Is the Employment Relationship Becoming More Individualistic - Essay Example

ID # 5448 Order# 330869 To what extent is the employment relationship becoming more individualistic? Introduction Employee is the main functionary or working component of any organization, firm or company. Employee can be defined as an individual who is recruited by the firm or industry for delivering specific defined tasks with an objective of improving the productivity. The employee is recruited with some terms and conditions with a final aim of fulfilling the objectives of organization as a whole. The recruitment of employees is of two types i.e. individual contract and collective bargaining. The individual contract is a process in which the individual directly comes in contact with the employer and negotiates his or her terms of reference of employment. The collective bargaining is a process in which the terms of the reference for employment would be negotiated jointly on behalf of the group of employees at the time of recruitment (Labor Law Group, 1984)). The trade unions generally represent the employees in defining the terms of reference like wages, working hours, living conditions etc. After the negotiations, a contract will be made which is legally binding on trade unions and employers. The collective bargaining is also viewed as a human right that is to be protected legally as envisaged by the Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The right to bargain collectively through freedom of association was also recognized under Item 2(a) of the International Labor Organizations Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. The collective bargaining was one of the most effective methods of employment in the earlier days which witnessed challenges due to the era of globalization and liberalization. The growth of individual thought and freedom has led to fall of trade unions and individuals started preferring direct contact with the employers. At the same time, the employers too started feeling the inconvenience of trade unions by over interference in company administration and hence they also preferred individual contracts. They give higher emphasis to the human resource development for improving the employee performance. At employee level also, the preference to bargain directly with employers has increased in the recent years due to changes brought by the globalization. Though the concepts of collectivism and individualism is well accepted under working style of organizations, there has been a growing feeling that individualism is increasing among employees day by day. Hence, it is appropriate time to study and analyze the extent to which the employment relationship is becoming individualistic. This will help us in identifying the factors that are responsible for reduction in collective bargaining and the increase in individual contracts in employment. Keeping these points in view, an effort has been made through primary and secondary surveys to meet the objective i.e. to analyze the extent to which the employment relations have become individualistic and the extent to which the collective bargaining has been reduced? Methodology The primary survey has been made with data collection through questionnaires from 50 respondents. The factors responsible for reduction in collective bargain and extent or degree of increase in individual contracts in employment relations in organizations were identified. The treatments were compared using critical difference at 5 % level of significance using ANOVA (Analysis of variance) and statistical package NPRCSTAT (Gomez and Gomez, 1984). The statistical design followed was randomized block design (RBD) with 3 replications. Statistical parameters like general mean and stand error were estimated. The data was collected replication wise for all the studied treatments statistical significance was tested by applying F-test at 0.05 level of probability. The secondary survey has also been done by thorough review of literature related to the factors responsible for individualism of employment relations in organizations and factors responsible for reduction in collective bargaining. Based on these factors, prioritization was made and strategies were formulated to reduce the level of individualism and inculcate the feeling of coherence and attachment with the organizations. Results and Discussion It was revealed from the primary survey that the international economic situation is the highest influential factor resulting in higher extent of individual contracts in employment in organizations followed by change in moral standards of the society and human resource development approach. Its superiority is statistically significant than other factors as the critical difference value (4.2) is lower than the difference between the treatment means. Among the seven factors studied for primary survey, complications with union laws, political structure of the organizations, emergence of new sectors and increase in self centric approach are other important factors affecting the extent of individualism in employment relations in organizations. S.No. Factors Score Rank Statistical parameters 1. International economic scenario 78 I General Mean = 57 2. Change in moral standards in society 71 II Standard error of mean = 1.43 3. Human resource development 65 III Critical Difference (CD) (5%) = 4.2 4. Complications with union laws 63 IV 5. Political structure of the organizations 55 V 6. The emergence of new sectors 43 VI 7. Increase in self centred approach 24 VII The individualism among employees in organizations