Unitary, Pluralist, and Radical Perspective in Employment Relations - Essay Example

Unitary, Pluralist, and Radical Perspective in Employment Relations Introduction The objective of this essay is to discuss the different approaches to the study of employment relations such as unitary, pluralist, and radical. The essay also contains an evaluation of each approach in relation to their relevance to field of employment relations. The discussion starts with unitarist perspective followed by pluralist and radical approach to employment relations. The scope includes the main features of each perspective, strength and weakness, importance and relevance to the study of employment relations. The unitarist perspective is broadly defined as an approach emphasizing the importance of sharing the organization goals and team working. It is a paternalistic approach with more positive attitude towards employees and rejects the pluralist notion of conflict and trade union (Gennard & Judge, 2005, p.44). The pluralist perspective on the other hand believed in the inherent conflict between employers and employees because the workplace is a microcosm of society where diversity of interest, values, and beliefs exist. The pluralist believed in the effectiveness of trade union and collective bargaining in maintaining the balance of power in the workplace. (Dzimbri, 2008, p.3). Radicalism in employment relations holds a highly critical view of Western capitalism and business practices. It is an employment frame of reference where employers are assumed exploitative of their employees and highlights the many injustices of contemporary employment (Redman & Wilkinson, 2002, p.208). Unitarist perspective of employment relations Main features Values and perceptions of an organization play an important role in determining which employee relations will be approach adopted. For instance, there is greater chance of adopting the unitary approach if the one organization views harmony and integration vital to the success of its operations. This is because the unitarist approach encourages all employees to share organization goals and work together as team (Gennard & Judge. 2005, p.55). According to Rowley (2009), sharing interest and values is central to unitarism thus the source of authority and focus of loyalty in a unitarist organization is often the senior management (p.84). Unitarist organization can be authoritarian in its attitude or paternalistic that limits an employee’s autonomy (Genard & Judge, 2005, p.56). It also possesses a unitarist value system that assumes greater commonality between employers and employees contrary to common belief that they are inherently in conflict (Hunt & Provis, 1995, p.73). Since it often assume commonality of values and interest, a unitarist management expect cooperation from workers at all time and view conflict as irrational and avoidable (Rowley, 2009, p.84). Unitarism confirms the legitimacy and authority of management by establishing a relationship focusing on unity of purpose within a hierarchically led organization. It has an employment relationships constructed from systematic assessment and reward, which is usually based on the extent of a particular employee’s contribution to the shared goals (Mason & Hyman 1995, p.12). Overall, a unitary organization has unified structure, purpose, with single source of authority and interconnected members. Evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of this approach Contrary to other approaches of employee relation where both common and divergent interest exist (Kaufman& Taras, 2000, p.178), the unitary model of employee relation that assumes commonality of interest between employer and employee hold different policies and practices that are contributing to its strength. For instance, a unitarist workplace is non-unionized thus no need for collective bargaining or worker strike that often result to further conflict. Although unitarist organizations do not deny the presence of worker-management conflict, such conflict as mentioned earlier is considered undesirable and can be avoided through an open and trusting environment and effective grievance machinery. A unitarist work environment therefore is almost free from self-serving exploitation and aspirations to counterbalance the employer’s power through collective actions (Kaufman & Taras, 2000, .178). The unitarist HR model is another strong feature of the unitarist approach to employee relations as it appeals to both management and employees. This HRM approach avoids union and marginalization as it promotes commitment and individualism in the workplace (Debrah, 2001, p.50). Moreover, this neo-unitarist HRM support two managerial ideologies and represent a set of assumptions that can strengthen HRM practices within a unitarist workplace. For instance, a “hard” unitarist HRM support an authoritarian management style where strict control, discipline, and union avoidance are applied in workplace. On the other hand, a “soft” unitarist HRM support the paternalist approach that encourages employees to treat the members of the organization as a family and expect management to play the role of a good father capable of making decisions beneficial to everybody (Wilton, 2010, p.278). The weakness of this approach however, is its excessive emphasis on the harmony of interest between management and employees to the point that it totally