What Do IR and ER Mean - Essay Example

?Interviewee Peter Gender Male Age 32 Nature of Business Supermarket/ Coles Job for analysis Assistant manager/ branch level Questions/ Answers 1) What does IR /ER mean to you? I believe that through IR my rights at work are best secured; my view is based on the fact that in the context of IR, the communication between employer and employees in my organization has been improved, one of the most important benefits of IR. Moreover, employees have now the chance to participate in the decision-making process of the organization – even indirectly; this is a result of the support provided by IR to employees of all levels. Also, in my organization, the IR framework has resulted to the following phenomenon: the confidence of employees has been increased; the perspective of the higher involvement of law in the resolution of disputes developed in the workplace has given to employees the sense that their rights in the workplace are more effectively protected. Therefore, I consider that IR reflects a system of rules which aim to protect primarily the rights of employees – even in many cases the above target are not fully achieved. I believe that such failure is the result of the lack of cooperation and communication within the organization, which are necessary prerequisites for the successful implementation of any IR system. It should be noted that the role of IR in each organization is not the same – for example, in my organization the views of employees on IR are positive. In other organizations where the IR framework has been used for the promotion of the interests of the employer, employees are not supportive to the specific framework. 2) How are your conditions of employment determined (Contract or agreement) and how does your process work? The hiring of an employee is based on a contract signed between the employer and the employee. In this contract, reference is made to all terms of the particular agreement, for example to the hours of work/ compensation. In any case, additional benefits are arranged between the employer and the employee since the entrance in the workplace. The change of the terms of an employment contract is not allowed in the future, except from the case that such initiative is taken after a relevant decision of the employer. Also, the store manager monitors the performance of employees in his store on a weekly basis. The store manager also decides on the promotion of employees in accordance with their performance. It should be noted that there are weekly meetings in which employees can share their views with the store manager; if changes need to be made regarding the distribution of tasks or hours of work, then relevant suggestions can be made by the employees to the store manager in these meetings. The hiring process used in my organization can be characterized as quite satisfactory – being aligned with the rules of IR; however, in regard to the monitoring of the employees’ performance and their rewarding, still improvements would be made; the power of the store manager to decide on all aspects of employees’ rights – in the context of a particular store – can be an advantage but also a drawback. In the organization where I work the store manager will be replaced in the next 6 months; the views of the new store manager on IR will be critical regarding the employees’ rights and benefits in all the departments of the specific store. 3) What impact has the new system of workplace relations had on your working conditions? At a first level, because of IR the benefits of employees in the workplace have been increased – referring to both monetary and non-monetary benefits, for example, the payment – based benefit, the bonus at the end of each year and the partial cover by the employer of the medical insurance of employees. Also, the communication between the employer and the employees has been improved, even at not a high level. Another aspect of the involvement of IR in my organization has been the increase of competition among employees, as result of the implementation of a performance-based compensation system, which, however, has not been welcomed by all employees since there are organizational departments where the challenges for employees are more; thus, the above system should be customized on the conditions of the organization. The IR framework has also led to the development of training schemes; the development of principles, like equality in promotion and rewarding is also the result of the expansion of IR framework across the organization. Finally, the IR framework has led to the differentiation of change management processes within the organization; employees’ views on changes introduced in the organization are likely to be taken into high consideration. Analysis Since the establishment of IR, the employees’ position in the workplace has been improved – in those organizations where the rules of the specific system are applied. The view of Peter on IR, as revealed through the above interview, reveals a series of important facts: a) in organizations where IR framework is effectively established, the communication between the employer and the employees is quite good, b) the level at which IR framework benefits each organization are not standardized; c) IR framework has increase the confidence of employees in the workplace; because of IR employees are given the chance to participate in the decision marking process of their organization, a fact that increases their motivation (Colling and Terry, 2010), d) from a similar approach, through IR framework the potential involvement of law in the regulation of business operations has