Among the suggestions for commentaries in the focal article by Lefkowitz et al. (Reference Lefkowitz, Zickar, Cascio and Kochan2026) is the question of the comparability of I-O psychologists’ experiences outside the U.S. to those described in the article. In the article, the authors employ a U.S.-centric perspective when describing the role that I-O psychology played (or did not play) regarding organized labor. Therefore, it is important to examine whether this perspective can be generalized to other parts of the world. Because European I-O psychology calls itself work and organizational psychology (WOP) rather than industrial and organizational psychology, one might assume that WOP researchers have incorporated organized labor more extensively into their studies. As much as I would like to portray Europe as a haven for collaboration between organized labor and I-O psychology, that does not reflect reality.

Historically, European WOP has shifted between economic and humanistic goals (Reichman & O’Neill Berry, Reference Reichman, Berry, Carr, MacLachlan and Furnham2012). Sometimes it has followed U.S.-based perspectives, such as Taylorism. Other times, it has employed its own perspective, such as object psychotechnics (Giese, Reference Giese and Abderhalden1927). This perspective involves adapting work means and conditions to the nature of the workers. It is a necessary addition to subject psychotechnics, which focuses on adapting workers to work (Giese, Reference Giese and Abderhalden1927). However, object psychotechnics, a more human-focused approach, did not gain much popularity, and researchers focused more on subject psychotechnics (Friedmann, Reference Friedmann1953). Nevertheless, European researchers repeatedly attempted to adopt a human-centered approach. For instance, they introduced a research program on the humanization of work (Salfer & Furmaniak, Reference Salfer and Furmaniak1981), which aimed to foster workers’ personalities, enhance their qualifications, and offer opportunities for co-determination in the workplace. Others examined the latent functions of work (Jahoda, Reference Jahoda1979) or examined criteria for a human-centered job design (Hacker, Reference Hacker1984). These criteria include job feasibility without impairment or harm, as well as support for learning and health. Furthermore, human-centered jobs should aim to develop workers’ personalities by allowing them to reach their full potential and develop skills (Hacker, Reference Hacker1984, Reference Hacker2025). This can be achieved by assigning complete tasks, offering decision-making autonomy, providing social support, and offering feedback. However, these initiatives did not explicitly include organized labor, unions, and other forms of work representation (e.g., Jahoda et al., Reference Jahoda, Lazarsfeld and Zeisel2017).

One might assume that European WOP researchers focus more on employee health and well-being than U.S.-based researchers do (Zickar, Reference Zickar2004). However, this has not led them to engage with organized labor, such as unions or work representatives, more than their U.S.-based colleagues do. As with North American teaching (Barling, Reference Barling1988; Vesper et al., Reference Vesper, Zickar, O’Brien, O’Neill, Dollard, Flynn, Fletcher, Stephenson, Ahr, Jost, Somerville and Barling2025), European textbooks rarely mention unions or other forms of industrial relations. In fact, only a few European WOP researchers have explicitly studied unions: Research groups in Belgium and Sweden (e.g., De Witte et al., Reference De Witte, Sverke, Van Ruysseveldt, Goslinga, Chirumbolo, Hellgren and Näswall2008; Goslinga et al., Reference Goslinga, Hellgren, Chirumbolo, De Witte, Naswall and Sverk2005; Sverke et al., Reference Sverke, Hernandez, Tanimoto, Hellgren, Näswall, De Cuyper, Selenko, Euwema and Schaufeli2023) have done so. Other research groups are located in Spain (e.g., Martínez-Iñigo et al., Reference Martínez-Iñigo, Zacharewicz and Kelloway2020) and in Germany (e.g., Vesper & König, Reference Vesper and König2022) or were located in the United Kingdom (e.g., Hartley & Kelly, Reference Hartley and Kelly1986).

