Why does the willingness of interest groups to join forces with their peers abroad vary across issues? The present article points to cross-issue variation in the “constrain-thy-neighbor” effects of transnational law. Interest groups consider not only whether they are worse off if they themselves are subjected to a transnational law. They also consider how it affects them if the same law applies abroad. Depending on the issue, they derive advantages or disadvantages from seeing their neighbors constrained, and this affects their willingness to fight transnational legislation on that issue. To illustrate the argument, the article compares cohesion within the Union of Industrial and Employers’ Confederations of Europe (UNICE), the European peak employer federation, on two aspects of EU company law. UNICE members were divided over EU takeover directives while uniting against EU worker participation directives. Statements released by German and British UNICE members show that the divergent constrain-thy-neighbor effect associated with these issues contributed to variation in cohesion.
Addison, J.T., Bellmann, L., Schnabel, C., & Wagner, J. ( 2004). The reform of the German Works Constitution Act: A critical assessment. Industrial Relations, 43(2), 392-420.
2.
Beyers, J., Eising, R., & Maloney, W. ( 2008). Researching interest group politics in Europe and Elsewhere: Much we study, little we know?West European Politics, 31(6), 1103-1128.
3.
Bowman, J. ( 1982). The logic of capitalist collective action. Rationality and Society, 21(4-5), 571-604.
4.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände [Annual report]. (1973). Jahresbericht. Cologne, Germany: Author.
5.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände [Annual report]. (1974). Jahresbericht. Cologne, Germany: Author.
6.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände [Annual report]. (1975). Jahresbericht. Cologne, Germany: Author.
7.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände [Annual report]. (1981). Jahresbericht. Cologne, Germany: Author.
8.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände [Annual report]. (1982). Jahresbericht. Cologne, Germany: Author.
9.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände [Annual report]. (1989). Jahresbericht. Cologne, Germany: Author.
10.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände & Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie. (1981, January 27). Stellungnahme zu dem Vorschlag der EG-Kommission für eine Richtlinie über die Unterrichtung und Anhörung der Arbeitnehmer von Unternehmen mit komplexer, insbesondere transnationaler Struktur [Position paper regarding the EC Commission proposal for a directive concerning the information and consultation of employees in companies with a complex and especially a multinational structure]. Cologne, Germany: Author.
11.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände & Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie. (1982, July 22). Rundschreiben Nr. 13 an die Mitgliedsverbände zum Vorschlag der EG-Kommission einer 5. Richtlinie [Newsletter no. 13 to the member associations regarding the EC Commission proposal for a 5th directive]. Cologne, Germany: Author.
12.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände & Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie. (1983a). Comment on the amended proposal for a directive on procedures for informing and consulting employees-COM (83) 292 Final (Vredeling directive proposal) . Cologne, Germany: Author.
13.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände & Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie. (1983b, November). Stellungnahme zum geänderten Vorschlag einer Fünften gesellschaftsrechtlichen Richtlinie [Position paper regarding the amended proposal for a 5th directive] . Cologne, Germany: Author.
14.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände & Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie. (1989, June 21). Stellungnahme zum Vorschlag einer 13. gesellschaftsrechtlichen Richtlinie über Übernahmeangebote [Position paper regarding the proposal for a 13th company law directive concerning takeover bids]. Cologne, Germany: Author.
15.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände & Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie. (1991, March 15). Stellungnahme zum Vorschlag für eine Richtlinie des Rates über die Einsetzung Europäischer Betriebsräte [Position paper regarding the proposal of a Council directive on European Works Councils] . Cologne, Germany: Author.
16.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände & Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie. (1998a, December). Stellungnahme: Richtlinienvorschlag zur Errichtung eines allgemeinen Rahmens zur Verbesserung der Informationsund Konsultationsrechte der Arbeitnehmer in der Europäischen Gemeinschaft [Position paper: Proposed directive regarding the creation of an overall framework for the improvement of information and consultation rights for employees in the European Community]. Cologne, Germany: Author.
