The Structuring of Neoliberalism in the US Airline Industry
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Open Access Dissertations 9-2012 Organizing Markets: The trS ucturing of Neoliberalism in the U.S. Airline Industry Dustin Robert Avent-Holt University of Massachusetts Amherst, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/open_access_dissertations Part of the Sociology Commons Recommended Citation Avent-Holt, Dustin Robert, "Organizing Markets: The trS ucturing of Neoliberalism in the U.S. Airline Industry" (2012). Open Access Dissertations. 611. https://doi.org/10.7275/8z4d-d912 https://scholarworks.umass.edu/open_access_dissertations/611 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Access Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Organizing Markets: The Structuring of Neoliberalism in the U.S. Airline Industry A Dissertation Presented by DUSTIN ROBERT AVENT-HOLT Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY September 2012 Sociology © Copyright by Dustin Avent-Holt 2012 All Rights Reserved Organizing Markets: The Structuring of Neoliberalism in the U.S. Airline Industry A Dissertation Presented by DUSTIN ROBERT AVENT-HOLT Approved as to Style and Content by: _________________________________ Donald Tomaskovic-Devey, Chair ________________________________ Joya Misra, Member ________________________________ Robert Faulkner, Member ________________________________ Michelle Budig, Member ________________________________ Michael Ash, Member ______________________________ Donald Tomaskovic-Devey, Chair Department of Sociology ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS What seems like to many years ago I started an unpredictable journey into academia because I wanted to understand the world around me and in some way transform that world. Beginning at North Carolina State University in 2003 I could have never imagined the impact of so many people on my intellectual journey. Undoubtedly, among the most central people in that journey has been my advisor, Don Tomaskovic- Devey. After taking me under his wing early on at NC State, he took me with him to the University of Massachusetts. I am indebted to him for countless conversations in not only his office (certainly the hardest place to maintain a conversation) but at countless bars in numerous cities, spanning multiple countries. Don brought me onto his projects and helped me develop my own. His constant pushback against my ideas has helped me develop my own sociological voice. He never asked what he would get out of of this, only seeking to ensure that I had everything I needed to develop as a sociologist. For that I am a better sociologist today that I was when I started. Having a mentor like Don has been crucial, no one person can be everything. Several other faculty at UMass took more time than they had to support me in numerous ways. Among the most important was Joya Misra. Joya met with me when I visited UMass and has been selflessly giving her time to me and my work since then. Her unwavering support and enthusiasm through challenges that seemed insurmountable to me has meant more than she could know. I don’t think I could have landed where I am today without her agreeing to serve on my committee when she was already overbooked and then offering her time and energy to helping me from start to finish in this project. iv Her ability to critique not only constructively but also lovingly is a rare gift that helped me move forward and stay positive about what I am doing. Michelle Budig opened her door to me with enthusiasm when I came to UMass and like no other actively sought to work with me. From my first seminar with her on Labor Market Inequalities she has pushed me toward clearer and sharper analytical reasoning. Rob Faulkner has always provided energy and enthusiasm along with his nuggets of sociological insights. Whether rifling through pages of CompuStat or the latest article on network diffusion conversations have always been lively and informative. Finally, Michael Ash agreed to serve on my committee with only limited knowledge of me, but has been an enthusiastic supporter of my work and provided a distinctive intellectual point to bounce my ideas off. I sincerely appreciate his offering up his time to helping me see this project through. No one can understand what it is like to be in graduate school, except other graduate students experiencing it with you. I was fortunate enough to numerous graduate students to lean on through this process. At UMass Irene Boeckmann has been a constant source of support, encouragement, and humor. Through routine lunches, dinners, and beers Irene listened to the development of this project, and for that I am extremely thankful. I also want to thank Jason Rodriquez, who among other things went through the crucial job market process with me. Sometimes neither of us thought we would make it into good jobs, but we did. I’m glad to have shared that experience with him. Numerous other graduate students at UMass provided suggestions on my work, read pages of it, helped me laugh, and simply provided a supportive atmosphere. Of particular mention for me are: Ken-Hou Lin, Chris Smith, Sharla Alegria, Melissa Hodges, Josh v Carreiro, Abbey Templar, and Ryan Turner. While at NC State I developed strong ties to many people, the most important of which were Sarah Nell and Kendra Jason. Even from afar they were both supportive and offered help when needed through routine emails, phone conversations, and drinks at conferences. With all of these friends I know I will never be alone at a conference. My family has been central to this process, providing constant love and support at just the right times. My parents, Bob and Kim Avent and Cindy and Beau McCranie, provided undying support and encouragement. Not all of my grandparents were able to see this process through but I know they are proud of me and that is all I could ever ask for. When I started my journey I was unmarried and childless. I am now married to a wonderful and supportive women, Laura, and we have the most amazing daughter, Phoebe. Both have helped to keep me grounded and ensure that I didn’t stay caught up in the ivory tower. Laura picked up her life to be with me during this process and that has been the greatest gift she could have given. She also ensured that we did things together on the weekends and provided constant encouragement that I could see this process through. Phoebe is only 16 months old and while she cannot complete a sentence she has taught me more than I could have imagined. It is with the hope that some bits of knowledge I contribute will make her world a better place that I continue this journey. vi ABSTRACT ORGANIZING MARKETS: THE STRUCTURING OF NEOLIBERALISM IN THE U.S. AIRLINE INDUSTRY SEPTEMBER 2012 DUSTIN AVENT-HOLT, B.S., GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY M.S., NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY Ph.D, UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST Directed By: Professor Donald Tomaskovic-Devey This dissertation examines the emergence of neoliberalism through an historical analysis of the evolution of the U.S airline industry. In 1938 the basic economic activities of U.S. airlines were placed under the regulatory oversight and control of the Civil Aeronautics Board. This institution of “regulated competition” persisted largely unquestioned until the economic crisis of the 1970s. Out of this crisis the Airline Deregulation Act was passed in 1978, eliminating most of these economic controls. Based on analysis of Congressional hearings, a key industry trade press (Air Transport World), the general business press, and financial and labor market data on the airline industry I explain the stable reproduction of “regulated competition” from 1938-1973, the mobilization against regulated competition that began in 1973 that led to the reorganization of the industry in 1978, and the transformation of the market for air travel in the 1980s following the 1978 Airline Deregulation Act. Through analyzing this case of the transition from state vii interventionism to neoliberalism I make three interrelated historical and theoretical arguments. First, as an historical object neoliberalism is a contextual and often incoherent political project that to fully understand requires fine-grained analyses of the social spaces in which neoliberalism is inserted and adapted. Second, neoliberal deregulations such as occurred in the airline industry do not translate into a simple self- regulating market. Instead, what we observe in this case is that market actors rebuild institutions and reorganize social relations in order to protect themselves from market competition. Finally, at a theoretical level I argue that while analytically distinct networks and institutions are mutually constitutive of markets and interact with each other in the evolution of a market. This case demonstrates the back and forth dynamics of actors building social relations to transform institutions that then transform existing social relations that is the hallmark of market dynamics. Thus, at a theoretical level I draw out the importance of understanding the relationship between networks and institutions in understanding the evolution of markets as social fields, while at a historical level I argue that focusing on concrete cases of neoliberalism will help us understand the multiplex politics behind producing a neoliberal political economy and the unexpected consequences of it. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………….……….…..iv ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………………..vii LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………….…..x LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………………....xi CHAPTER 1. NEOLIBERALISM AND THE SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF MARKETS……....1 2. THE RELATIONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL ARCHITECTURE OF MARKETS AS FIELDS……………………………………………………………..13 3.