Contribution of Work Relations to Australian Businesses - Case Study Example

Contribution of work relations to Australian businesses Employment relationship refers to the link or interaction between the employers and the employees, and comes about when one performs tasks under employment under conditions and on an agreement to remuneration. It forms a basis for the creation of the rights and obligations of the both the employer and the employed. Employment is the basis by which the nature and extend of the rights of employees and their obligations to their employers are determined. In Australia, institutions have played a great role in the defining of the labour market and the subsequent industrial relations. Such changes are evident through the shift to a more decentralized system for the formal bargaining arrangements, which also resulted in enterprise-level collective agreements (Wever 1995, p. 74). There are basic goals within the Australian businesses that the employment relations are set out to achieve. One is the definition and the amplification of the performance-management prospects and regulations. Second, is the expansion of policies and techniques, rules and guidelines that are fair, just and follow the basic objectives and viewpoint of labour legislations. Third, there is the creation of effective communication networks and systems that ensure the material needs of employees are met. Fourth, statement of the terms and conditions of engagement based on the principal of equality and guaranteeing the organizational intents as well as individual requirements and ambitions are fulfilled. Lastly is the instituting of a relation and congruency between employee pact and the employment rapport through a psychological obligation (Singh & Singh 2010, p. 124). There is a basis for the whole concept of employment relationship (ER). It lays down the tactic and direction, essential approach and insolence plus appropriateness for the organizational drive. It also looks into the ER policy which necessitates the discipline, disbursements and rewards, enhancement in working conditions, administration style and managerial approaches and the subsequent prospects of trade unions or the collective bargain bodies for the both employees and managers. One of such elements of the employment relations is the collective bargain, practised by the employees. This is enabled by their participation in the various labour unions relevant to employment line. The Australian Industrial Relations Commission has the power to certify enterprise bargains (Wooden, Drago & Hawke, 2000, p. 9-10). An increased level of union density within Australia has enabled an increased level of collective bargaining by the unionised employees. This brings about the advantage of having better working conditions, relevant salary and the various benefits that come with the employment to the entity employees. Since employee relations aims at fulfilling the interest by both managers and employees by maximising profits for the former and ensuring highest wage prices for the latter, most Australian businesses have shifted from the centralized decision making system and make emphasis more on the unit-level negotiations, involving both financial control and responsibility. This enhances the single-table bargaining (STB), which improves the communication element of employee relationship. The shift from centralized decision making system within the unions (initiation of STB) can foil the ‘divide and rule’ policies on the part of management and provide a ground for closer working relationships, eradicating inter-union disputes (Marchington &Wilkinson 2005, p. 280) Employment relations involve a series of communication to and from employees and employers, the purpose of which is to apprise and edify the staff on the plans of the management. Such include team-briefings, informal and non-routinized communications, formal written media such as employee reports and house journals or company newspapers et cetera (Deery 1999, p. 70). The achievement of such level communication is that the employees are up to speed on the goals of the organization and they employ their great knowledge base to improve on customer care and product quality hence sustaining competitive advantage. In Australia, there is the trend of the individualisation of the workplace relations in both public and private sectors. This brings the competitiveness of the Australian businesses to an even level with the international markets. Cooperative and participative employment relations are evident in high performance work systems. The stiff competition present in the economy markets demands an increased company performance for the Australian businesses. Their managements have been forced by the competition to intervene on the technology and structure of production (Ruysseveldt, Huiskamp & Hoof 1995, p. 13). Under such circumstances the employment relations get deregulated hence a contribution towards the collective bargain system. Generally, there is a more flexible working time arrangements in the Australian businesses, which has resulted from the collective bargain caused by the employment or industrial relations. These have also brought about an extension on the working time distributions, which subsequently increases the production of a business. There are also the qualitative aspects of the employment relations such as an increased competence for the qualification of the various job opportunities (Ackers 2008, p. 1). The employment relationship has the contribution that the employee is subject to the employer and assents to their control through the whole work day. Employees are mostly forced into employment by their responsibilities, for example to their families. Mostly, they have limited choices in terms of the employers. Though on the other hand, the employers have a wide range of choices, for example, replacing incompetent workers with technology, though the employers’ choices are limited in case the labour markets tighten. Such relative power resources are variable with time. Employment relations form the basis in which such different interests are harmonised, this way achieving the pursuit of a common goal (Colling & Terry 2010, p. 20). This creates a driving force caused by the peaceful coexistence between both conflict and harmony of the two sides of interest (employee and employer). Basically, the relationship is branded by ‘structured antagonism.’ In the Australian economy, there has been the contribution by the employment relations on matters of formal bargain. Though it is still concentrated in the large work places or at the national level and there is a high application of the negotiations between the workers and the management. These negotiations are regulated by a set of techniques and edicts. These help in the achievement of both the technical and analytical issues within the businesses (Gadner & Palmer 1997, p. 8). The development of the industrial relations came in the setting of the concept that problems in employment relations spring from market deficiencies which operate against the interests of labour and source disparities in the power relationships of managers and the workers. It is from the perspective of employment relations there was the achievement of eradication of the “master-servant” relationship present between the employers and the employees within the Australian economy (Brown et al 2011, p. 16). Employment relations have resulted in a merging in both the union deterioration and the income disproportion. The processes of internationalization and globalization have resulted in the convergence of the formerly distinct national patterns of the industrial relations. This is mainly evident for example through the technological development within the economies (Barry 2011, p. 12). Industrial or employment relation has been successful in the control of conflicts in three dimensions; mainly structural, distributive and the interpersonal relations. With the manager’s responsibility being the planning, controlling and forecasting of the business’ activities, structural conflict may arise when he is in a way incapable of this (Barker & Christensen 1998, p. 5). Distributive conflict comes about when there is unequal distribution of resources or revenues among the company’s stakeholders. Finally, the interpersonal conflicts mainly arise when the executives of the company are ill equipped to deal with the personnel within the organization. The main role of management is the effective formation and implementation of the employment relations and the subsequent policies (Wailes et al 2004, p. 86). In addition to that, industrial relations have managed to create the basis for the information sharing, communication and the two-way communication within an organization. The various systems within the Australian businesses set up for the effective flow of the information flow, establishment of understanding and creation of a consensus is critical for the effective competition of a company within the economy. This is since the employment relations have played a role in the employee motivation within the businesses (Gomez- Mejia et al 2004, p. 57). The presence of the employee relations has achieved the goal of involving the employees of Australian businesses in the management and the daily running of the businesses. It has also enhanced the employer-employee relations plus the mechanisms of their operations. Through industrial relations, the Australian companies have achieved this by providing the workers with a wide skills base through their involvement in training (Weiss & Shmidt 2008, p. 5). One of the greatest achievements of the employment relations within the Australian businesses is the creation of a harmonious and cooperative relationship between the employees and the management (and their representatives) on the other hand, and between them and the government. The various achievements of the industrial relations can be seen at different levels of for example at the national level, at the industrial level and at the enterprise’s level. These are seen through the elements which are evident at the various levels. At the national, the industrial relations are seen as the labour relations policy. The policies are agreed upon by the government, the employers and the workers. In the industrial level, ER is evident through the acts of collective bargaining processes carried out by the employer’s organizations and the various employment unions. Lastly, at the enterprise level, ER is identifiable through representations of workers’ interests by the unions, and takes a more direct course (Edwards & Arrowsmith 2006, p. 27). There can scarcely be any discussion on the opinion i.e. the value and essential for conference and communication in a time when it is putative that information distribution and consultation are imperative to enterprise standards, ductility and worker inspiration. Effective commercial stratagems can no longer be advanced by executives’ without information contributions from, and depending on on the familiarity of frontline employees. Indeed, communiqué skills are today an indispensible attribute of management. Conference and communication techniques introduced willingly after discussion with personnel is likely to be seen as part of an organization's values, rather than as ones levied and grudgingly accepted (Marks et al 1998, p. 153). ER has also achieved social justice by creating a consensus through negotiation hence preventing political, social and economic consequences. ER provides for the freedom of association both for the workers and the employers. Such freedom takes into the consideration of the employer’s organization and the union workers as autonomous and independent bodies and neither of the two is subject to the domination by the other. It also allows for the workers without distinction to join the unions that are relevant to their job to form for them platform through which they can get to protect their own interests. ER enables both the employers and the workers to enjoy the advantages of the collective bargaining such as the resolution of differences between the two (Winchester 2009, p. 8). An achievement brought about by the employment relations is that of Unitarism and mission. It ensures that the objectives of all involved (employees and employers) are the