Employment Relationship: the Issue of Conflict Inherence - Term Paper Example

Introduction With the advancement in the literature on the of industrial relations, many basic elements of the variables considered necessaryfor defining such relations have changed. The unprecedented growth of wealth in the corporate world has virtually redefined the way the relation between the employees as well as the employer largely been seen in historical past. The psychological contract between the employer as well as employee has radically changed due to the changing perceptions held both employers as well as employees regarding the extent of trust and loyalty for each other. (Herriot). As such there is a shift on both the sides of the coin because employers, on one hand, have changed the fundamental way of working whereas the so called trade off between security versus loyalty continuously evolved too as employees are also looking for the ways to carve out their individual identities in this dynamic and fluid environment. What above discussion suggests is the fact that the conflict is an inherent and often permanent element in the equation of employment relations as despite being agreed on trading off the job security with the loyalty to be shown to the employers, employees still consider a degree of conflict in their relationship with employers. This however, further depend upon the relative degree of conflict in the employment relations as such conflict may between the different layers of employees as well as the employers/management. This paper will undertake to explore and understand the issue of inherent conflict in employment relations by discussing different aspects of the same. Industrial Relations The term industrial relation potentially defines the relationship between the workers/employees and the management of the organization. Earlier efforts on defining the industrial relations concentrated on defining the industrial relations in terms of "processes of control over work relations" (Hills). This definition therefore set up the tome of industrial relations in terms of the defining as to how the work relations are controlled within an organization. The emergence of the term Industrial Relations happened during the decade of 1920s due to enormous increase in industrial activity in US and UK. However, over the period of time, its interpretation as well as name has changed from Industrial Relations to Personnel Management and from Personnel Management to Human Resource Management. Despite such change, it is critical to understand that the basic theoretical thrust behind the concept has remained same i.e. management of people. (Edwards). Edwards is also of the opinion that since the industrial relations are basically responsible for the employment management therefore a better representation of the term Industrial Relations can also be Employment relation. The representation of the workers is achieved through the formation of a collective bargaining agent or unions which often negotiate the nature of relationship between workers and the management of the firm. It is also critical to understand that the degree of industrial relations may vary at everyone functional level i.e. they may have different dynamics when viewed at the shop/floor level whereas the intensity and significance may greatly vary when the same is dealt much higher level of employment relations. Further, the degree and variability of industrial relations also depend upon the relative technological strengths of the employers as with the advancement in technology, many jobs may be rendered as redundant and many workers may loose their jobs due to technological change. Employment Relations Employment relationships need to be viewed in two perspectives i.e. from the point of view of the employee and the employer. For an employee, employment is an obvious source of income and a way to achieve the social recognition and identity. Thus the term employment relations not only have the economic influence, but it also carries a social orientation due to the different softer issues involved in the process. (Bamber, Lansbury and Wailes). This therefore not only gives rise to the question of power struggle between the labor and the capital and the interactions of the different stakeholders of the organization. What is also critical to understand that the understanding of multi-disciplinary approaches while dealing with the issue of employment relations A holistic and multi-disciplinary approach would enable to understand the dynamics other than related with the monetary aspects of the relationship between the employer and the employee. This multi-disciplinary approach gives this whole a much larger significance as to the core of this issue, a deep conflict between the capital and the labor can easily be analyzed. As discussed above that the employment relations are critical for employees because it provides an opportunity to basically carve out a social identity for them therefore in order to protect such identities, employees often negotiate their contractual relationships in a manner which potentially protect their own interests. However, from the perspective of the employer, employment relations are critical because in a current dynamic environment, technology defines the overall competitive position of the organization in the market therefore if the level of skills and aptitude of the employees are not properly maintained and developed then employer may face exit from the market. For this reason, the maintenance of cordial employment relations is critical for the overall success and failure of the firms. (Edwards). What is however, critical is the fact that employers often also attempt to fulfill their own productive aims therefore a dilemma arise when there is an asymmetry between the aims and objectives of the employer and the employee It is due to this reason that different organizational controls are set within the organization in order to achieve the organizational objectives and the different forms of such organizational controls determine the nature of employment relations. (HODSON). Though organizational controls may be helpful in determining the overall nature and direction of employment relations, what is also critical to note that the level and nature of the employer behavior determine the ownership and resistance to the work from worker Thus, organizational controls coupled with the employer behavior set the overall tone and texture of the nature of relationship between the two stakeholders in the organization. It is however, important to note that employers often give more credence to the economic performance of the employee and if the same is not achieved to