been made clear; employers’ power on their organization has not been reduced; however, the alignment of this power with the relevant employment law is effectively promoted through the IR framework, e) IR framework has not been introduced just in order to support the increase of employees’ compensation; the above framework is rather based on a more integrated approach in regard to the improvement of employees’ position within modern organizations (Eaton and Keefe, 1999); in the specific case, when Peter was asked regarding the benefits of IR in the workplace, in accordance to his experience, he had referred to both the improvement of communication between employer and employees and the increase of employees’ compensation. If the views of Peter on IR are critically evaluated using the unitarist and the pluralist approach, the following assumptions can be made: a) the views of Peter on IR seem to be closer to the unitarist approach – which promotes the participation of employees in all organizational initiatives; in the context of the unitarist approach, all people in the workplace have to communicate for ‘the protection of the common good’ (Bendix 2000, 20), b) certain common points have been also identified between the view of Peter and the pluralist approach; this approach emphasizes on the existence of conflicts in the workplace and the intervention of the IR for their elimination or, at least, their limitation (Aswathappa and Dash 2007). The, simultaneous, alignment of the organizational environment with the principles of the unitarist approach and those of the pluralist approach can be explained as follows: in the particular organization efforts are made so that communication and cooperation in the organization to be improved – a target that has been achieved at a high point. At the same time, the development of conflicts among employees and employer in regard to various employees rights has not been avoided, a fact that lead to the potential applicability of both the unitarist and the pluralist when having to evaluate the performance of IR across the specific organizations. Interviewee 2 Name Jane Gender Female Age 25 Nature of Business Retail/ Myer Pty Ltd Job for analysis Sales assistant Questions/ Answers 1) What does IR /ER mean to you? I would say that IR framework is just another framework of rules for resolving disputes within businesses. Moreover, the role of IR in protecting the employees’ rights – as the planners of this framework claim – is not clear. Often, the employer uses the rules of IR for supporting his rights – of course, the above phenomenon may not be fully justified, i.e. it is possible that a violation of IR rules occurs in this case. In my organization, IR framework has not significantly supported the interest of employees. In fact I would characterized the IR framework as a system for promoting changes in regard to employees’ rights ensuring that the resistance in the workplace will be minimized. However, not all employees are aware of the rules of IR framework – a failure that is not just their fault but also of their employer’s. In this context, when a violation of employees’ rights occurs, no reference is made to the rules of the particular framework, which, in this case, becomes inactive. For this reason, I would like to state that the IR framework could be effective only if both parts employees and employers are equally aware of the content of this framework. At this point, reference should be made to the fact that, in the organization where I work, employees are not informed on their rights; in fact, some of them are not even aware of their terms of their employment arrangement – in cases that this arrangement has been made orally and not written. For the above reasons, I think that the specific framework is not necessarily applied on all organizations – at least, not at the same level, as for example in the organization where I work. 2) How are your conditions of employment determined (Contract or agreement) and how does your process work? The hiring process is quite strict; a trial period is given to the employee before the hiring process proceeds. In many cases, employees are not hired after the end of the trial period, a fact that has discouraged people from applying in the particular organization. Moreover, at the level of stores, the decisions of the store manager in regard to the store’s employees are not controlled by the central administration of the organization. The store manager is free to decide on the type and the content of employment contracts used in the hiring process. For this reason, it is a common phenomenon that individuals who wish to work in the particular organization to search for the store where the terms of employment are satisfied for the employees, i.e. where the decisions of the store manager are supportive towards the rights of employees. Most commonly, hiring is made through an oral agreement between the employer and the employee. It should be noted that the employee’s performance is monitored continuously – on a daily basis. The power of employees to bargain for their rights is limited, for example, employees are not given particular rights of choice in regard to their hours of work or their compensation in case of illness. In general, employees across the organization are not given the power to participate in critical store decisions or to suggest solutions for facing daily operational problems. A clear barrier seems to exist between the employees and the store manager. The former has the control of the store – in terms of administration – while the latter are engaged to various operational activities. Moreover, the promotion within the organization is problematic; when need for specialized skills exists or if a job position is available at administrative level, then the most common solution is the hiring of new employee – existing employees are not given the chance to improve their position within the organization, a problem which has been often become the reason for conflict between the store manager and the employees. 