Employment Relations - Unitarist and Pluralist Approaches - Coursework Example

Running Head: Employment Relations Employment Relations Insert name: Module: Institution: Instructor: Date: Abstract The paper explores the rise of part-time, contract and temporary work that is non-standard employment relations is often seen as an inevitable outcome of the changing economic environment and associated requirements of a modern day organisation. However, this can also result in worker discontent if contingent workers are not treated equitably. For effective operation, the paper will substantiate on the industrial approach (unitarist and pluralist) in dealing with such scenario by focusing on two human resource functions. I will assess each approach and then figure out in my own opinion the best or the most appropriate approach to use. Employment Relation Employee relations entail the activities pursued with an aim of maintaining good relationship between employees and employers geared toward satisfactory production and motivation. Basically, employee relations involve the avoidance and resolution of problems related to workers and may impact on work performance. Unitarist theory, pluralist theory and Marxist theory are the most prevalent approaches (Edward, 2003). Each approach gives a particular perception of place of work relations and will mostly interpret differently any work related activities. Unitarist approach The unitarist approach is based on hypothesis that the firm is or should be an incorporated group of individuals with solitary authority structure with similar set of values, interests and goals shared among all the individuals within the firm. Edward (1998) points out that firms are thought to be in agreement and incorporated, with all workers within the firm sharing the same organisational goals and objectives and is perceived to work as one team. Through the unitary approach it is believed that both the employer and employees can attain and meet their common goals (high output level, good returns, good remuneration as well as job security). The unitary approach focus mostly on controlling and directing the workers and view the organisation as a unitary system of management, hence an opposition to this is regarded as unnecessary and exceptional. Moreover, unitary system is believed to be a paternalistic advance where it calls for loyalty of the entire workforce group. In this approach, trade unions are reckoned as unnecessary and conflict is perceived as distressing. Pluralist approach This approach views the conflict of interest and misunderstanding between employees and employers (managers) over the allocation of profits as common and bound to happen. Pluralism supposes that attainment of harmony and long-lasting stability in workers relations is the best solution of sorting demands of competing groups. Managers should therefore adopt the approach of agreeing with procedures and codes which ascertain that conflict of interest exist, thus need to negotiate and initiate compromise. The pluralist welcomes trade unions, joint consultation, collective agreements and mediation. Critique of pluralism Although compromise between parties with conflict of interest may stabilize in short run, but firm performance is assessed in global way. The compromise might be a lowest denominator, too safe but unsatisfactorily radical. Stakeholders rarely deal thoroughly with fast moving situations in which fundamental changes are called upon. The incorporation of bureaucratic procedures in consultation and mediation suppress the local initiatives. This may make stakeholders meetings a provision for resistance as opposed to willingness to change. The approach gives very little in situations involving face to face meetings between managers and employees especially in small enterprises. The integration of employees’ loyalty with the organization, individual interests and trade unions entails dilemmas (Cheng-Ping & I-Fei, 2009). Analysis The management of individuals at workplace is changing to keep pace with dynamics of rapidly changing conditions at work. Personnel management has turned into human resource management to human capital management as firms endeavor to surpass competitors in a global economy. Successful organisations for that reason search to build up productive interaction with employees, a move that translate into approaches that draw on the full potential of their workers through performance improvement and organisational change. Economic forces demand that the speed of revolutionise is likely to be instantaneous with technological advancements, which is improving day by day and calls for customised changes in services. Employee relations as a result should aim at knowledge management in addition to individuals at their own level similar to a competitive advantage (Bryson, 2001). This compares with recommendation by Donovan report in 1968, where he pointed out that pluralistic approach, believes that conflicts involving managers and employees are unavoidable and that well thought-out mechanisms ought to be considered in resolving the conflict in an organised manner. Pluralism stressed on communal bargaining through adversarial unions within the place of work where harmony is sought after through compromise. Though, the human resource related activities in management efforts throughout the 1980s and 1990s in promotion of team work techniques jointly with transformation within union population resulted to a more unitarist approach. (Guest & Hoque, 1996) Best approach I perceive unitarist approach