17.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände & Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie. (1998b, February 2). Stellungnahme zum geänderten Vorschlag für eine 13. Richtlinie über Übernahmeangebote [Position paper regarding the amended proposal for a 13th directive on takeover bids]. Cologne, Germany: Author.
18.
Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände & Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie. (2002, November 26). Stellungnahme zum Kommissionsvorschlag für eine neue Übernahmerichtlinie [Position paper regarding the Commission proposal for a new takeover directive] . Berlin: Author.
19.
Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie. (1987 ). BDI comments in UNICE memo 22.6/12/2 on O.P.A.-Takeover bids . Brussels, Belgium: Union of Industrial and Employers’ Confederations of Europe.
20.
Callaghan, H. ( 2006). European integration and the clash of capitalisms: British, French and German disagreements over corporate governance, 1970-2003. Doctoral dissertation, Evanston, IL, USA: Northwestern University.
21.
Callaghan, H. ( 2009). Insiders, outsiders and the politics of corporate governance: How ownership structure affects party positions in Britain, Germany and France . Comparative Political Studies, 42, 733-762.
22.
Callaghan, H. ( 2010). Beyond methodological nationalism: How multilevel governance affects the clash of capitalisms. Journal of European Public Policy, 17(4), 564-580.
23.
Callaghan, H., & Höpner, M. (2005). European integration and the clash of capitalisms: Political cleavages over takeover liberalization . Comparative European Politics, 3, 307-332.
24.
Cohen, A. ( 1995). Divided capitalism and Marx’s concept of politics . Political Studies, 43(1), 92-104.
25.
Confederation of British Industry. (1973). Interim recommendations by the CBI Subcommittee for European Social Affairs on EEC proposals for worker participation in management. London: Author.
26.
Confederation of British Industry. (1984). CBI response to the Government’s consultative document on the "Vredeling" directive and draft EC Fifth directive on the harmonisation of company law . London: Author.
27.
Confederation of British Industry. (1989a). CBI memorandum: Contested takeovers- The international dimension. London: Author.
28.
Confederation of British Industry. (1989b). CBI response to DTI consultative document. London: Author.
29.
Confederation of British Industry. (1991). Response to the European Commission’s proposal for a directive concerning the establishment of European working councils. London : Author.
30.
Confederation of British Industry. (1993). News release. London: Author.
31.
Confederation of British Industry. (2001). News release. London: Author.
32.
Dahrendorf, R. ( 1978). Class and class conflict in industrial society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. (Original work published 1959)
33.
Fioretos, O. ( 2001). The domestic sources of multilateral preferences: Varieties of capitalism in the European Community. In P. Hall & D. Soskice (Eds.), Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage (pp. 213-246). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
34.
Freeman, R.B., & Lazear, E.P. ( 1995). An economic analysis of works councils. In J. Rogers & W. Streeck (Eds.), Works councils (pp. 27-50). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
35.
Frieden, J. ( 1999). Actors and preferences in international relations. In D. A. Lake & R. Powell (Eds.), Strategic choice and international relations (pp. 40-76). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
36.
Friedrich, O.A. ( 1972). Der Mitbestimmungsvorschlag aus der Sicht der Arbeitgeber [The worker participation proposal from the employers‘ point of view.] In H. von der Groeben, H. O. Vetter & O. A. Friedrich (Eds.), Europäische Aktiengesellschaft- Beitrag zur sozialen Integration? [European Company - A contribution to social integration?] (pp. 48-78). Europa Union Verlag.
Greenwood, J. ( 2002). Inside the EU business associations. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave.
39.
Greenwood, J., & Aspinwall, M. (Eds.). (1998). Collective action in the European Union. Interests and the new politics of accountability. London: Routledge.
40.
Hall, P., & Soskice, D. (Eds.). (2001). Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
41.
Hancké, B., Rhodes, M., & Thatcher, M. (Eds.). (2007). Beyond varieties of capitalism: Conflict, contradictions, and complementarities in the European economy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
42.
Hojnacki, M. ( 1997). Interest groups’ decision to join alliances or work alone. American Journal of Political Science, 41(1), 61-87.
43.
