Industrial Strikes Are in Terminal End - Literature review Example

DISCUSSION TOPIC: INDUSTRIAL STRIKES ARE IN TERMINAL END By Discussion Topic: Industrial Strikes Are inTerminal End Introduction Industrial strikes or industrial action refers to any measure taken by a structured labour union intended to reduce production levels of employees in a company (Hall, 2006, pg. 298). It engrosses the situation where workers adopt an activity that constraints, confines or interrupts the performance of work. In its extremity, strikes may manifest in employees refusing to attend totally or do their designated jobs. Industrial strikes are performed for the purpose of the employee wanting to get a better remuneration package or for the betterment of their working conditions. Despite the motives behind industrial strikes, there has been a concern amongst industrial stakeholders on the adverse impacts created by strikes that has necessitated the emergence of other alternatives to the industrial action. This paper discusses the topic that industrial strikes are in terminal decline. One of the main negative impacts of industrial strikes is apparent in the low quality of production output by employees. Consequently, this affects the overall productivity of a company even after the industrial strike comes to an end. The constant interruption of production leads to low production levels, as employees efforts are utilised in the strikes, creating an opportunity cost (Launiainen, 2014, pg. 8). Additionally, it is notably visible to realize that when workers engage in industrial strikes the firm’s image is tainted. The suppliers to the firm become reluctant to do business leading to a low overall productivity of the company. Another feasible impact of the industrial strike is its effect on the workers’ health and job satisfaction. Fowler, Gudmundsson and Whicker (2009, pg. 230) illustrates that the employees become discontent with their job leading to low morale, affecting their psychology too. The workers become stressed and as the industrial action continues they become less skilled in stress management. Animosity is created between the employees and the company. Moreover, there are empirical studies that propose that social relations amongst the workers and company leadership become relentlessly hampered (Deakin and Morris, 2012, pg. 26). The relations of employees are damaged too, especially between those who participated in strike activity and those who were against it. Those who participated in strikes feel betrayed by those who didn’t, eventually leading to less teamwork in the organization. This affects cordial workmanship leading to the formation of rival factions at the workplace that can be detrimental to the working environment. The combined effects that arise due to industrial actions may give rise to improved working conditions (Fossum, 2008, pg. 98). The management of companies may feel obliged to meet the employees’ demands especially in cases where the strike is congruent with labour laws. Though some forms of strikes such as the violent strike may be outlawed, the management may intervene to save face. They may increase wages to avoid further damage to the image of the company or deteriorating public relations. Despite the positivity in industrial strikes, there has emerged escalated emphasis on the establishment of an improved methodology of settling disputes (Drinkwater and Ingram, 2005, pg. 375). This has enormously contributed to the declining utility of strike, especially in the contemporary United Kingdom. Several stakeholders in the labour industry have expressed their dissatisfaction with the present methodology of handling labour conflicts. Critics of industrial strikes have reiterated that instead of opting to employ an arsenal of weapons in addressing grievances, there need to be arms management and phased disarmament. This will create an avenue to employing other methods of conflict resolutions between the employees and their employers. The various solutions to mitigate industrial actions in the UK include the antimonopoly approach. According to Pope (2006, pg.55) this approach is aimed at limits contracts to individual firms and is majorly employed in the US. When a company is operating as a monopoly, it may force the employees to work under certain terms that may appear regressive. This may lead to industrial strikes, however, when an industry has various players, the probability of strikes is minimal. This is on the basis that a company’s relations with its employees will be benchmarked to other well-performing players. The diminishing use of industrial strikes is also attributed to technology. It is evident that advancement in technology is spawning trends that reduce the functions of industrial strikes in the management of labour relations (Osabuohien and Ogunrinola, 2007, pg. 75). Technology has aided the firms to continue operations despite the ongoing strikes that may be on the course. For this reason, the need for an industrial strike is minimized as the management of firms does not run the risks of economic or financial losses. Managers can employ technology to cover for employees who are striking; thereby the strike does not have any effects on the general performance of the firm. The nature of an automated manufacturing process makes it possible for an administration to run a factory in spite of an industrial strike by its employees. This has eliminated the requirement for hiring substitute workers to replace those on strikes; whether temporary or on a permanent basis. Skeleton administrative teams can supervise the minimum number of position required for maintaining the needed production levels. The automated machine performs the tasks with the help of the technicians who manipulate the machines and the automated manufacturing procedures. Kleiner, Leonard and Pilarski (2002, pg. 201) urge that automation in the companies has led to new hiring trends that incline the managers