to be the best in dealing with employee relations. The rapid change in the global economy calls for a win-win relationship between employers and employers, and this helps organisations to achieve their set goals. This is stimulated through a desire and willingness of many employers to manage the workforce through cooperation and agreement. The success of unitarist approach in an indecisive background where rationalisation and streamlining are expected, it has impinged on the conventional area of trade unions (Howell, 1998). In this view, it follows that firms now give attention to communication processes with the individual compared to jointly through pluralistic makeup by means of institutionalised measures. The level of the functioning or integration of the unitarist approach is subject to the classiness of the workforce, size of the firm and tendency for adjustments. Because of diversity of employees in workplace, there is need for organisation to strategise how to manage such workforce. The use of unitarist approach will be much relevant when managing such instances as it put into consideration the individual attributes and personal needs so as to realise the organisational goals. Managing diversity at workplace matters for the reason that it prohibits cases of hiring, firing, promotion or wage discrimination on basis of personal distinctiveness (Cheng-Ping, & I-Fei, 2009). For effective management of diversity at workplace, the managers need to borrow much from unitary theory which offers employees with a ‘‘fair go’’ in the workplace. Managing diversity has also been achieved both within and outside legal requirements, for instance, some employers institute voluntary programs to encourage and manage diversity. Recognizing and encouraging diversity make sure that no differences crop up to create barriers to professional growth or service delivery. Many benefits will accrue with managing diversity at work, such as employee retention, increased commitment to organisation which will result to raised productivity thus good profit to the firm’s stakeholders as well as good remuneration and rewards to employees (Cheng-Ping & I-Fei, 2009). It also improves the staff morale in pursuing organisational goals. Significance of unitary approach at; a) Employees perspective Working practices need to be flexible. People need to be improvement oriented, multi-skilled and willing to handle any work they are called upon. Where union are permitted, they perceive them as a means of further communication Focus on good relationship between employees and employers Encouragement of employee participation in organizational decision making process. This helps to empower people in their roles by focusing on team work, innovation, problem-solving and creativity. b) Employer perspective Staff policies need to unite, empower as well as motivate workers Broader goals of the firm need to be communicated to employees Remuneration and reward systems should be formulated so that they promote commitment and secure loyalty among employees Individual goals should be incorporated with organizational needs to boost productivity level Managers should be responsible of their team responsibilities Conclusion In conclusion, it’s clear that the promotion of relationship linking the employer, employee and trade unions has surfaced as a comprehensive system where union significance is compassionate of both long and short term interests of the organisation as well as those of its employees. The relationship between the three parties is based on acknowledgment of a general importance to safeguard the competitiveness, feasibility, and success of the firm (Cheng-Ping & I-Fei, 2009). It is also understandable that the existing nature of employee relations has gone through a dramatic revolutionises in theory and development, similarly with the development of the function of trade unions that has changed from a social involvement with basics of both the pluralistic and unitarist approaches.  To take in a more comprehensive approach obliging economic realities, unitarist approach has been very vital in the Australian workplace and has remained to be a reinforcement theory in employee relations. References Beardwell, I. (1996). Contemporary Industrial Relations: A Critical Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bryson, A. (2001). The Foundation of Partnership? Union Effects on Employee Trust in Management. National Institute Economic Review. London.  Cheng-Ping, C. & I-Fei, L (August 2009). Individual Characteristics, Organizational Justice and Job Attitudes of Employees under Non-standard Work Arrangements: Study of Employees of International Tourist Hotels. International Journal of Management, Poole: August, Vol.26, no. 2, p.224-240 Edwards, P. K. (1998). The Changing Employment Relationship: the Search for New Models. Paper to ESRC Employment Relations Seminar. Edward, P. & Edward, P. K. (2003). Industrial relations: theory and practice. New York: Wiley-Blackwell. Guest, D. & Conway, N. (1998). Employee Motivation and the Psychological Contract. Issues in People Management. IPD, Volume 21. Guest, D. & Hoque, K. (1996). Human Resource Management and the New Industrial Haynes, P. & Allan, M. (2001). Partnership as a Union Strategy: a Preliminary Evaluation. Employee Relations. Volume 23, 2.  Howell, C. (1998) “Restructuring British Public Sector Industrial Relations: State Policies and Trade Union Responses.” Policy Studies Journal. Vol. 26, 2. Sisson, K. (1999). The “New” European Social Model. Employee Relations. Vol. 21, 5. Read More