Unitarist, Pluralist and Radical Perspectives LIPC Integration Plc - Essay Example

LIPC Integration Plc. Payment System The Unitarist, Pluralist and Radical Perspectives in the Case of LIPC Integration Plc. The Fabrication Department One of the evidences that reveal the unitary perspective in the LIPC Integration Plc case is the call by workers in the design department for better rewards in compensation of their creativity and talent. As earlier noted, one of the unitary perspectives of workers is that the terms and conditions of employment should favourable. The fabrication department is the unit that seems to propagate the unitary perspective the most. The workers in this department are at peace with the new performance–based reward and pay system and with the company’s management. As a result of the system, many of those in the department feel so incentivised that they are more dedicated to their work. The call for more training by members of the department shows that they are focused on business process and performance improvement. On its part, the management of the company is confident that the new system encourages employee loyalty and commitment. Communication between the department and management seems to be open with each party offering positive response to moves by the other party. The unitary perspective perceives the company as a harmonious, integrated system. In view of the perspective, the staff and management of the company share similar interests, objectives, purposes (whatishumanresource 2015). This being the case, all members of the organisation work together so that they can realise the mutual goals that they together share. According to the unitary perspective, all employees of the company should be loyal to the organisation and its interests. From the perspective of the employees, with respect to unitarism, they should enjoy flexibility at the workplace, their orientation being toward the improvement of business processes as noted by Ackers and Wilkinson (2003). To this extent, the employee should be multi-skilled and should be armed enough as to be able to efficiently perform different tasks. Although generally the unitary perspective does not consider trade unions necessary, if they exist, their main role is to be a further means of communication between staff and management (Mullins 2005). Generally, the unitarist perspective holds that conflict is disruptive and should, therefore, be avoided at all costs (Kelly 1998). One view of employees who hold the unitary perspective is that there ought to be good relations in the company much as the terms of employment should be favourable (Ackers & Wilkinson 2003). Decision making, employee participation, and the support of employees by managers are other aspects that the employees who hold the unitary perspective demand. One perspective of management rooted in unitarism is that staffing policies should be dedicated to unifying effort much as they should motivate and inspire employees (Budd 2004). The management also holds the view that reward systems should be so designed that they encourage employee commitment and loyalty. In addition, the management believes that there is need to communicate properly the wider objectives of the company to avoid staff-management conflicts. Generally, the fabrication department does not have a problem with the management of the company and the new system that has been instituted. The management supports the views of the department regarding training of employees as a way of increasing productivity. One recommendation for the department’s good is that management should ensure that terms and conditions of employment for workers remain favourable to them. Management should also put effort towards ensuring that employee commitment and loyalty are improved by the payment system such as complimenting hard working staff verbally and through other rewards (Budd, 2004). Employees in the fabrication department beyond doubt are not in conflict with the company’s management. The management is positive about their concerns and has pledged its support for their request for additional training. For them, a voice that is not radical can best serve their needs as suggested by Banfield and Kay (2008). This being the case, the members of the department can find a voice in their leaders, supervisors, or representatives. The Design Department In the case, pluralism is at play especially in the case of the design department. The workers in the design department and management are in conflict over how profits should be shared. These elements are clearly powerful subgroups with different and conflicting views. While the employees in the department demand better pay for their creativity, the company’s management are opposed to this view. Secondly, the management is opposed to the idea presented by workers that they remain owners of the designs that they create. In as much as the management has taken this move, the issues have not been solved conclusively. It is also evident that the company’s management have opted to coordinate and persuade the employees on realising that the employees cannot easily be dispensed with. Communication between the department and management seems to be antagonistic initially, management only later opening up a window for constructive dialogue. Farmer, Smith and Yellowley (2012) note that employees bring with themselves