Should Public Sector Employees Have the Same Bargaining Rights as Private Sector Employees - Coursework Example

Abstract The debate on advocacy of the people’s rights especially in relation to the government sector is more often seen and sometimes dismissed as irrelevant. However, the changing working environment and the general rise in the cost of living presents various dynamics that must be dealt with as a matter of urgency. Several factors must be considered while trying to bring about a balance in the work environment to ensure that both parties are at equilibrium and daft a formidable conclusion. There are also political considerations that arise to some extent where voting may be influenced by the individual’s stances on various issues that relate to labor laws. This paper tries to delve into this subject by demonstrating the importance of advocating for employee’s bargaining power whether in the public or private sector. I .Introduction For as long as the issue of employee and employer relation has been in the lime light, discussion has been ongoing as to how far employees in both the private and the public sector should enjoy what may be considered as rights that are equal to some extent. In order to understand this subject in more clear terms it, may be important to look into some interpretations and points of view that supports these arguments. In agitating for better working conditions and even better pay, employees are said to apply what is commonly known as collective bargaining. This can be said to be a means by which employees, in the private and often in the public sector, seek to negotiate with theirs to see to it that their working environment and even the pay are improved. Although there has been a seemingly low regard of this subject and often looked at as only appropriate and necessary in the private sector, collective bargaining rights have in the recent times taken center of debate in regards to public employees and unions. The role of the nation’s budget versus the contributions that the employee makes to enhance it further comes into play in this subject. Should the employee be deprived off some amount from his salary in order to have this amount cover up the provision of his rights? Whichever way the argument goes, the bottom line is that the right to agitate for a fair wage and decent work conditions should be presented to all workers whether they work for private or public employers (Bergstrom & Goodman, 1973).It has been argued that governments have a tendency to trample on the rights of their workers to advocate for better pay and working conditions. Thus, just like corporations, they need sometimes need to be reminded by organized workers to treat their employees fairly. It would be necessary to keenly look at the benefits that may arise from collective bargaining for both the employer and the employee. II A) Unnecessary- Public Sector / Civil Service When looking at the public sector and the rights of the workers, several arguments come into the picture. On one hand there is the employees whose earnings are expected to be slumped in case their rights have to be looked into. It can therefore be argued that to some extent there is an encroachment of the same meager earnings of the people in the public sector. To this extent, the members of the civil society are left with minimal options than to continue agitating for the improvements of their working conditions by all means. The case of protests held by workers in Wisconsin in 2011 is perhaps a demonstration of the power of the people upon the realization that government policies oppress them rather than motivate and encourage them to offer service to the public. The protests may be seen to have sparkled quite a huge debate in regard to the role and commitment of governments in providing suitable working conditions for their people without interfering with the rights of the people (Tiebout, 1956). At this point, it is notable that the single most important asset that workers may put into force is their unity. Unions must play their role in putting the government in check in a bid to realize better pay and better working conditions for workers. Admittedly, the government may be seen to have the means and the machinery that would bring down the any efforts by workers to fight for their rights. The legislature must thus be kept. Supporters of the radical changes in the public sector must make an effort to ensure that they provide a platform that does not just offer unconditional support to the unions but also encourage them to formulate what they believe to be proper and even make proposals of salary ranges (Bergstrom & Goodman, 1973). In other words unions must be encouraged to take hard and strong stances if and when need be. This might help to counter government interference with labour laws in a manner that makes them unfavorable to the employees. B) Essential Jobs not Discretionary There are several ways to look at the debate on whether there should be essential or discretionary provision of job opportunities. Basically essential jobs may be seen to provide a solution to recurring or cumulative needs of the people. In that case a discretionary lifestyle may be seen as a result of an individual’s efforts or a result or circumstances that not every individual may be privileged to have. By and large governments have the capability to provide the conditions and salaries that would enable their citizen afford first the basic needs. However, in so doing they must ensure that the employees can comfortably afford these items through the salaries offered. (Cutler, Elmendorf, & Zeckhauser, 1999) Regrettably, most government employees happen to be the greatest victims of thin budgets. Although the private sector is often seen as better in provision of salaries, it is notable that there is still a huge gap in harmonization of salaries especially in the wake of essential and discretionary provisions. One may thus be inclined to question the role of unions in trying to bring forward a balance between essential and discretionary provision. On one hand, one may argue that unions must be in the frontline in ensuring that at least the basic salaries for the employees both in government and private sector are at an acceptable level (Bergstrom & Goodman, 1973). Employment should provide a general feeling of commitment for