Unequal and Indeterminate Employment Relationship - Essay Example

THE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP: UNEQUAL AND INDETERMINATE By Introduction The phrase employment relationship is defined as a legal notion used globally in referring to the connection between an employee or worker and their employer, who is the party under whom the employee performs tasks as per the employer’s terms. The reward is payment in terms of either wages, salary, or whatever means of compensation that the two distinct parties agree on. An employment relationship usually has attributed to it that bind the employers and employee together (International Labour Organization 2011). They include what type of organization it is, the purpose of the organization, the employee’s expected roles, the working hours, the rewards from the service, terms and conditions in the bond, the deployment of power within the organization and so on. The employment relationship commences when an employer decides to hire a worker, meaning that there is a party involved in overseeing the relationship. It is at this point that a controversy may arise regarding equality and clarity involved in the process. This text will discuss the mentioned controversy, and support in detail why or what makes it uncertain and unequal as well by analysing the three perspectives of the relationship. The employment relationship has two parties who agree to correlate before it qualifies to be called that. In the case where one of the parties involved tends to have a bargaining power that is more than the others are, then it means that they have better options and privileges above the other, which results in inequality. The biggest reason why there exists the notion of inequality in the relationship is that in the modern world, it is far much easier for an employer to hire an employee than it is for the employee to find a job. This condition has been brought about by the economic conditions on the globe that lead to an unbalanced relationship between the numbers of jobs created for the people joining the job market.During the application process for instance, as Orife, Ashamalla & Slack (2003, p. 40)write, some employers use discriminatory criteria in selecting job applicants which in some instances might be unjustified. Such include asking about gender, marital status, race, age, to mention but a few. According to Serna, Perez, Artazcoz, Moen, and Benavides (2013), “gender differences in power that place men in a better situation than women to bargain their employment conditions… show more men working with a permanent contract and occupying the higher job status positions.” This simply means that even inside organizations, gender bias is a means applied in creating the inequality. On the employer’s part as well, inequality is possible. This is discussed by Hogbin (2006, p. 4) where he argues that the contract signed during the start of any employment is equal because if it was not, then the employee would not accept the job. The biggest disadvantage lies with the employer, as in “… an employee has the freedom to resign from a job for any reason… in an overwhelming majority of cases, employers are powerless to prevent job resignations…”. Such a scenario poses as a threat to an employer in that an untimely resignation by their employee(s) can tamper with their functioning. This too, is a case of inequality in that some relationships allow the employee more options than the employer. In Seems (2008, p. 59) it is revealed that an employment relationship is never a guarantee for either of the two parties. This is because on the part of the employer, he/she is not sure of who they are hiring, which presents a potential risk of them not being up to standard in meeting the tasks they are required, or rather, they risk signing what proverbs refer to as a “blank cheque.” This is to say that in hiring someone for a certain amount of reward, the employer is unsure of whether the employee is worth it. An employee’s worth is determined as per their skill, output, pace, amongst other aspects, depending on the organization. Still on the employee’s note, some get hired, but do not have a definite answer regarding their stay at the organization. This therefore creates a dilemma or confusion as to whether they should settle with the current (hired) job, or keeping giving ear to the wind that might import better (permanent) vacancies. Seems adds that on the employee’s part, the uncertainty lies in the fact that their benefits (determined after hiring) can be varied any time. This includes conditions and wages. The above issues are, however addressed through three outstanding theories by scholars in the industrial relations fraternity. These theories or perspectives contrast in their presentation of understanding workplaces with regard to conflicts, regulation of jobs, and Unions’ roles. These three perspectives on workplace relationships are radical/ Marxist, Pluralist, and Unitarism, and will be discussed herein; Pluralist perspective This perspective recognizes that within the organization, power distribution is uneven, and that there are multiple groupings, each with a power of its own, and that might result in conflict if not effectively managed. Blyton and Jenkins (2007, p. 166-167) explains that in an organizational setup, the main course of the conflict between the employer and employees would be the wage-effort bargain. This conflict might arise due to the two-way desires of both employer and employee to achieve maximal from their roles in the work context. Workers might demonstrate to have their wages increased, while employers might cut down their employees’ wages to have higher returns from their businesses. The solutions offered under this perspective include accommodation of all existing groups’ interests by observing democracy across the entire workforce, negotiations during joint decision-making, the use of collective bargaining, and implementing fair concessions on both the employer and employee’s parts. This perspective can apply in resolving the