ignores the reality that management and employees do not share the same agenda despite unity at work (Gennard & Judge, 2007, p. 56). Moreover, its predominantly managerial approach only legitimized employers and managers authority over their subordinate employees rather than promoting cooperation and gaining commitment (Singh, 2011, p.12). In practice, the unitary view of employee relations that trade unions is detrimental to purpose and business requirements of the organization seems totally idealistic as employees in reality have a different perspective of work that only union can present (Reilly, 2001, p.12). In fact, a number of criticism about the unitary perspective include exploitations of unscrupulous employers masked as flexible work such as the long hours being experienced by young workers who are working under poor contractual arrangements and low salary (Dransfield, 2000, p.89). Moreover, a unitary approach may fail if for instance, the business is flourishing, wages are adequate, and employees job are secured but suddenly business went bad and employees’ situation got worse. This is because unitarist view of organization is somewhat unrealistic particularly when it is completely ignoring the potential for genuine conflict of interests (Rees & Porter, 2008, p.323). Importance of this approach to the study of employment relations The Business Council of Australia or BCA stated that as far as industrial relations are concern, there is an inherent conflict between employer and employees. In contrast, employee relations believed that cooperation is much more widespread than conflict in this relationship (analysis of BCA statement in Hunt & Provis, 1995, p.73). This cooperation comes from a unitarist value system which is one of the defining features of employee relations second to decentralized approach (ibid, p.72). The importance of unitarist approach to the study of employment relations therefore is the fact that such approach is essential to the maintenance of employee-employer relationship as well as motivation and productivity of the workforce which students of employee relations should be familiar about. Moreover, recognizing the strength and weaknesses of the unitary approach can reinforce our knowledge of it appropriates and applicability to different areas of employee relations such as creating and maintaining employee motivation, achieving efficiency through cooperation, power sharing, and others (Cole, 2004, p.395). Relevance of this approach to employment relations The unitarist approach is undoubtedly relevant to employment relations in many ways including negative ones. For instance, employee relations promotes harmonious working relationship through shared decision making (Talloo, 2008, p.225) while unitarist, although mainly interested in harmony of interest and goals run their organization through hegemony to achieved integration and team working (Bull & Duff, p.188). Another but relevantly constructive is the fact that no success can be achieved if each employee is pursuing a different direction. For instance, in order to win a football match members of the football team must actually play as a team with same objectives and aiming for the same goal. Similarly, a unitary approach sees the organization as cohesive and integrated team with common values, interests, and objectives to achieve not the football goal but the goal of the enterprise (Nickson, 2012, p.219). Pluralist perspective of employment relations Main features Contrary to unitarist view of organization, the pluralist perspective acknowledges the existence of conflict above all. This is because pluralist theory is based on the notion that the workplace is a diversified environment with conflict social values, interest, and beliefs (Dzimbri, 2008, p.3). For instance, the primary motivation of most workers are financial gains, increased leisure, independence, and flexible working arrangement but this is definitely in conflict with management’s natural desire for cost-cutting, increased profits, and minimal incentive packages (ibid, p.3). Since the organization is viewed as a collection of competing ideas and values, a pluralist organization is often focus on conflict resolution and problem solving to maintain the equilibrium between employers and employees. Collective bargaining is a popular feature of pluralist approach as it regards employees as a group of people represented by the union, a collective body aimed to balance the power in the workplace (Loosemore, 2003, p.116). Trade union, an identifying mark of pluralist approach is more of a natural reflection of varying interest rather than a troublemaker contrary to unitarist view (Marchington et al, p.421) and for this reason egoist perspective or looking at employees as commodities is not allowed. In relation to the features above, employees in pluralist organization are human beings with complex economic and psychological needs thus entitled to equal treatment and right to voice out their grievances. This is because there is plurality of interest in the employment relationship (Bacon et al, 2009, p.58) Evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of this approach Although pluralist approaches are often under attack from unitarist and radical perspective, there is some sense in recognizing the importance of conflict in employment relations. For instance, conflict is harmful but it should