3) What impact has the new system of workplace relations had on your working conditions? The IR framework has resulted to a slight increase on the level of compensation. Moreover, in the context of the new system, the employer cannot fire an employee without notice. In practice, this means that employee has a bit of time available to search for a new job. At the next level, because of the IR framework unfair treatment and inequality in the workplace have been reduced. Still, the power of employees to ask for their rights has not been secured, a fact that often leads to conflicts between the employer and the employees. Also, phenomena like unfair promotions or rewarding can be identified in the workplace; this phenomena are, sometimes, expanded mostly because the increased independency of the store manager towards the central administration of the organization. Analysis Industrial relations have been developed because of the need for the increase of fairness within the organization. Indeed, this target has been highly achieved within most organizations worldwide. However, still, the following problem seems to exist: the mechanisms for the monitoring of conditions in the workplace seem to be ineffective. Employees’ rights are often ignored either because employers want to avoid the increase of their businesses’ operational costs or because such schemes would result to the continuous increase of the power of employees within organizations. The view of Jane on industrial relations, as presented above, reveals a series of important facts: a) the current IR framework is not effective in terms of the enforcement of its rules; there are employers who choose not to apply the rules of the specific framework – probably because the consequences for them are quite limited, b) the benefits of IR have not been equally developed across organizations; there are organizations where IR have just promoted the slight increase of employee compensation (Kaufman, Beaumont and Helfgott, 2003); c) employees in many organizations are not aware of their rights, in included in the IR framework; as a result they are not able to ask for the respect of these rights, a fact that can lead to the significant limitation of power of IR (Leat, 2007), d) even if IR framework has been introduced in order to decrease conflicts in the workplace, this target has not been achieved; the need for updating the existing IR framework is clear. The views of Jane in regard to the role of IR in the workplace are differentiated – compared to those of Peter; in the organization where Jane works, there would be no chance for application of the unitarist approach, which is characterized by high level of cooperation in the workplace (Bendix 2000). Indeed, the above approach is based on ‘the mutual cooperation and harmony in the workplace’ (Caforio and Kummell 2005, 544). In the case under examination, the use of the unitarist approach for explaining the benefits of IR would lead to the following contradiction: by using the unitarist approach, emphasis is given on the achievement of the firm’s needs and not so much to the needs of the firm – which are better addressed through the pluralist perspective (Singh and Neeraj 2011). On the other hand, the pluralist approach is based on the belief that employees should be given the chance to participate in most phases of organizational plans, even if their power to be involved in the firm’s ‘decision making process’ (Parkinson, Gamble and Kelly 2005) is limited. The use of pluralist approach in the specific organization would increase the chance for the development of an agreement between employees and employers, i.e. a perspective for limitation of conflicts in the internal organization environment seems to exist taking into consideration the current trends regarding the performance of IR in firms of different characteristics/ size. References Aswathappa, K. and Sadhna, Dash. 2007. International Human Resource Management. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Education Bendix, Sonia. 2000. The basics of labour relations. Cape Town: Juta and Company Caforio, Giuseppe, and Gerhard, Kummel. 2005. Military missions and their implications reconsidered: the aftermath of September 11th. London: Emerald Group Publishing Colling, Trevor and Terry, Mike. 2010. Industrial Relations: Theory and Practice. Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons Eaton, Adrienne, Keefe, Jeffrey. 1999. Employment dispute resolution and worker rights in the changing workplace. Champaign: Cornell University Press Eisenberg, Avigail. 1995. Reconstructing political pluralism. Albany: SUNY Press Freedland, Mark. 2003. The personal employment contract. Oxford: Oxford University Press Kaufman, Bruce, Beaumont, Richard and Helfgott, Roy. 2003. Industrial relations to human resources and beyond: the evolving process of employee relations management. New York: M.E. Sharpe Leat, Mike. 2007. Exploring employee relations. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Parkinson, John, Gamble, Andrew and Kelly Gavin. 2000. The political economy of the company. Portland, US: Hart Publishing Singh, N. and Neeraj, Kumar. 2011. Employee Relations Management. New Delhi: Pearson Education India Read More