conflict that arises when there is inequality between the two parties, for instance, if the employer decides to fire an employee or reduce their wages, the above processes can apply to ensure satisfaction on both sides. Unitarist perspective From the unitary perspective to apply, three assumptions have to be in place. The first assumption is that a group of people who are integrated exists, there should be a simple loyalty or authority structure, and third, there should be a set of common objectives, interests and values (Rose 2008, p. 27). In this setting, the employer (management) retains the right to make and manage decisions, but they are regarded as acceptable and legitimate, in which any sign of opposition to it is perceived as irrational. This leads to the outstanding attribute of this perspective that is a theory that takes into assuming that the entire organization observes and enjoys unity and harmony, and all kinds of conflict are regarded as exceptional and unnecessary. This perspective is effective in curbing conflicts that arise from dissatisfactions between employees and the management (internally) and regards the involvement of trade unions as an intrusion to the organization, thus similar to the opposition earlier mentioned, they are considered irrational. As such, trade unions are not allowed in organizations not unless in special cases when they can mediate on issues regarding payments, but never on matters regarding decision making and authority (Safari Book 2011). This perspective is best used by management bodies because it presents the following attributes; one, it enables the management level to exercise mild authority by putting into consideration the terms and demands of everyone in the organization. Concisely, it allows the formation of a governance structure whose interest is for the best of everyone involved. Secondly, it gives management peace of mind in that the employees can take the blame on their behalf, and lastly, it keeps any external influences at bay since it upholds the management’s actions and decisions. Marxist perspective This perspective of employment relationships takes a societal approach and takes into assumption that power in an organization will always pull in opposite directions; towards the employer and employee. Concisely, the Marxist perspective conducts its analysis based on “materialistic” approaches, which are attributed to society, society in the sense that individuals in society need to survive thus need to struggle in order to afford their basic needs. This is the reason why employers will struggle to achieve more at the expense of their workers. This in turn pushes the workers to resist, thus the emergence of conflict (Salamon 2000, p. 10-11).The conflict, resulting from these two bodies relating is about the struggle of both to achieve higher leverage over the opposite force (party) during the bargaining process. This approach is usually associated with the notion earlier discussed that an employer can survive without the employee, but the employee finds it very hard, or next to impossible in surviving without an employer (job). This approach therefore deals directly with employer-employee conflicts. According to the Dzimbiri (2008, p. 4), organizational conflicts arise from the struggle between the two parties in that while employers may decide to pay less to the employees so as to make more income, the employees on their part resist by forming [industrial] conflicts. The resolution of such conflicts includes accommodation of all existing groups’ interests, negotiations, use of collective bargaining, and implementing fair concessions to both employer and employee. Conclusion The discussion text above defines through a practical approach the implementation of the employment relationship, and goes on to demonstrate how it is indeterminate and unequal. The inequality mostly affects the employer, who as the evidence supports, is awarded the weaker hand during the negoatiaon process. On the other hand, the employer is disadvantaged by the uncertainty in that when hiring a worker, they are unsure of his/her output capacity, thus putting their organizations at risks of underproduction or semi-skills. In conclusion, the discussion analyzed the three theories that can be used to control or ensure equality, performance, and cohesiveness persists in an organization. These theories are the Marxist, Unitarist, and Pluralist, all which play distict roles in varying organization scenarios, as is evident in the text. Bibliography Blyton, P & Jenkins, J 2007. Key Concepts in Work, Los Angeles, Calif, Sage. Dzimbiri, LB 2008, Industrial Relations In A Developing Society The Case Of Colonial, Independent One-Party And Multiparty Malawi. GöTtingen, Cuvillier. Hogbin, G 2006, Power in Employment Relationships: Is There an Imbalance?,New Zealand Business Roundtable. International Labor Organization 2011, Employment Relationship, Available from:http://www.ilo.org/ifpdial/areas-of-work/labour-law/WCMS_CON_TXT_IFPDIAL_EMPREL_EN/lang--en/index.htm John NO, Maali H, Ashamalla, &Frederick, JS 2013,Unintended consequences of equal employment opportunity: Unequal parties in the selection process? Journal of Diversity Management. Rose, E 2008, Employment Relations, Harlow, England, Prentice Hall/Financial Times. Safari Books Online 2011, Industrial Relations: Perspective and Approach, Safari Books Online, Available at:http://my.safaribooksonline.com/book/management/9788131726013/1-industrial-relations-evolution-and-growth/navpoint23 Salamon, M 2000, Industrial Relations: Theory And Practice. Harlow [U.A.], Financial Times Prentice Hall. Seems, C 2008, Ready, Set, Hired!: A Practical Guide To Starting A Career With The Canadian Government. Renfrew, Ont, General Store Pub. Serna C, Perez E, Artazcoz L, Moen B & Benavides F 2013,Gender inequalities in occupational health related to the unequal distribution of working and employment conditions: a systematic review, International Journal for Equity in Health. Available from:http://www.equityhealthj.com/content/12/1/57 Read More