants of individual participation in trade unions. Human Relations 47,
6388.
Kelloway, E.K., Catano, V.M., Southwell, R.R., 1992. The construct validity of union
commitment: development and dimensionality of a shorter scale. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology 65, 197211.
Kim, T.Y., Bateman, T.S., Gilbreath, B., Andersson, L.M., 2009. Top management credibility and employee cynicism: a comprehensive model. Human Relations 62
(10), 14351458.
Klandermans, B., 1986. Psychology and trade union participation: joining, acting
quitting. Journal of Occupational Psychology 59, 189L 204.
Krecker, M.L., ORand, A.M., 1991. Contested milieux: small rms, unionization, and
the provision of protective structures. Sociological Forum 6 (1), 93117.
Kuruvilla, S., Gallagher, D.G., Fiorito, J., Wakabayashi, M., 1990. Union participation
in Japan: do Western theories apply? Industrial and Labor Relations Review 43,
374389.
Lowery, C.M., Beadles, N.A., 1996. Predictors of union election outcomes and union
support in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management 15 (3), 255267.
MacFarlane, A., 1982. Trade unionism and the employer in hotels and restaurants.
International Journal of Hospitality Management 1 (1), 3543.
Monnot, M.J., Wagner, S., Beehr, T.A., 2011. A contingency model of union commitment and participation: Meta-analysis of the antecedents of militant and non
militant activities. Journal of Organizational Behavior 32, 11271146.
Morrison, E.W., Robinson, S.L., 1997. When employees feel betrayed: a model of how
psychological contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review 22,
226256.
Naus, F., Iterson, A.V., Roe, R., 2007. Organizational cynicism: extending the exit,
voice, loyalty, and neglect model of employees responses to adverse conditions
in the workplace. Human Relations 60 (5), 683718.

65

Oyserman, D., 1993. The lens of personhood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65, 9931005.
Pugh, S.D., Skarlicki, D.P., Passell, B.S., 2003. After the fall: layoff victims trust and
cynicism in re-employment. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 76, 201212.
Riley, M., 1985. Some Social and Historical Perspectives on Unionisation in the UK
Hotel Industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management 4 (3), 99104.
Robinson, S.L., 1996. Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Administrative
Science Quarterly 41 (4), 574599.
Robinson, S.L., Morrison, E.W., 2000. The development of psychological contract
breach and violation: a longitudinal study. Journal of Organizational Behavior
21 (5), 525546.
Rousseau, D.M., 1989. Psychological and implied contracts in organizations.
Employee Rights and Responsibilities Journal 2, 121139.
Rousseau, D.M., 1995. Psychological Contracts in Organizations. Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Shore, L.M., Tetrick, L.E., Sinclair, R.R., Newton, L.A., 1994. Validation of a measure of perceived union support. Journal of Applied Psychology 79 (6),
971977.
Simbula, S., Guglielmi, D., 2010. Depersonalization or Cynicism, efcacy or inefcacy:
what are the dimensions of teacher burnout? European Journal of Psychology
of Education 25 (3), 301314.
Tekleab, A.G., Takeuchi, R., Taylor, M.S., 2005. Extending the chain of relationships among organizational justice, social exchange, and employee reactions:
the role of contract violations. Academy of Management Journal 48 (1),
146157.
Thompson, R.C., Bailey, L.L., Joseph, K.M., Worley, J.A., Williams, C.A., 1999. Organizational Change: effects of fairness perceptions on cynicism. Report of U.S
Department of Transportation.
Thompson, J.A., Hart, D.W., 2006. Psychological contracts: a nano-level perspective on social contract theory. Journal of Business Ethics 68 (3),
229241.
Turnley, W.H., Bolino, M.C., Lester, S.W., Bloodgood, J.M., 2004. The effects of psychological contract breach on union commitment. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology 77, 421428.
Wayne, S.J., Shore, L.M., Liden, R.C., 1997. Perceived organizational support and
leader-member exchange: a social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal 40, 82111.
Wittmer, J.L.S., Martin, J.E., Tekleab, A.G., 2010. Procedural Justice and work outcomes in a unionized setting: the mediating role of leader-member exchange.
American Journal of Business 25 (2), 5569.