The reality of work cultures in the modern economy - Essay Example

The Reality of Work Culture in the Modern Economy al Affiliation Introduction When Kraft took over Cadbury in 2010, they had the view that this was going to be an expansion of their business that operates in over 160 countries. The company that has its origin in America took over Cadbury that is a British company. The company bought off Cadbury and is today the sole owner of maiden British company. The takeover has not been easy as there have been many challenges surrounding it, and the British citizens from all occupations have expressed their concerns over the takeover (Rigby and Masters, 2010, p. 2). The organization that fights for the rights of workers has pushed for several assertions by Kraft and at the same time continued to push the government to act accordingly to save the many British citizens who work for Cadbury Company, which is now under Kraft. Several issues have come up over time since the takeover and even before the situation was the same. These issues range from difference in cultures and values as well as laying-off workers as well as closing of some plants aligned to the Cadbury Company. These issues have continued to create a lot of tension between the British public and the Kraft Company over the years since the takeover in 2010 (Rigby and Cohen, 2010, p. 2). The Unite, a workers organization championing the rights of workers in the United Kingdom has constantly pressed the Kraft Company to assure the workers of their jobs at the company after the takeover and at the same time to be honest and truthful with the public. The government has been under pressure to compel the Kraft Company to assure the employees that their job is safe with the company (Eaglesham, 2010, p. 2). Kraft and Cadbury cultures in the workplace The values that Kraft and Cadbury advance at the workplace are very different. Kraft Culture Kraft as a company is capitalistic in nature and the major goal is to maximize on the revenue regardless of the effect this may have on the people who work for the company. When the company took over Cadbury, it made a promise that it would not close any plant in the country. However, months down the line the same company closed the Somerdale factory in England. This is despite the fact that they made a promise not to do so. The major reason, according to the company management was a poor analysis of the viability of the company in Somerdale and greater investment that Cadbury Company in Poland. This was a major setback for the many employees who were working at the Somerdale Company as they lost their job. This is a good example of capitalistic approach to work and revenue driven decision-making process (Francis, 2012, p. 87). The wellness of the employees and the job security is not a concern for Kraft. This in turn trickles down to the public, causing poverty and stress among the lower class in the society. This culture is of great harm as it leads to inequalities in the society. The social gradient due to such cultures is a major concern in the modern work culture. Another poor value that Kraft has in its management in the workplace is lack of consultation in their approach to issues. The company is planning to increase the amount of money employees pay to the retirement scheme to cater for the retired employees. This is a burden of the side of the employees. The management took this decision without consulting the employees and despite this lack of consultation, the implementation of the directive is already underway. This leads to stressful situations at work as the input from the workers is enormous and the resources that they gain in the end are minimal (Dewe et al., 2010, p. 61). This culture, therefore, defines work as a disciplined compliance where the employee has the duty to obey the prerogative of the manager, and those in high positions of management and supervisory roles. This means that the welfare of the workers is no longer an issue of consideration for many companies, but rather the key issue of consideration is achieving the objectives of the company and the organization. This is the case with Kraft Company after its takeover of Cadbury in the UK. Cadbury culture Cadbury as a company had a culture of trust and in the British society; trust is one of the very important values. The Cadbury Company gives much attention to the trust of others other than give much attention to the monetary objective as Kraft does. Investment is a factor, but it does not override trust as a culture. This creates the satisfaction in the workplace for the employees and thus stress-free life. Poverty reduces as employees plan themselves with the little they earn without fear of unnecessary extra deductions. This means that the health of the employees who work for Cadbury is safe as compared to those who work for Kraft as a company (Denison, 2012, 89). The other culture of Cadbury is the proper remuneration for the work done and the acknowledgement of the workers’ union. Cadbury allows the employees to take part in the decisions of the company. The empowerment process boosts the morale of the employees and at the same time leads to better education levels for their children as well as better quality of life. Changes from the takeover The takeover at Cadbury by Kraft has brought with it many changes in the company. Firstly, the culture has changed from that of public benefit to that of the company benefit. It is now more of investment related issues and revenue generation rather than the well-being of the employees. There have been many demonstrations after the takeover and UNITE as a workers’ championing group has had several calls to protect the jobs of the many employees in Cadbury. The management has failed to communicate with the workers and instead, has even gone