not be avoided because doing so will mean running away from the facts. According to Jackson (1982), conflict should not be avoided but rather confronted and handled properly as it can also lead to a more acceptable and beneficial arrangements in the workplace (p.31). Therefore, suppression, ignorance, or avoidance of conflict is not helpful to the organization’s effectiveness. The pluralist acceptance of the legitimacy of multiple stakeholders and mediate their competing interest seems its strongest point since it parallels the vision of good employment relationship. For instance, good employee relations protect all stakeholders such as employers, workers, consumers, and the public. These include striking a balance between employers’ property rights and workers’ rights in order to maintain the equilibrium between efficiency, equity, and voice (Budd, 2011, p.71). The weakness however is the pluralist mismanagement of these conflicts and varying interest in the workplace, which subsequently resulted to the decline of trade unions and organizations adopting the approach. In fact, it lost favour as an industrial relations approach due to union-led strikes in the 1980s and early 1990s. Organizations that adopted the approach and recognized trade unions, allowed negotiation and consultation, entertain grievances were met with absenteeism, low productivity, and high labour turnover (Redman & Wilkinson, 2002, p.195). In UK in the early 1980s for instance, the core goal of the Thatcher government was to tame the trade unions as they are considered obstacles of government reforms. In the process, most of the problems of the employers disappeared, collective bargaining becomes less, and managers were for the first time allowed to organize their workplace in the manner they feel beneficial to the enterprise (Howell, 2007 p.6). Importance of this approach to the study of employment relations The pluralist approach has been the centre of criticism due to the detrimental effects of collective actions against business enterprises. However, it is similarly important to the study of employment relations because it has some good qualities that may be useful in enhancing employment relationship, efficiency, and productivity in the workplace. For instance, it is true that the workplace is “a microcosm of society” as it is actually a place where diversity of interest, values and beliefs exist and generating conflict (Dzimbri, 2008 p.3). It is also equally true that most management desire is contradictory to employees’ workplace motivation thus if left uncontrolled, such conflict may result to disarray (ibid, p.3). For this reason, the idea of trade union and collective bargaining in some aspect may be useful in the study of employment relations as knowledge of these important pluralist characteristics can help us developed a more effective approach. Relevance of this approach to employment relations Similar to unitarist approach, the pluralist perspective of employee relations is relevant in many ways. For instance, it has been the dominant form of workplace employment relations approach as many consider it as the best means of serving the interest of the working class (Bendix, 2001, p.22). Moreover, there will be always conflict between the more powerful employers and weaker employees thus in order to have a good employment relations, an approach that can balance this power is required. An “orderly” collective bargaining may be more relevant because there is always common interest in a relationship (ibid, 22). Radical perspective of employment relations Main features The radical perspective is more of a Marxian theory of society and of social change than of industrial relations but like the pluralist, it consider the economic power between competing social groups such as the employers and employees (Singh, 2011, p.17). Specifically, it addresses the means of productions and the position of workers within the capitalist system that favours the employers (Bendix, 2001, p.22). Like the pluralist and unitarist, it also hold that employers are with greater power than employers (ibid, p.22). In the radical approach, the concern it is not only employment relationship but the conflict within the socio-economic system thus resolution and achieving equality through trade unionism is not possible (ibid, p.22). Employment relations using the radical approach is more concern with control and do not believed that a capitalist firm could ever accommodate consensus over management goals. Similarly, the only workers motivation recognized by this approach is attaining adequate standard of living and control the pace and content of their work while employers are inherently for the profit and minimizing cost of production (Pot 2000, p.25) Evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of this approach Radical approach to employee relations is somewhat disliked in some of part of the West particularly after the downfall of communist states such as the USSR. However, it is still being used in France and Italy where strong trade union confederations still exist (Leat 2012, p.20). The unpopularity of this approach is brought about by its hostility towards capitalism. For instance, since it consider labour relations as class relations and believed that the relations between capital and labour is by nature unbalanced and abusive, the approach is requiring complete