Therefore, the neglect of organized labor by I-O psychologists is not necessarily a mere U.S. phenomenon. However, it has been argued that I-O psychology is largely U.S.-centered (Bajwa & König, Reference Bajwa and König2019). Therefore, European researchers may have been influenced by their U.S.-based colleagues. Nevertheless, this does not explain why research has been so scarce, considering that unions have a long history in most European countries, with union membership rates ranging from 8% in France to 70% in Finland, Denmark, and Sweden, averaging 23% across the European Union as a whole (European Trade Union Institute, 2025). Moreover, union safety representatives in Europe play a pivotal role in fostering safe and healthy work environments and safeguarding workers from occupational hazards (Walters & Wadsworth, Reference Walters and Wadsworth2017). This may partly explain why organizations in countries in which union density is higher report better psychosocial risk protection and stronger perceptions of psychosocial safety climate (Dollard & Neser, Reference Dollard and Neser2013).

Despite the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology’s (EAWOP) stated mission to “enhance the well-being and performance of individuals and organizations” (EAWOP, 2025) and the long history of unions in Europe, I-O psychology in Europe seems to ignore or neglect organized labor, despite the important role trade unions play, for example in promoting occupational safety and health (Vesper et al., Reference Vesper, Zickar, O’Brien, O’Neill, Dollard, Flynn, Fletcher, Stephenson, Ahr, Jost, Somerville and Barling2025). Additionally, the long tradition of European WOP research on burnout using the job demands-resources model (Bakker et al., Reference Bakker, Demerouti and Sanz-Vergel2023) has not resulted in a holistic approach that includes organized labor to address the causes and consequences of burnout (Demerouti & Adaloudis, Reference Demerouti and Adaloudis2024; Vesper et al., Reference Vesper, Zickar, O’Brien, O’Neill, Dollard, Flynn, Fletcher, Stephenson, Ahr, Jost, Somerville and Barling2025). This neglect provides an opportunity for researchers to engage in research on and, importantly, with trade unions, as described by Somerville and Barling in Vesper et al. (Reference Vesper, Zickar, O’Brien, O’Neill, Dollard, Flynn, Fletcher, Stephenson, Ahr, Jost, Somerville and Barling2025).

In conclusion, the European I-OP perspective on organized labor has largely resembled that of the US, with a few exceptions being the research groups in Belgium (e.g., De Witte et al., Reference De Witte, Sverke, Van Ruysseveldt, Goslinga, Chirumbolo, Hellgren and Näswall2008), Sweden (e.g., Sverke et al., Reference Sverke, Hernandez, Tanimoto, Hellgren, Näswall, De Cuyper, Selenko, Euwema and Schaufeli2023), Spain (e.g., Martínez-Iñigo et al., Reference Martínez-Iñigo, Zacharewicz and Kelloway2020), United Kingdom (e.g., Hartley & Kelly, Reference Hartley and Kelly1986), and Germany (e.g., Vesper & König, Reference Vesper and König2022). This is despite the ongoing significance of organized labor in ensuring occupational safety and health, particularly in light of the growing prevalence of hazardous working conditions (see Vesper et al., Reference Vesper, Zickar, O’Brien, O’Neill, Dollard, Flynn, Fletcher, Stephenson, Ahr, Jost, Somerville and Barling2025; Vesper et al., Reference Vesper, Grzymala-Moszczynska, König, Martínez-Iñigo, Sverke and Zickar2024; Zickar, Reference Zickar2004). As Kaylee Somerville and Julian Barling pointed out, fewer than 60 papers were published focusing on union-related topics in the last 35 years within top organizational behavior journals (Vesper et al., Reference Vesper, Zickar, O’Brien, O’Neill, Dollard, Flynn, Fletcher, Stephenson, Ahr, Jost, Somerville and Barling2025). This indicates a general worldwide trend of IOP neglecting organized labor. Therefore, IOP researchers worldwide are strongly encouraged to collaborate with organized labor. From my conversations with various trade unionists, I can conclude that all IOP topics are relevant to unions, and our research would benefit from incorporating their perspective.