implies to the weighing of private or individual concerns far above the common or collective interests and hence there is a feeling that employees should be encouraged for developing a nature of collectivism than individualism (Brown et al., 2000). Even the recruitment methods followed in organizations prefer towards individualistic approach than collective agreement. Some researchers interpreted that the individualization may reduce the element of trust and in fact damage organizational performance (Deakin 1999). This is supported by the fact that the higher emphasis on rewards and sanctions is related to individual output and hence the employees will focus much on meeting their contractual obligations and resisting community interest. Pfeffer (1998) opined that the employees absorb significant amounts of management time and resources. It was further argued that the linking of economic incentives and individual performance may have a negative impact on organizational outcomes. However, the concept of collectivism cannot be separated from concept of individualism, because it may happen that individualistic practices have strong linkage with collective elements of the organizations (Deery and Mitchell, 1999; Healy, 1997). Healy further pointed out that there is a strong need to focus on an area of industrial relations of appraisal. He explained the importance of introducing an appraisal scheme of a unionized and public sector occupational group and elaborates the process of collectivization of an apparently individualized approach due to union involvement. Kessler and Purcell (2003) also opined that the collectivism and individualism in organizations supplement each other than replacing the same. They further explained that the nature of collectivism and individualism gets changed over time and hence it influences the extent of individualism in employee relations. The role of employees, employers and trade unions was found to be significant in deciding the extent of individualism in employment relations in organizations. They categorized different types of relations between employees and management like traditional (unitary perspectives on behalf of employees and management), classical conflict (unitary management and pluralist employees with highest level of distrust of management on employees), continuous challenge (unitary management and pluralist employees with highest level of distrust of employees on management), sophisticated modern (pluralist perspectives on behalf of employees and management), standard modern (managerial ambivalence and fluctuation between pluralism and unitarism) and sophisticated paternalist (pluralist management and unitary employees) .There are several factors responsible for growing feeling of individualist approach among employees in different organizations (Brown, 1999). Firstly, the change in moral values of the society is the most important factor that led to the individualistic approach among the employees in organizations. In the recent years, there has been a drastic change in moral standards of the society and family structure. People have become more materialistic and allocate less or no time for expressing the feeling of collectivism and emotions leading to a self centred life style which certainly poses threat to the feeling of collectivism among the employees (Giddens, 1998). It is difficult to transform the personality of any employee suddenly with the training programmes of the organizations. Secondly, the growing feeling or craze among the youth towards the economic well being or commercial approach is another valid factor that significantly tilts them towards the individualistic approach. Since childhood, the people have been experiencing the advantages of economic stability in relation to their comforts in life. Hence their risk taking nature is reduced and they try to gain the economic benefit in any organization they work and they don’t hesitate to shift to another organization if considerable percent of increase in perks and salary is offered. In this case, even their attachment towards organization in which they presently work will be dominated by the increase in salary in new organization leading to individualism among the employees. Hence, it may be felt that as long as their existing organization pays them good salaries and good jump in positions at regular intervals, they tend to feel collectivism and their individualism is highly linked with the organizational efficiency and hence they tend to enhance the productivity of the organization (Giddens, 1998). Harpaz and Meshoulam (2009) also made a research study on analyzing the meaning of work, employment relations, and strategic human resources management in organizations in Israel. They revealed that Israeli workers in their firms have shown more individualism and materialism which also reflected their less extent of collectivism. No doubt, the preference to individual achievements of employees dominated their contributions to organization and society. This also affected the nature and style of employment relations and organizational policies. The management strategies of these firms stressed much on the corporatist employment relations system which is dependent on the tri-partite collective bargaining among employers, employees, and the management. It also emphasized the need for creating relative balance of power among the employers, employees, and the management depending upon the changes in political, economic and social aspects of the society. It was also opined that there is an urgent need to transform the style