of firms to have a higher ratio of supervisors to employees, to act as cushion when employees are engaged in strike activities (Hunter, et al., 2001, pg. 406). In automated industries, strikes will be a thing in the past, as unions will realize their effectiveness in calling for a strike is greatly obstructed. The industrial strikes are also on the terminal decline because of the commitment of the small businesspeople to disintegrate powerful unions. Unions form a foundation to incorporate all workers in the quest for the legitimisation of industrial strikes. The more powerful a union is, the more likely its membership will go on strike (Chen, 2009, pg. 672). However, recent disadvantages that a small business faces when engaging with a powerful trade union has resulted in the business always be on the receiving end. Negotiations occur in favour of the union because of its stronger bargaining power, rendering the small businesses irrelevant in triumphing in the economic conflict. The employers have ultimately created wide associations to counter powerful unions. The associations formed by employers have enabled the employers to prolong strikes in the determination for them to avoid giving in to demands (Purcell and Georgiadis, 2007, pg. 185). This pattern of counter-attack will prohibit persistence of workers together with their unions to engage in industrial strikes wherever they please. The industrial strike will diminish eventually, bearing in mind that the general public does not tolerate prolonged strikes. Nevertheless, there are instances where the public may endure strikes that take a long period to end. The public will, however, demand a different methodology to tackle the grievances raised by the workers. Some companies try to address public concerns over enduring strikes by continuing to operate a struck business. This concept of ‘continuing to operate’ opens a fresh discussion on whether strikes are declining in utility. The ultimate decline of a strike is also based, on the increased development of better methods to endure or survive a strike. Stakeholders are concentrating on how to survive a strike leading to the need for improved strike preparations. This preparation provides an ample time for those intending to go on a strike, to reflect on why they want to strike. The employees or unions are expected to issue strike notice to the concerned party, during which the interested parties may resolve the issue before it is out of hand (Warneck, 2007, pg. 103). The notice of strike also aids the management of a firm to prepare itself quickly for the upcoming event. The preparation exercise paves a way for employers to ponder whether to employ substitute workers or rapidly transform their companies to better technology for automation purposes. In this regard, there are obvious advantages to all the parties involved in amicable solutions may be reached prior to the strike. Strikes will continue to decline if preparations are always carried out before the onset of the industrial action. Another strategy that has led to diminishing popularity of strike is controlled timing. The strategies of timing have evolved into more sophistication. Eldridge (2013, pg. 36) states that the employers are no longer inclined to the notion of handing all decision-making powers to the unions on setting the date when the strikes will occur. A negotiation is conducted to set an all-inclusive date that enables both the employers and workers to be ready for the strike. This balance will enhance understanding between the aggrieved party and the employer which leads to early resolutions. There has been a contemporary development of ‘insurance’ in labour relations management by various business entities. Organizations have grouped together with the intention of instituting strike insurance funds. For example, most airlines companies have embraced this practice. The airlines that endure to do business when there is a strike pay a fraction of their income to the particular airline that has ceased operation due to a strike (Gittell, Von Nordenflycht, and Kochan, 2004, pg. 171). This enhances the capacity of the particular airline to survive a strike and forces the union involved to consider closing all companies banded in the insurance alliance. This will be a more difficult task to ban all companies thereby proving that strikes will be a thing of the past in the near future. On the other hand, unions that cover workers have also established themselves to withstand long-enduring strikes. They have increased strike funds and slackened their constitution to provide for assurance to striking workers that they will be compensated. Unions in the global arena have embarked on a mission to support each other financially in the fight for their need to ensure strikes occur (Kelly, 2004, pg. 270). This has greatly provided a different perspective on the issue that strikes are going to end soon. Industrial strikes are declining because the opponents of the strikes have established other mechanisms for conflict resolution. One such mechanism is negotiation, where the management of firms has accepted the unions and their roles in advocating for employee welfare. The range of reasons for the utility of strike makes it necessary for the various stakeholders to promote methods of conflict resolution that is more based on bargaining rather than forbearance. (Fisher, Ury, and Patton, 2011, pg. 5) echoed that negotiations can be used by employers and unions to reach a mutually beneficial ending, determine differing view and crafting outcomes that will satisfy both parties It is imperative for both the union and the employer factions to employ a neutral advocate who will air their grievances from a neutral perspective. Negotiation has ultimately contributed to the slow decline of an industrial strike, especially in the cases whereby workers want a pay hike. The processes to be followed by the neutral professionals are left flexible. The