the desired level of employer and as such the overall nature of the relations is dependent upon the economic performance of the employee. Conflict in Employment Relations The Marxist views on the conflict in employment relations are based on the assumption that the interests of the management/owners of the business are entirely different from that of the working class therefore the conflict will arise when both the classes i.e. workers and management attempt to manage their respective class identities tend to engage into conflict. (Hills). This potential class struggle determines the degree and extent of the conflict between the two classes because their relative interests may not be served by each other. There are three different approaches which basically outline the degree of conflict in the industrial relations between the employer and the employee. The unitary view or approach is based on the assumption that there is identity between the interests of the employer as well as the employee and any conflict which may arise can be the result of the gap between the understanding of the interests. Such view therefore advocates the commonality of goals and focuses on the shared heritage of the organization which is equally shared by the employees as well as employers. The pluralist view is based on the assumption that the conflict is the necessary part in the employment relations because at the time of outlining the rules of the game i.e. terms and conditions of the employment, both employers as well as employee uses their own bases of authority and the resulting differences in the authority of the two parties create the conflict in employment relationship. The radical view discusses a middle ground between the unitary and pluralist views by outlining that the reforms are in the best interests of both the workers as well as the employers and that any such potential conflicts shall automatically vanish. The earlier attempts to define the potential conflicts in the employment relationship are largely considered from the view point of the relocation of the workers from one place to anther. The potential harm of such a mass relocation resulted into the psychological as well as moral deviance within the workers who then went on to include the element of their cultural as well as individual identity at their work places. Many earlier critics pointed out to the fact that the potential conflict in employment relations happened due to the industrialization and free market system and its ill impacts on the employment relationships. Further, due to the increased industrialization and relocation of the workers from agricultural basis to the free markets, labors specially unskilled labor grew uncertainty not only towards their individual identity but also towards the job security. It was due to this reason that an implicit psychological contract emerged between the employer and the employee for making a trade off between the loyalty and the job security. However, from the perspective of socio-economic consequences of such a trade off, it has been comprehensively demonstrated that individuals will accept only "a certain degree of social exposure" (Hills) before they seek institutional protection such as unions, government intervention etc to safeguard their interests. This assertion further suggests that the conflict in employment relations may be inherent due to the relative importance given by employees to protect their interests. Such conflict may however remain dormant until the point where it becomes necessary for the survival of the individuals to engage into conflict to protect their interests. While tracing the sources of the conflict between the employer and employee, there are two critical elements which need to be considered. First is the marketing aspect which is basically related with the pricing of the labor i.e. the wage paid to the labors for their work performed. It is also however important to consider that wage issue is not only related with the wages only, but it also relates to the number of hours worked, possible overtimes, compensations, benefits, paid holiday etc. The second aspect of the conflict is related with the managerial issues which are basically targeted towards deciding what to achieve during the contractual period of work hours. Is conflict inherent Considering the multiple perspective of the employment relations, it can easily be inferred that conflict is an inherent and sometimes most important element of the employment relationship. However, it is still an issue of debate as to whether the conflict is a continuous process or just accidental in nature and emerges only when the conflict of perceived interests emerges As discussed above those employees will attempt to accept the employers' actions to a point where it does not harm their interest and the moment this threshold is breached employees will seek institutional help to protect their interests. Such assumption therefore indicates that the conflict may not be inherent in its entirety because as long as long interests of both the socio-economic entities are same, the conflict may not arise, therefore conflict may not be inherent in the employment relations. Conclusion Industrial relation or employment relationship is one of the key concepts in modern day management. With the passage of time, there has been change in the basic understanding of the subject as more multi-disciplinary approach has been adopted to discuss the employment relationship. It is however, also critical to understand that there are different approaches which outline the potential conflict in the employment relationship between the employer and the employee. Employment relations are assumed to be built on the assumption of shared goals of the employer as well as the employee and any gap between the goals would start the conflict between the two. However, employees shall continue to cooperate until the point where their interests are not threatened therefore conflict is not inherent in the employment relationship. Works Cited 1. Bamber, Gregm, , Russell D Lansbury and Nic WaileS. International and Comparative Employment Relations : Globalisation and the Developed Market Economies . Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 2004. 2. Edwards, Paul K. Industrial Relations: Theory and Practice. New York: Blackwell Publishing, 2003. 3. Herriot, Peter. Employment Relationship : A Psychological Perspective . Philadelphia : Taylor & Francis Routledge, 2001. 4. Hills, Stephen M. Employment Relations and the Social Sciences. New York: Univ of South Carolina Press, 1995. 5. HODSON, RANDY. "Organizational Anomie and Worker Consent." Work and Occupations 26.3 (1999): 292-323. Read More