of management from traditional human resource management to modern strategic human resource management which would certainly address the issue of higher extent of individualism felt in employee relations in organizations. Thirdly, the nature and extent of human resource development in the form of training programmes decides the extent of individualism and collectivism among the employees in organizations (Guest and Conway, 1999). They used a national sample of 1,000 employees and drawn conclusions on factors affecting employment relations in black hole organizations. Black hole organizations are those firms in which neither a set of progressive human resource development practices nor a recognized trade union exit. It was revealed that higher extent of negative attitudes and work experiences were found in those firms where there is either human resource management or a trade union presence or both. It also confirmed that the job satisfaction of employees is largely determined by the implementation of human resource development programmes like exposure visits and training programmes and their impact was found to be significantly higher than that of existence of trade unions. Even in black hole organizations where positive psychological contract between individual and organization existed, the job satisfaction was found to be satisfactory. It may be true that if the human resource department functions well and emphasizes much on employee training programmes and exposure visits, the feeling of satisfaction among the employees would improve and they feel higher commitment towards the common goals of the organization (Gilson and Wagar, 1996). Hence, almost all the organizations are giving higher emphasis on human resource development for employee welfare. Some times, the human resource development it self concentrates on positive factors that aid in individualistic approach among individuals and rather they try to satisfy the aspirations of employees. If any organization fails to provide support to the employees in terms of training and exposure visits, the employees would certainly feel disappointed and they get attracted towards other firms where the avenues for training are well executed. The change in political set up of the organization also influences the extent of individualism of the employees in organizations. If the existing executive body of the organization favors the employee benefits in terms of training and other avenues, the employees would feel high sense of satisfaction towards their individual goals and towards the organizational productivity. However, when there will be shift in executive body, the nature of stand taken by them towards employees may change which may result in change in employee satisfaction levels and their extent of individualism in organizations. The nature of management team and its strategies would influence the employee relations towards individualism in an organization to a greater extent (Kelliher, 1989). They further stated that the management strategies may vary from time to time and also from nature of firm i.e. private or public sector based on their extensive research study on employment relations in relation to style of management in catering sector in United Kingdom. In private firms, there will be a greater flexibility in changing the management strategies over a period of time so that the employee relations can be further improved and individualism can be taken care along with the collectivism with a final objective of enhancing the productivity of organizations. Some times, there exists a great potential to exert positive influence on employee relations in organizations by motivational factors of management (Bacon and Storey, 2002). They opined that the potential for developing a positive inter relationship between the employee representatives and managers have to be explored for higher productivity of the firms in United Kingdom. They emphasized a detailed management plan after thorough study of existing practical conditions of contemporary environment in the firms and there is a strong need to understand the themes of individualism, collectivism and partnership. As mentioned earlier, the individualism and collectivism go together in an integrated manner and the chances for having better relations among the managers and employees have to be improved significantly by stressing on human resource development programmesof the employees. The international and national economic scenario also affects the extent of individualism among the employees in organizations. The inflation and demand and supply factors for different commodities at both national and international levels severely affect the productivity of the organizations and hence the fate of the salary structure and other perks of employees would be significantly affected by these changes. The organizations with positive influence due to international economic changes would have more flexibility in entering in to individual contracts with employees at the time of their recruitment making them more individualistic in nature. The emergence of new sectors like software development and nano technology would certainly influence the preference of employees towards different organizations and will not mind to shift to new companies which provide them opportunities to work in frontier areas. For example, during early 1990’s, the emergence of computer programming companies led to heavy recruitment of employees which led to discontinuation of employees from other organizations. The intervention of employee unions in all the issues