engaging panel in the discussion may opt to do their negotiation in private, publicly and are allowed to offer recommendations. The practice of negotiation effectively terminates any form of industrial strike, immediately upon its inception (Howell, 2005, pg. 52). The outcome of the negotiation talks is usually consented by the parties involved; largely the reason negotiation is gradually replacing industrial strikes. The government plays a critical role in ensuring industrial strikes are eliminated. Kelly (2012, pg. 32) argues that despite government interest, there appears a traditional protestation to government involvement in the collective bargaining processes. This occurs when one party will yearn for favour from the government of the day. Governments across the global nations ensure that industrial strikes do not reach aggravating heights where crime can be perpetuated. The government also passes laws that prohibit violent forms of industrial strikes which may lead to loss of life and damage to property in extreme cases. With government intervention, the rationale behind the industrial action is greatly dissolved, making the practice less effective. Industrial strikes have also lost popularity and will continue to do so because they are considered by many a primitive type of conflict resolution. Pope 92004, pg. 520) established that strikes promote antagonism, and the modern society does not acknowledge the essence of the practice due to civilisation philosophies. The modern society opts for a settlement other than conflict. The consequences of strike discussed earlier in this paper forms a clear reason stakeholders opt for settlements. This also occurs when a cost-benefit analysis is conducted to evaluate whether strikes are beneficial. When limitations outweigh the benefits, stakeholders believe it is vital to settle disputes to avoid further public criticism. Industrial strikes are gradually being replaced by arbitration, more specifically compulsory arbitration. This is a method used to settle court cases outside court boundaries. Unions may be imposed to settle disputes concerning their members, especially where the employee is deemed to have grossly violated employee rights by paying very low salaries against the state’s minimum. Compulsory arbitration is replacing industrial strikes because it is a quicker and cheaper alternative to the practice. In spite of all the reasons levelled against industrial strike and the fact that the practice is ending terminally, there are proponents of the practice. The rationales why industrial strike will persist in the near future are revealed by the continuous behaviours of employees in relation to strikes (Marginson and Sisson, 2006, pg. 110). The workers view strikes as a demonstration of collective voice as detailed by the collective voice approach. The collective voice approach underlines the importance of the public to view principally strikes as expressions of employee discontent. The foundation of this approach urges the stakeholders to recognise the essence that due to the costs and uncertainties involved in strikes, the strikes call for the employees to consider fairness and legitimacy (Luchak, 2003, pg. 125). The workers should not abuse their rights to place demands purely based on their economic self-interest. When they consider this, the industrial strike will be viewed from a larger fair perspective even by the employees. This is one of the explanations why strikes will continue to be present in the modern world. Industrial strikes would occur now and in the near future depending on certain determinants. One of them is that the conflict between the employer and his subordinate often lies below the façade of the labour-management association. As such, authenticity and trust are often predicaments to management, and, therefore, the possibility of strike activity. However, the definite occurrences of strikes vary greatly depending on the behavioural framework of negotiations. Another cause for concern that strikes will continue is the hard bargaining technique employed by management, which causes worker dissatisfaction and solidarity. Hirsch (2008, pg. 170) demonstrated that employees also persist in striking activities when they perceive that they have the ‘striking power’. This enables them to engage in a strike that is effective, particularly is the strike has an economic impact on the firm, although there may be avenues the employees can exploit to air their discontent, they view strikes as the best option that suits them that yields quicker results. Hence, the strikes will continue to be a tool used to express employee dissatisfactions. The employees will also continue to engage in industrial strikes especially the companies that produce essential products. Union bargaining power is enhanced by this fact, as customers will demand termination of strikes to get the urgent good. In this regard, the union can call for strikes any time they wish bearing in mind that they have a higher influence on the matter and will reap better rewards (Chen, 2009, pg. 665). The management will have no alternative but to meet their demands, as there would be no room for playing hardball. The other beneficial aspect of strikes is that the demands of the labourers can be recognised instantaneously. The managers will address employee needs and by this, a better relation is nurtured between the employer and the employee. The smoothening of the relations will obscure future industrial strikes and in the event of disagreement, the issues will be sought out immediately (White, 2005, pg. 10). Industrial strikes also continue to be relevant in the contemporary labour-management relations because strikes offer new methodologies of doing things and technological innovations. As described earlier, strikes provide an excellent opportunity for managers to allocate resources to develop technology that can substitute human capital (Black and Lynch, 2001, pg. 