same and of intent to only pursue the wellbeing of the organization and its products, plus the services they offer and the clients (Singh & Singh 2010, p. 142-143). The mission reflects a summary of the organizational purpose and its techniques of working towards it in a vibrant and unequivocal manner. Another relevant achievement of the employment relations contribution within the businesses in Australia is pluralism. Since there are differences within the organization structure there is incompatible and varying objectives. With such existing conflict in response there is the creation of rules, procedures and systems for the management of dissent and limit its influence to the maximum (Murray 2002, p. 120). Employment relations are pigeonholed by both conflict and collaboration. There are therefore abundant enterprise level mechanisms in diverse countries. Their efficiency is to an extent accustomed by the specific corporate culture or idea relating to the organization of people. The expansion of enterprise level industrial relations enables Australian businesses to cater for alterations or operational changes. Indeed, it is a way of reconciling the need for heightened management suppleness with the need to guarantee that employees' apprehensions are taken into account of and their cooperation achieved without which efficacious change would scarcely be possible (Kalleberg, Reskin & Hudson 2000, p. 7). The existence of a sound ER a labour management relations policy abbreviated as LMRP and the goals of such a policy include; employment to the workers and the relevant job securities, plus an increase in the employment opportunities. An addition to that is the improvement of the living standards of the individuals through better terms of agreement and the working conditions. Third, there needs to be an improvement on the productivity hence widening the financial base and subsequently raising the employees’ living standards. Last but not least, ER ensures minimal conflict, acquiring peaceful relations and peaceful means of conflict resolution (Jacoby 2005, p. 54). In conclusion, employee relations is a layer that enlivens the associated fields of Human Resource Development, Human Resource Management and industrial relations, acting as a software or motivational device that tints every actions, attitudes, policies, and processes which include confidence-building in order to gain employee commitment and an improved performance level (Wood & Goddard 1999, p. 57). All Australian companies aim at building core competence, assuming the employment relations approach takes into account the inclusive strategic objectives and goals of the enterprise. Employee relations mainly looks into three factors; providing employees an opportunity to participate in decision making (including within the Human Resource Management), improving work force performance and skills and lastly creation of incentives for effective functioning of the workers. References Barker, K. & Christensen A. (1998). Contingent work. American employment relations in transition, 15. Barry, M. (2011). Research Handbook in Comparative Employment Relations. (A. W. Michael Barry, Ed.) Camberley: Edward Elgar Publishing. Deery, S. (1999). Employment Relations: Individualisation and Union Exclusion - An International Study. (R. M. Stephen Deery, Ed.) Leichhardt: Federation Press. Gardner, G. & Palmer (1997). Employment Relations: Industrial Relations and Human Resource Management in Australia (2 ed.). Australia: Macmillan Education AU. Ruysseveldt, R. H., Huskamp, M. & Hoof (1995). Comparative Industrial & Employment Relations. Los Angeles: SAGE. Wooden, R. W., Drago & Hawk (2000). The Transformation of Australian Industrial Relations (Vol. Illustrated). Australia: Federation Press. Marchington, A. W. & Wilkinson (2005). Human Resource Management at Work: People and Development (3rd Edition ed.). London: CIPD Publishing. Murray, G. (2002). Work and Employment Relations in the High Performance Workplace. New York: Routledge. Singh, P. N & Singh. P. (2010). Employee Relations Management. Delhi: Pearson Education India. Ackers, P. (2008). Reframing Employment Relations; the case for neo-pluralism. Industrial Relations journal 33(1), 2-19. Colling, M. & Terry, T. (2010). Industrial Relations: Theory and Practice (3 ed.). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Wever, K. S. (1995). Negotiating Competitiveness: Employment Relations and Organizational Innovation in Germany and the United States. Havard: Harvard Business Press. Wailes, N., Lansbury, R. D., & Bamber, G. J.S (Eds.). (2004) “International and comparative employment relations,” Sage Publications Limited. Jacoby, S. M. (2005). The embedded corporation: Corporate governance and employment relations in Japan and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Kalleberg, A. L., Reskin, B. F., & Hudson, K. (2000). Bad jobs in America: Standard and nonstandard employment relations and job quality in the United States. American Sociological Review, 256-278. Marks, A., Findlay, P., Hine, J., Thompson, P., & McKinlay, A. (1998). The politics of partnership? Innovation in employment relations in the Scottish spirits industry. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 36(2), 209-226. Wood, S., & Goddard, J. (1999). The statutory union recognition procedure in the Employment Relations Bill: a comparative analysis. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 37(2), 203-245. Winchester, D. (2009). Industrial relations research in Britain. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 21(1), 100-114. Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Balkin, D. B., & Cardy, R. L. (2004). Managing human resources. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall. Edwards, P., Al, C., & Arrowsmith, J. (2006). Industrial Relations and Critical Realism: IR’s Tacit Contribution. Weiss, M., & Schmidt, M. (2008). Labor law and industrial relations in Germany. Kluwer law international. Brown, R., Condor, S., Mathews, A., Wade, G., & Williams, J. (2011). Explaining intergroup differentiation in an industrial organization. Journal of Occupational psychology, 59(4), 273-286. Read More