expectations, attitudes, and beliefs to the workplace. Some of these expectations, belief, and attitudes may conflict those of their employers leading to conflict at the workplace. The pluralist perspective holds that the organisation comprises powerful subgroups that have divergent views (whatishumanresource 2015; Kaufman 2004). These sub-groups include management and trade unions or employees. To this extent, there is higher chance of conflict than absolute harmony in the organisational setup. According to pluralism, disagreements and conflicts of interest between workers and managers over the way profits are distributed are not out of the norm and neither can they be escaped from (Ackers & Wilkinson 2003). This being the case, management assumes the role of persuading and coordinating employees rather than controlling and enforcing. In order to solve the conflict that is rocking the design department, a number of measures should be taken. One of the measures is to use external arbitrators to assist in solving the dispute as suggested by Kelly (1998). The organisation should also have personnel and industrial relations specialists whose roles will be to offer advice to managers and provide specialist services related to staffing, negotiation and union consultation. Yet again, the managers should recognise workers representatives and give them the room to perform their duties. The two conflicting parties should come up with collective agreements to which they should be committed, Employees in the design department are well placed in that finding people with their level of talent and skills is hard. The employees in the department feel that their creations should remain their personal intellectual properties. As the company’s employees, they may find a voice in a trade union which is dedicated toward fighting for their specific interests (Lewis, Thornhill & Saunders 2003). On the other hand, as consultants, they may find a voice in organisations that deal with copy rights and intellectual property. The Assembly Department The conflict revolving around the assembly department best illustrates the radical perspective. Members of the department note that the new system works against them as they do not derive any benefits from it. They further argue that they need more flexible working hours and frequent breaks. The management of the company has declined to respond positively to the demands of the department possibly in a bid to ensure that the business makes more profit. Given the capital that they hold, the management has threatened to outsource the work performed by the department, a move that has affected the department’s productivity. There seems to be poor communication between the department and management especially given the hard line taken by the management in relation to the departments’ requests. The radical perspective perceives industrial relations as a subset of the wider capital society (whatishumanresource 2015). According to this view, industrial relations in a capitalist world are perpetual and are a sure source of conflict although open conflicts are not common. The perspective further holds that at the centre of industrial relations are class struggles between the employee and the employer. Each class tries hard to consolidate its respective position with an aim of getting greater leverage over its counterpart. The conflict that is facing the assembly department can be solved by trying to find a point at which the employees feel that they are well paid and management feel that the company will not lose a lot of its profit. What this means is that the management should soften their stand regarding the issues raised by the employees in the department. Perhaps the engagement of external, independent arbitrators and workers union can help solve the conflict. The assembly department has a big problem with the management. Their genuine concerns are being belittled by the management perhaps because of the lower bargaining power that they have by virtue of the nature of the work they do. Considering that the management has taken a hard and radical stand against the department, the members of the department need a voice that is equally radical. A strong voice in this respect can be found in a trade union and anti-outsourcing groups. References Ackers, P. & Wilkinson, A. (2003) Understanding Work and Employment: Industrial Relations in Transition, Oxford University Press. Banfield, P. & Kay, R. (2008) Introduction to Human Resource Management. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Budd, J. (2004) Employment with a Human Face: Balancing Efficiency, Equity, and Voice. Cornell University Press, New York. Farmer, M. Smith, P. & YellowleyW. (2012) Organizational Behaviour. Routledge, London. Kaufman, B. (2004) Theoretical Perspectives on Work and the Employment Relationship, Industrial Relations Research Association, New York. Kelly, J. (1998) Rethinking Industrial Relations: Mobilization, Collectivism and Long Waves, Routledge, London. Lewis, P., Thornhill, A. & Saunders, M. (2003) Employee Relations: Understanding The Employment Relationship, Financial Times/Prentice Hall, London. Mullins, L. (2005) Management and Organisational Behaviour, FT Prentice Hall, London. whatishumanresource (2015) Approaches to Industrial Relations, viewed 28 May, 2015. http://www.whatishumanresource.com/approaches-to-industrial-relations Read More