ahead to close one of the factories in Somerdale, England. This further deteriorated the relationship between the employees and the new employers. The closure of Somerdale factory was a major setback for the entire British community, and the many employees who used to work at the factory and in the process, this effect trickles down to their families (Ciulla et al., 2007, p. 102). The poor relationship between the employees and the new employer is even worse with the increase in contributions to the retirement scheme by the employees of Cadbury. The lives of the employees are not the same since the takeover in all the negative manners and ways. The many employees in the company are facing imminent pull out of the final salary scheme or a three-year salary freeze if they opt to continue with the scheme. This is in contrast to how the situation was prior to the takeover by Kraft. Impact of cultural change to employees Most of the employees have lost their job because of the closure of the Somerdale factory in England. The closure is subject to cultural change where capitalism and revenue generation is the key purpose of any company in the modern culture that Kraft advances. The culture has many impacts on the lives of the employees. The employees have to content with stress levels in the company, as job security is not a guarantee anymore. The increase in the contribution to the pension scheme by the new owners is yet another harsh consequence that the new culture has on the employees. The poverty levels increase in the process as the low skilled workers lose their jobs and as a result, they have poor living conditions (Davila, 2012, p. 76). The effect trickles to even the healthiest of the employees, as with the poor pay, they cannot afford the quality health services in the society. This, at the same time, is an issue that creates a lot of stress among the workers. The stress that exists among them does not allow them to concentrate well on the work thus they end up being poor workers and producers (Chan, 2007, p. 54). The stress then leads to poor work ethics and poor relationship with the managers of the company. The cultural change ensures that the employees do not have a voice as they are voiceless and their opinions do not count. The opportunity to grow the economic prowess of the company is what counts in this new work culture. Work ethics and cultural change Ethical issues affected by the change of culture and the takeover include issues of trust. The employees have their trust levels in the company reduced since at the time of the takeover the company, there was a promise that there would be no closure of any factory affiliated with Cadbury. However, the same did not happen as the new owners went ahead to close the Somerdale factory. Ethically speaking, it is unethical to promise something as a company then goes back on the same promise, and act contrary to the same promise one makes (Skapinker, 2010, 2). The employees, therefore, do not view the company as being ethical in its actions. Another ethical challenge that has come with the new culture is the issue of representation in the company. The new culture does not give opportunity to the employees to take part in the decisions-making process in the company. The moral authority to participate in the process of decision-making is not possible for the employees. It is ethical to allow the participation of the employees in decision-making (Hugman, 2013, 56). Conclusion Cultural change and the subsequent change of ownership in any company are bound to create many shifts from the daily activities of the company. In the takeover of Cadbury, Kraft, an American company changed the entire culture and practices at the company. The cultural change gives rise to what modern work culture that is in sharp contrast with the old culture. The well-being and the welfare of the workers was the major concern for old workplace culture, but the modern culture advances the generation of revenue, and the seizure of investment opportunities whenever they present themselves. The culture adopted by Kraft is modern capitalism, but Cadbury’s culture is partnering with nature where the management collaborates with the employees (Alvesson and Sveningsson, 2008, 78). Bibliography Alvesson, M., & Sveningsson, S. (2008). Changing organizational culture: cultural change work in progress. New York: Routledge. Chan, K. B. (2007). Work stress and coping among professionals. Leiden: Brill. Ciulla, J. B., Martin, C. W., & Solomon, R. C. (2007). Honest work: a business ethics reader. New York: Oxford University Press. Dávila, A. M. (2012). Culture works: space, value, and mobility across the neoliberal Americas. New York: New York University Press. Denison, D. R. (2012). Leading culture change in global organizations aligning culture and strategy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Dewe, P., Driscoll, M. P., & Cooper, C. L. (2010). Coping with work stress a review and critique. U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell. Eaglesham, J. (2010, February 10). Mandelson attacks Kraft on jobs. Financial Times. Retrieved March 5, 2014, from http://FT.com Francis, T. (2012). Understanding Culture and Ethics in Organizations Super Series. Dublin; New York, N.Y.: Routledge. Hugman, R. (2013). Culture, values and ethics in social work: embracing diversity. Dublin; New York, N.Y.: Routledge. Rigby, E., & Cohen, N. (2010, April 2). Cadbury staff issued with pension ultimatum. Financial Times. Retrieved March 5, 2014, from http://FT.com Rigby, E., & Masters, B. (2010, May 26). Kraft censured in UK over Cadbury deal. Financial Times. Retrieved March 5, 2014, from http://FT.com Skapinker, M. (2010, September 29). Why do business titans need to give back?. Financial Times. Retrieved March 5, 2014, from http://FT.com Read More