and policies of the organizations led to dissatisfaction among the management teams and hence they prefer towards individual recruitment and individual contracts (Healy, 1999). The organizations give much emphasis to fulfillment of organizational goals and targets and individuals would be rewarded if they meet the specified targets in defined time limit. This also led to higher extent of individualism in employment relations in organizations. Calyeley and Healy (2003) studied the workplace industrial relations in an inner–city secondary school and concluded that the unionized teachers and their representatives resisted the impact of centralized managerial and educational change. This indicated the negative impact of unionism on introducing any desirable changes in organizations. It also explains the importance of the significant interrelationship between political and trade union activism and the tension and inconvenience between workplace relations and unions. These types of developments and experiences led to higher extent of individualistic approach in employment relations in organizations. Kelly and Waddington (1995) suggested that participative unionism forms the basis for trade union organizations and they conclude that the individual member services supplement the collective organizations rather than replacing the same. Conclusion The decline of collective bargaining in industrial relations might be due to changes brought by the liberalization and globalization. The importance of collective bargaining was felt more when the demand for physical labor force was high. However, the need for labor force declined in the recent years due to introduction of sophisticated machinery which has created jobs for technical persons and reduced the demand for physical labor. At the same time, the labor were not well aware about their rights and legal provisions in the earlier days necessitating them to have a common representing body in the name of trade unions where as now a days, the individual awareness about the working conditions and rights has phenomenally increased leading to reduction in collective bargaining. Lastly, the organizations started giving less preference to collective bargaining due to unnecessary complications with trade unions in the name of strikes. References Bacon, N & Storey J 2002, ‘New Employee Relations Strategies in Britain: Towards Individualism or Partnership?’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 38 (30):407-427. Brown, W. 1999, ‘Individualisation and Union Recognition in Britain in the 1990s in Employment Relations Individualisation and Union Exclusion’, The Federation Press, New South Wales. Brown W, Deakin S, Nash D & Oxenbridge S 2000, ‘The Employment Contract: From Collective Procedures to Individual Rights’ British Journal of Industrial Relations, 38(4), December issue. Clayeley, M. & Healy, G. 2003, ‘Political Activism and Workplace Industrial Relations in a UK Failing School’. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 41(1): 97-113. Deakin, S. 1999 ‘Organisational Change Labour Flexibility and the Contract of Employment in Great Britain’ in Employment Relations Individualisation and Union Exclusion, The Federation Press, Sydney, chapter 7. Deery, S. & Mitchell, R. 1999, The Emergence of Individualisation and Union Exclusion as an Employment Relations Strategy’ in Employment Relations Individualisation and Union Exclusion, The Federation Press, Sydney, p.3. Gibbons, R. 1998, ‘Incentives in Organisations’ Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12 :115. Giddens, A. 1998, ‘The Third Way’, Polity Press, Cambridge. Gilson, C. & Wagar, T 1996, ‘Individual Contracts and the Impact of Labour Legislation: TransTasman Comparisons’ Australian Bulletin of Labour Law, 22:275. Gomez, K.A. & A.A. Gomez 1984, Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research Workers, Wiley-Inter science publication, John Wiley and Sons, New York. Guest, D & Conway, N 1999, ‘Peering into the Black Hole: The Downside of the New Employment Relations in the UK’ British Journal of Industrial Relations, 37(3), 367-389. Harpaz, I & Meshoulam, I 2009, ‘The meaning of work, employment relations, and strategic human resources management in Israel’, Human Resource Management Review. Online publication from 25th September 2009. Healy, G 1997, ‘The Industrial Relations of Appraisal: the Case of Teachers’ Industrial Relations Journal 28(3), September. Healy, G 1999, ‘The Trade Union Role in Career Development: a membership perspective’ Industrial Relations Journal 30(3) September. Kelly, J & Waddington, J 1995, ‘New Prospects for British Labour’, Organisation, 2(3-4): 415-426. International Labor Organization 1998, Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, 86th Session: Geneva, www.ilo.org/declaration/. Kelliher, C 1989, ‘Management Strategy in Employee Relations: Some Changes in the Catering Industry’, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 1(2), ISSN: 0959-6119. Kessler, I & Purcell, J 2003, ‘Individualism and Collectivism in Industrial Relations’ Chapter 12 in Edwards P Industrial Relations - Theory and Practice Blackwell British Industrial Sociology’ Sociology 29(4), November. Labor Law Group 1984, Collective bargaining in private employment, BNA books publication, P:836, ISBN-10: 0871794241. Pfeffer, J 1998, ‘Six Dangerous Myths About Pay’, Harvard Business Review, May-June, 109. United Nations General Assembly 1948, ‘Article 23’. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Paris, www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/. Read More