both the employer and the employee. In this context, several aspects come into play. There general perception is that the private sector better provides better discretionary provisions. The employees in the public service thus continue to see themselves as lowly salaried and therefore continue to agitate for better pay. Inevitably, the debate of whether terms of payment should be exclusively essential or discretionary may not really have a formidable conclusion. However, there acceptable point is that there is whether in the private or the public sector, there must be first the satisfaction of essential needs before the discretion provisions. The debate is further enhanced by the realization that there some functions must be given priority regardless of their seemingly low concern. For instance, the firefighter performs an important function when called upon to do it. However, this might only be occasional and therefore some schools of thought may argue that their bargaining power should be limited in consideration of the number of hours worked at one given time. Nonetheless, it must be acknowledged that that they have as much rights as any other employee in either government or the public sector. c) Fiscal Limitations There are several factors that hinder the realization of the employee’s financial goals. The goals of expectations of the nation at large may determine how the employee and the employer harmonize their fiscal objectives. Perhaps the first most important step is to outline these objectives. When this is done, there is likely to be an agreeable system of how these objectives may be met between the employee and the employer (Lang & Jian, 1996). The nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and resources may as well determine the extent to which its employees may be well remunerated. It is observed that the general spending of the public regardless of the level is rising necessitated by a myriad of factors. This further necessitates a balance of what the individual is earning. It has been almost agreed that reductions in spending could represent undesirable service cuts which may be brought about by overstretching the taxes levied on various employees. Fiscal limitations will no doubt regarded as a key factor while interrogating the issues of employees bargaining rights (Bergstrom & Goodman, 1973). However, public service levels, unlike fixed amenities, can be altered by local action. In this case, local action may be referred to as any measures that may be put in place to enhance the public earning and to ensure that there some measure of satisfaction within the public employees. In virtually any community, desired levels of local government services can be modeled as a function of how much those services are valued, the costs of producing the services, and the jurisdiction’s ability to raise revenue. When these factors are enhanced, there is a possibility of striking a formidable balance where employees will feel appreciated for the services they are providing. The political angle of fiscal limitations must not be downplayed at any one given point. There is the likelihood that utility-maximizing voters will choose a spending level such that the ultimate benefit of an extra dollar of spending will be to some extent replaced by the overall cost of the taxes that may be levied to finance that particular expenditure. In other words, the employee will be comfortable if the tax that may be levied upon some expenditure is catered for in another sector. Other factors that may contribute to these calculations are issues such as mobility and sorting. Here the equilibrium between various economic strata in a given community may be seen to determine how far the issue of fiscal limitation affects the provision of goods and services and the general spending of that given community. Outcomes can affect the sorting equilibrium across communities considering that the outlook of a town in terms of attractiveness to movers changes with the shifts in public service package. Further a factor such as new residents joining the voter rolls and the public sector may affect the mindset of the population thus bringing about a shift in the issue in determination of important issues in the town and eventually in the whole nation. Another factor that may be cited as an example of how fiscal limitation may be an important factor to look into is the issue of economic downturn. Economic turnarounds unselectively affects the population and to some extent hoe the public perceives the polices that the government puts in place to curb this problem. If employees feel sufficiently shielded by the polices, it may be to the advantage of the government. On the other hand, fiscal limitations handed down on the employee will only most likely bring about more agitation by the employee. III.A) Compensation and Benefits The issue of compensation and benefits will be largely dependent on an organization in terms of size, professionalism, status and so on. Generally, each organization will be seen to follow a different remuneration structure for their employees. However, there are certain salary components that are common across the industries and they are observed in a number of ways. These salary components can be classified into the following broad categories (Tiebout, 1956). There is the base pay, which is the simply the monthly salary that is consistently offered by all organizations. It can be looked at the annual basic salary which comprises of 12 monthly payments. In some organizations there may be the cost of living adjustment allowance which is mostly applicable to employees sent on temporary assignment or posting outside of their home country. This ensures that the employee is well catered for to be able to compensate for difference in cost of living between the host and home countries. In some cases, there may also be the family allowance offered to support employees in their children’s upkeep. Organizations do this by providing a flat amount every month for every dependent child (Poterba & Rueben, 1999). Such provisions make the employee appreciative of the working environment and may be more productive. In recent times, changing demands in lifestyle have resulted in employees demanding that such allowances be factored in as part of their pay. Insurance and medical covers are part of the employees’ demands both in the civil service as well as the private sector. The ability of the unions to advocate for such demands may be seen to greatly determine the perception of the employees on the unions. Like compensations, benefits too are part of employees’ agitation and demands. Benefits may be looked at from the perspective of non-cash components of the package. These may include such considerations as pensions, health and medical insurance, life insurance, personal accident and critical illness insurance a well as annual vacation entitlements (Cutler, Elmendorf & Zeckhauser, 1999). At this point one may not clearly make direct comparisons across organizations since distinguishable differences are evident in the features, applicability and characteristics of the benefits packages provided by different organizations. On the overall, these entitlements are increasingly becoming demands that the employee and the employer must negotiate on. It is notable that where these aspects are provided, there are employees are likely to feel more comfortable with the terms and may end up being more productive. For government employees, these conditions are variably applied and there are evident discrepancies depending on the sector one is looking into. The importance of benefits and compensations may be largely viewed as motivational to the employee. Some organizations feel that this is more of a favor to their employees and therefore they are in the best position to decide how much they must chip in towards this cause. The bargaining concept of the employee at this context is that they should be enabled to propose the amount they would best cater for their specific needs (Lang & Jian, 1996). It is worth noting that most organizations either exclude the employee in deciding how much of compensation and /or benefit they should get at one point. This is where the unions come in to try and negotiate on behalf of the employees while the employer also sends in representatives who work out a plan that is acceptable to both parties. The ever increasing cost of living is probably the single most factors that contribute to the advocacy of these rights. B) Walking may constitute safety. This statement may best be interrogated from the point of view that endeavoring to advocate for these rights might be better in the long rather than waiting for matters to take their own cause. When employees agitate for their rights whether in the private or the civil service, their voices are likely to make a big difference. It could be argued that if it was left to the government to make decisions in regard to who gets what, it may take a long time since government expenses may be overwhelming to some extent. Collective bargaining on this matter may hold the solution to an amicable agreement (Cutler, Elmendorf & Zeckhauser, 1999). The representatives who sit to deliberate on these issues must be well knowledgeable and looking for some sort of balance for both parties. C) Management Practices On the subject of employees’ rights and collective bargaining, the issue of management practices becomes crucial on one aspect. The resources that are amassed from the taxes levied or monies collected in any other way become instrumental in determining how confident employees and employers feel about the whole process (Cutler, Elmendorf & Zeckhauser, 1999). In some cases, government sets up organizations to carry out the processes of managing these funds. This kind of organization is important in ensuring that employees can continuously follow up on various taxes that are levied on their pay pack. Ultimately, this is an issue of accountability. Governments have been repeatedly accused of levying taxes that do not eventually translate to the better services for the citizens. Employee unions come in handy in trying to see to it that these needs are catered for appropriately .There is also the issue of management of the unions and all other forms of corporations that advocate for the rights of the employees. These organizations need to be autonomous to some extent and heavily independent to be able to carry out their duties without the influence of external forces. D.Civil Service does not always work. The debate on whether government or the private sector is the best for provision of services ranges on. On the onset, it is clear that the criticism leveled against governments sometimes leaves one in unclear judgment. To some extent, governments are seen to be ignorant to the problems that affect the common man thus they are adamant to provide some of these compliments to their employees (Cutler, Elmendorf & Zeckhauser, 1999). This has greatly affected the general provision of services in government offices where it is often seen as an obligation that the employees undertake unwillingly. Apart from bureaucracy, government systems are seen to harbor the most corruption and thus affecting delivery of services and hindering proper working environment. This is in contrast to what is found in the private sector where people are seen to work out of some motivation. IV. Summary. Whether in the private or the public sector, it is important that employees understand the importance of advocating for their rights in terms of pay and working environment. In doing so, they must be reasonable and awake to all the issues that surround them and the status of nation’s and global economy at any one given moment. Whatever direction the debate takes, it is important to note that one important aspect is the fact that both parties must feel obliged to play their part of the bargain. . With good management of human and other form of resources, the civil service should perhaps be the most effective sector for provision of services. References Bergstrom, T. & Goodman, R. (1973). Private demands for public goods. American Economic Review Cutler, D.M., Elmendorf, D.W., & Zeckhauser, R.(1999). Restraining the leviathan: property tax limitation in Massachusetts. Journal of Public Economics 71, 313–334 Poterba, J.M., & Rueben, K.S. (1995). The effect of property tax limits on wages and employment in the local public sector. American Economic Review 85 (2), 384–389 Lang, K., & Jian, J. (1996). Property Taxes and Property Values: Evidence from Proposition 2. Boston University, Mime Tiebout, C.M. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy 64 (5), 319-348 Read More