Pluralist vs Unitary Frames of Reference in Australia - Essay Example

?Battle between the Pluralist and Unitary Frames of Reference in Australia Introduction Every organization has a distinct environment in terms of the prevailing attitudes, motivational levels and degree of amiability in its environment. These differences seem to become more apparent when organizations are geographically dispersed in different countries since every region has their own distinguishing traits and policies. A frame of reference is defined as the structure of views and concepts that determines the behaviour of an individual or a group. Every organization has a frame of reference that determines the employee relations. Budd and Bhave (2006) stated that it revolves around the relations between the employers and the employees. The most commonly discussed frames of references for analyzing the employee relations include the unitary and pluralist perspectives. These two concepts bear contrasting differences with respect to each other and help the management deal with situations and conflicts in an effective manner. This paper shall discuss the workplace relations in Australia with respect to the unitary and pluralist frames of reference. 2. Differences between Unitary and Pluralist Perspective The unitary perspective includes the concept of shared goals and unified vision among all the employees and employers. According to Agarwal (2008), the believers of this perspective are under the impression that success can be attained only if the members of the organization possess the same views and business objectives, in spite of their differing job descriptions and nature of tasks. Whereas according to Edwards (2003); some school of thoughts believe that unitary frame of reference bears minimal degree of practicality for most situations since it holds the assumption that all employees are loyal to the organization and the management makes all decisions in accordance with the best interests of their employees. Such organizations do not promote the concept of trade unions, rather stress on the efforts involving team building and management. Trade unions are discouraged so that the probability of occurrence of conflicts is minimized. Budd and Bhave (2006) explained that any conflicts that may arise in the organization will be simply an outcome of poor management or misunderstanding, rather than conflict of interests. In the modern times, human resources management has taken over to monitor the employee relations of organizations. On the contrary, pluralist frame of reference caters the self-interests of employees that might cause competition and motivation of fulfillment of personal goals more than harmony and common interests. Individuals with common goals and interests may develop unions to support each other in the presence of conflicts. Edwards (2003) stated that whenever different sources of authority are present, the probability of greater conflicts is witnessed. Some of the conflicts of interests might arise due to the employees’ demand for higher salaries and employers’ demand for lower wages etc. The conflict of interests creates dissimilar visions and objectives and thus, ends up affecting the productivity and revenues of the organization. The management (of such frame of reference) is often witnessed to serve more time in coordination and motivating employees, rather than controlling and improvising. 3. Workplace Relations in Australia Australia is counted amongst the regions that had been under the affect of plurality frame of reference since the initial years of the twentieth century. This was the time when unions played a vital role in influencing the structure of the employee and industrial relations. Leigh (2005) provided an estimate to highlight the degree of integration of unions in Australia at that time; at least 2 from 5 employees were known to be a part of some union in their organization. The gradual introduction of policies and systems by the government caused changes in the traditional structure of Australian employee relations; their intervention has resulted in the development of legal frameworks which are expected to be followed by organization. The decision of National Wage Case in 1988 provided grounds for the introduction of ‘structural efficiency principle’. This step led to the introduction of collective agreements between the unions and the employers; unions were not organized enough to communicate with the employers on such a level, therefore they had to adapt to the changes. Briggs and Buchanan (2000) explained that this development was directed to improve functional flexibility. Lansbury (2000) provided some examples of the type of collective agreements that were aimed to be achieved with this type of employee relations; development of multiple skills among employees, broader classification of work and eradication of obstruction between different kinds of tasks. Briggs and Buchanan (2000) provided information about the early years of 1990s; Business Council of Australia (BCA), which included major employers of Australia, demanded further changes in employee relations so that enterprise-based bargaining could be promoted. This was a moment of gradual transition from a pluralist frame of reference to a unitary one. The inclination towards unitary frame of reference can be evaluated due to BCA’s claims of enhancement of mutual interests between employees and management after the introduction of enterprise-based bargaining. Lansbury (2000) stated that later in 1993, Enterprise Flexible Agreements (EFA) were introduced that incremented the pace of the transition towards the unitary frame of reference since it did not restrict the employers to make decisions with the mandatory involvement of a union. This step has been vital for the facilitation of individual contracts for employees. The wave of change caught on when organizations, like Optus, started focusing on their hiring processes to ensure that loyal and committed individuals would be hired. These endeavours were aimed to reduce the union culture in the organization. As a result of such steps, the employees of Optus did not vote for the incorporation of union in their organization, rather opted for a non-union system. This agreement included factors that were meant to benefit the employees, such as increment in wages for employees who work for greater number of hours, reward system, flexible nature of tasks etc. Such agreements and organizational cultures facilitate in keeping the employees contented since it affects their productivity and loyalty to the organization. In the presence of such agreements, the desire for unions declined with the passage of the years. McDonald (1998) stated that the introduction of individual contracts, in place of collective bargaining, provides an opportunity to discuss personal requirements and expectations from a job. 4. Factors Leading to the Transition from Pluralist to Unitary Perspective The eventual decline of the unionization in Australia can be realized by the fact that there is minimal number of union strikes in the country. The following figure shows the decreasing number of business days that were lost due to disputes between employees and employers. Figure 1: Number of lost business days (due to disputes) in Australia (Leigh, 2005) Leigh (2005) provided the information that the rate of prevalent unions in the country is only 23% (as compared to 50% in the 1980s). The following figure shows the decline of the unionization over the passage of years: Figure 2: Decline of unions in Australia (Leigh, 2005) Researchers have given differing reasons for the decline of unionization in Australia. Svenson (1999) discussed one of the factors and said that the government agencies and employers wanted the unions to be eradicated to ensure that the power is not divided among sub-groups, rather remains in the hands of the few controlling bodies. The opposition from the employers aggravated due to increasing instances of closed shops and mandatory involvement of unions in decision making processes. Another reason that is discussed by Leigh (2005) is the rise of the competition in the markets. When there is lesser degree of competition or if an organization enjoys monopoly in the market then he has the resources and the funds to pay high wages and salaries to his employees. Prices can be kept high by the business owners if there are no competitors in the market. However, due to the rise in competition in the prevailing times, it had become difficult for organizations to pay high wages in return of the demands of the unions. Personal contracts (unitary) can be handled in an effective manner while applying the human resource management processes. Another factor that led to the adoption of unitary frame of reference is the structural change in the labour market. Leigh (2005) explained that unions have a greater probability of being found in manufacturing industries, public services and large organizations. The increasing number of private organizations, cutting back the government agencies and rise of small businesses has affected the formation of unions. 5. Conclusion Government bodies play a vital role in influencing the frame of reference of employee relations. The government regulations facilitated the presence of pluralist frame of reference in Australia since the early years of the twentieth century. Collective bargaining and unionization were commonly witnessed in the market. The presence of sub-groups (unions) in a single organization proved to affect the unified vision and objective of the organization since unions were focused on the fulfillment of their own motives, rather than the progress of the company. Due to the increasing pressures from the employers and change in government policies, decline has been witnessed in the concept of unions and the employee relations trend has inclined towards unitary frame of reference in Australia. References Agarwal, K 2008, Context of Employee Relations and Industrial Conflict, Acumen Professional Intelligence, viewed 4th October 2011, Briggs, C & Buchanan, J 2000, Australian Labour Market Deregulation: A Critical Assessment, viewed 5th October 2011, < http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/1999- 2000/2000rp21.htm#what> Budd, JW & Bhave, D 2006, Values, Ideologies and Frames of Reference in Employment Relations, Sage Handbook of Industrial and Employment Relations. Edwards, P 2003, The Employment and the Field of Industrial Relations, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Lansbury, RD 2000, ‘Workplace Change and Employment Relations Reform in Australia Prospects for a New Social Partnership?’ The Drawing Board: An Australian Review of Public Affairs, Vol.1, No. 1, July, pp 29-45. Leigh, A 2005, ‘The Decline of an Institution’, Australian Financial Review, p.21. McDonald, J 1998, ‘How Ethical is the Australian Workplace Relations Act?’ AIRAANZ98 Conference. Svenson, S 1999, ‘Union Organizing in Australia: Can the Decline be Stemmed?’ Organizing and Re-organizing: Unions meet the Millennium Conference, Hamilton, Ontario. Read More