Höpner, M., & Schäfer, A. (Eds.). (2008). Die Politische Ökonomie der europäischen Integration [The political economy of European integration] . Frankfurt, Germany: Campus.
44.
Ingham, G. ( 1984). Capitalism divided? The city and industry in British social development. London: Macmillan .
45.
Knudsen, H. ( 1995). Employee participation in Europe. London: SAGE.
46.
Kolvenbach, W. ( 1990). EEC company law harmonization and worker participation . University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Business Law, 11(4), 709-788.
47.
Korpi, W. ( 2006). Power resources and employer-centered approaches in explanations of welfare states and varieties of capitalism: Protagonists, consenters, and antagonists. World Politics, 58(2), 167-206.
48.
Longstreth, F. ( 1979). The city, industry and the state. In C. Crouch (Ed.), State and economy in contemporary capitalism (pp. 157-190). London: Billing .
49.
Mahoney, C. ( 2007). Networking vs. allying: The decision of interest groups to join coalitions in the US and the EU. Journal of European Public Policy, 14(3), 366-383.
50.
Marks, G., Hooghe, L., & Blank, K. ( 1996). European integration from the 1980s: State-centric versus multi-level governance. Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(3), 348-378.
51.
Müller-Jentsch, W. ( 1995). Germany: From collective voice to co-management. In J. Rogers & W. Streeck (Eds.), Works councils (pp. 53-78). Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
52.
Nagels, K., & Sorge, A. ( 1977). Industrielle Demokratie in Europa. Frankfurt, Germany: Campus.
53.
Offe, C., & Wiesenthal, H. (1980). Two logics of collective action: Theoretical notes on social class and organizational form. Political Power and Social Theory, 1, 67-115.
54.
Pontusson, J. ( 2005). Varieties and commonalities of capitalism. In D. Coates (Ed.), Varieties of capitalism, varieties of approaches (pp. 163-188). Houndmills, UK: Palgrave.
55.
Putnam, R.D. ( 1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games. International Organisation, 42(3), 427-460.
56.
Roe, M.J. ( 1994). Strong managers, weak owners: The political roots of American corporate finance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
57.
Saurugger, S. ( 2007). Review article: Collective action in theEuropean Union. Comparative Politics, 39, 481-500.
58.
Shleifer, A., & Summers, L.H. ( 1988). Breach of trust in hostile takeovers. In A. J. Auerbach (Ed.), Corporate takeovers: Causes and consequences (pp. 33-68). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
59.
Smith, M. ( 2000). American business and political power: Public opinion, elections, and democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
60.
Stein, J.C. ( 1988). Takeover threats and managerial myopia. Journal of Political Economy, 96(1), 61-80.
61.
Streeck, W. ( 1991). Interest heterogeneity and organizing capacity: Two logics of collective action? In R. Czada & A. Héritier (Eds.), Political choice: Institutions, rules, and the limits of rationality (pp. 161-198). Frankfurt, Germany: Campus.
62.
Streeck, W. ( 1997). Industrial citizenship under regime competition: The case of the European works councils. Journal of European Public Policy, 4(4), 643-664.
63.
Thüsing, R. ( 1982). "Vredeling-Richtlinie"-Schon vom Ansatz her verfehlt . Der Arbeitgeber, 16(17-34), 903-906.
64.
Visser, J., & Ebbinghaus, B. (1992). Making the most of diversity? European integration and transnational organization of labour. In J. Greenwood, J. Grote , & K. Ronit (Eds.), Organized interests and the European community (pp. 206-237). London: SAGE.
65.
Vitols, S. ( 2001). Varieties of corporate governance: Comparing Germany and the UK. In P. Hall & D. Soskice (Eds.), Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage (pp. 337-360). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
66.
Walker, R.P. ( 1983). The Vredeling proposal: Cooperation versus confrontation in European labor relations. International Tax & Business Lawyer, 1(1), 177-196.
67.
Waschke, H. ( 1977). Workers’ participation in management in the nine European Community countries. Comparative Labor Law Journal , 2, 83-101.
68.
Woll, C. ( 2006). Lobbying in the European Union: From sui generis to a comparative perspective. Journal of European Public Policy , 13(3), 456-470.