transformation of the whole pattern of ownership and control of industry (Kuper & Kuper, 1985, p.438). In orders words, the radical approach is requiring abolishment of capitalism and installation of Marxist social structure, which is undoubtedly a great disadvantage or weakness. By analysis, this approach has no strength since its viewpoint of employment relations appears heavily reliant of Marxist social theory, which has no place in democratic employment relationship. For instance, it cannot be applied directly like the pluralist and unitarist because it incompatible to capitalist business enterprises and requiring change in social structure, which will certainly bring more chaos than benefits. Importance of this approach to the study of employment relations The importance of radical approach to the study of employment relations is within the lessons learned from adopting such difficult and impractical approach. Familiarity with radical approach to employment relationship is in practice encourages avoidance of too extreme ideologically motivated labour practices. Although it has some useful similarities with pluralist and unitarist such as power balancing and cooperation respectively, the bottom-line is still the same. Relevance of this approach to employment relations The problem with the radical approach is the fact that it will not fit to both industrial and employment relations and therefore irrelevant. Moreover, considering that there are indeed some useful features as discussed earlier, these features would not work independently as their composition is intended for a different social structure. Conclusion The unitarist perspective highlights the importance of sharing goals, interest, and values of the organization. It is paternalistic in the sense that management is the sole source of authority and focus of loyalty. It expects cooperation from workers, reject conflict, and limits employees’ autonomy. In contrast, the pluralist perspective believed in the inherent conflict between employers with greater power and employees. It highlighted the need for collective action in order to maintain the balance of power in the workplace. The radical perspective on the other hand not only emphasized the inherent conflict in the workplace but the ills of capitalism. All perspectives are important and relevant in the study of employment relations in the sense that each one of them contributes to the betterment of employer-employee relationship. However, although the radical perspective is somewhat correct in presenting the problems in modern day employment, it is not relevant to democratic employment relations. This is because this perspective promotes change in social structure in order to ensure harmonious relationship. Bibliography: Bacon N, Redman T, Snell S, & Wilkinson A, (2009), The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management, SAGE Publications Ltd., US Bendix S, (2001), Industrial Relations in South Africa, Juta and Company Ltd, S. Africa Budd J, (2011), The Thought of Work, Cornell University Press, US Bull M. & Duff R, (2011), Understanding Social Enterprise: Theory and Practice, SAGE, US Cole G, (2003), Man Theory and Practice, Cengage Learning, US Debrah Y. (2001), Work and Employment in a Globalized Era: An Asia Pacific Focus, Routledge, UK Dransfield R, (2000), Human Resource Management, Heinemann Publishing, US Dzimbri L, (2008), Industrial Relations in a Developing Society: The Case of Collonial, Independent One-Party and Multiparty Malawi, Cuvillier Verlag, Germany Gennard J. & Judge G, (2005), Employee Relations, CIPD Publishing, US Howell C, (2007), Trade Unions and the State: The Construction of Industrial Relations Institutions in Britain, 1890-2000, Princeton University Press, US Hunt I. & Provis C, (1995), The New Industrial Relations in Australia, Federation Press, Australia Jackson M, (1982), Industrial Relations: A Textbook, Taylor & Francis, UK Kaufman B. & Taras D, (2000), Nonunion Employee Representation: History, Contemporary Practice and Policy, M.E. Sharpe, US Kuper A. & Kuper J, (1985), The Social Science Encyclopaedia, Taylor & Francis, UK Leat M, (2012), Exploring Employee Relations, Routledge, UK Loosemore M, (2003), Human Resource Management in Construction Projects: Strategic and Operational Approaches, Taylor & Francis, UK Marchington M, Wilkinson A, & Sargeant M, (2002), People Management and Development : Human Resource Management at Work, CIPD Publishing, US Mason B. & Hyman J, (1995), Managing Employee Involvement and Participation, SAGE, US Nickson D, (2012), Human Resource Management for the Hospitality and Tourism Industries, Elsevier, UK Pot F, (2000), Employment Relations and National Culture: Continuity and Change in the Age of Globalization, Edward Elgar Publishing, US Redman T. & Wilkinson A, (2002), The Informed Student Guide to Human Resource Management, Cengage Learning, US Rees W. & Porter C, (2008), The Skills Management, Cengage Learning, US Reilly P, (2001), Flexibility at Work: Balancing the Interests of Employer and Employee, Gower Publishing, US Rowley C, (2009), Human Resource Management: The Key Concepts, Taylor & Francis, UK Singh P, (2011), Employee Relations Management, Pearson Education, India Tallo T, (2007), Business Organization & Management, Tata McGraw-Hill Education, India Wilton N, (2010), An Introduction to Human Resource Management, SAGE, UK Read More