440). This rationale may not be propagated by employees simply because it may lead to loss of employment. However, employers should accommodate strikes bearing in mind that it will foster technological innovativeness, as it is universally accepted that where there is a need there is a way. Advanced technology cuts cost related to production activities, and it saves valuable resource such as time. Industrial strikes are supported and will continue to be supported because it facilitates transformation in management practices (Hodgkinson, and Perera, 2004, pg. 439). Managers in companies will have to adjust to new requirements by factoring in their workers decision. Inclusivity translates to better production. When workers are paid well, they become content; consequently, their moral is enhanced leading to higher productivity. In a global environment where cutthroat competition is inevitable, many firms compete in terms of sales revenue, which is dependent on overall production levels of the company. Industrial strikes also bring forth new communication avenues can be opened between the staff and the management. The communications offer discussion avenues for various stakeholders in labour relation management (Fossum, 2008, pg. 18). These avenues can also be transferred to other collective bargaining tools such as arbitration. Conclusion In conclusion, it is evident that industrial strikes are an everyday activity in the management of labour relations. Employees will continue to have demands even if their initial demands have been met. Majorly, industrial strikes have a negative impact on the employee, the employer and the society in general. Further, industrial strikes are now diminishing in the contemporary world. Many labour-relation managers have established alternative ways to industrial strikes such as arbitration and negotiation. Although there has been a downward trend in industrial strikes in the UK and all over the world, it is evident that the practice is advocated for by many key players in the labour-relations industry. The unions that protect the employee rights have a responsibility in ensuring that even in scenarios where they are mandated to institute industrial actions; they carry out their strike activity peacefully in the society. References Black, S. E., & Lynch, L. M., 2001. How to compete: the impact of workplace practices and information technology on productivity. Review of Economics and statistics, 83(3), 434-445. Chen, F., 2009. Union power in china source, operation, and constraints.Modern China, 35(6), 662-689. Deakin, S. F., & Morris, G. S., 2012. Labour law. Hart publishing. Drinkwater, S., & Ingram, P., 2005. Have industrial relations in the UK really improved?. Labour, 19(2), 373-398. Eldridge, J. E. T., 2013. Industrial Disputes Ils 151. Routledge. Fisher, R., Ury, W. L., & Patton, B., 2011. Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. Penguin. Fossum, J. A., 2008. Labour relations. McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Fowler, J. L., Gudmundsson, A. J., & Whicker, L. M., 2009. The psychological impact of industrial strikes: Does involvement in union activity during strikes make a difference?. Journal of Industrial Relations, 51(2), 227-243. Gittell, J. H., Von Nordenflycht, A., & Kochan, T. A., 2004. Mutual gains or zero sum? Labour relations and firm performance in the airline industry.Industrial & Labour Relations Review, 57(2), 163-180. Hall, R., 2006. Australian industrial relations in 2005-The WorkChoices revolution. Journal of Industrial Relations, 48(3), 291-303. Hirsch, B. T., 2008. Sluggish institutions in a dynamic world: Can unions and industrial competition coexist?. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 153-176. Hodgkinson, A., & Perera, N., 2004. Strike Activity Under Enterprise Bargaining: Economics or Politics?. Australian Journal of Labour Economics,7(4), 439. Howell, C., 2005. Trade unions and the state: the construction of industrial relations institutions in Britain, 1890-2000. Princeton University Press. Hunter, L. W., Bernhardt, A., Hughes, K. L., & Skuratowicz, E., 2001. Its not just the ATMs: Technology, firm strategies, jobs, and earnings in retail banking.Industrial & Labour Relations Review, 54(2), 402-424. Kelly, J., 2004. Social partnership agreements in Britain: Labour cooperation and compliance. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 43(1), 267-292. Kelly, J., 2012. Rethinking industrial relations: Mobilisation, collectivism and long waves. Routledge. Kleiner, M. M., Leonard, J. S., & Pilarski, A. M., 2002. How industrial relations affects plant performance: the case of commercial aircraft manufacturing.Industrial & Labour Relations Review, 55(2), 195-218. Launiainen, S., 2014. The many faces of strikes: attitudes towards industrial action by labour, management and human resources. Luchak, A. A., 2003. What kind of voice do loyal employees use?. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 41(1), 115-134. Marginson, P., & Sisson, K., 2006. European integration and industrial relations: Multi-level governance in the making. ILR Review, 59(2), 87. Osabuohien, E. S., & Ogunrinola, I. O., 2007. Causes and Effects of Industrial Crisis in Nigeria: Some Empirical Clarifications. Labour Economics 3rd Edition. Pope, J., 2006. Worker Lawmaking, Sit-Down Strikes, and the Shaping of American Industrial Relations, 1935-1958. Law and History Review, 24(01), 45-113. Pope, J. G., 2004. How American workers lost the right to strike, and other tales. Michigan Law Review, 518-553. Purcell, J., & Georgiadis, K., 2007. Why should employers bother with worker voice?. What Workers Say: Employee Voice in the Anglo-American Workplace, 181-197. Warneck, W., 2007. Strike rules in the EU27 and beyond. A Comparative Overview. Brussels: ETUI Report, 103. White, C., 2005. Workchoices, removing the choice to strike:[Paper in: Whose Choices? Analysis of the Current Industrial Relations Reforms.]. Read More