I. INTRODUCTION
Industrial peace is one of the core issues in the field of industrial relations. Moore (1951) suggested that industrial conflicts can be minimized or prevented by resort to two types of procedures: first, a procedure of regulating and limiting the power of the two interest groups, especially by restricting power that can be exercised; second, a procedure of providing positive interference in industrial disputes. Both procedures suggest that beyond workers and employers, a third important player may also directly interfere in industrial relations processes.
The Pluralist theory, the mainstream industrial relations theory, focuses primarily on the bipartite relationship between the workers and employers. The third player, governmental agencies, though is equally important, is largely overlooked (Keller, 1991). However, as a theory of politics in essence, the Pluralist theory requires considerable elaboration on such a missing piece, for it leaves itself open to questions of inequality of power among different interest groups: some groups may wield an influence on public policy which may not be the interest of other groups. Legislation and other public policy decisions oftentimes work through a complex process of political party structure (Hameed, 1982). Politics is one of the most important underlying developmental dynamic within industrial relations; as such governmental interference shall not be absent from existing theoretical frameworks.
The primary objective of this paper is to examine the Pluralist theory focusing on its explanation on the role of governmental agencies in industrial relations. Furthermore, I hope to prove that the absence of the role of the state may be a theoretical flaw within Pluralis...
... middle of paper ...
...on] McGuinty is being a lapdog for a union-hating right-wing mayor because he is afraid of Ford's political clout, not because he cares about transit in Toronto. (CBC News, 30
March, 2011)
Though these statements may be purely Mr. Kinnear’s expression of personal interests, one interesting fact about this dispute is that, TTC management and TTC employees in fact unanimously oppose this provision. Management fear the unintended consequence of governmental intervention will reversely cause higher wage, TTC employees worry that they may lose their right to strike as a powerful channel to articulate themselves. All in all, it is without a doubt that government actively involves in this industrial conflict, and pluralism theory again, fails to explain why government has taken such an active role in interfering labour relations between TTC management and employees.
To conclude this analysis on the basis of the labor’s extensive history, Sloane & Witney (2010) propose, “it is entirely possible that labor’s remarkable staying power has been because of the simple fact that to many workers, from the nineteenth century to the present, there really has been no acceptable substitute for collective bargaining as a means of maintaining and improving employment conditions” (p.80). In the end, it is important to anticipate unions and employers presently work together to find solutions that will enhance collective bargaining strategies and practices to serve the interest of both parties.
The primary objective of a trade union is to improve the well being of its members. They were formed to counter the superior economic power of the employers. It has long been recognised that the market dominance of employers could onl...
Beginning in the late 1700’s and growing rapidly even today, labor unions form the backbone for the American workforce and continue to fight for the common interests of workers around the country. As we look at the history of these unions, we see powerful individuals such as Terrence Powderly, Samuel Gompers, and Eugene Debs rise up as leaders in a newfound movement that protected the rights of the common worker and ensured better wages, more reasonable hours, and safer working conditions for those people (History). The rise of these labor unions also warranted new legislation that would protect against child labor in factories and give health benefits to workers who were either retired or injured, but everyone was not on board with the idea of foundations working to protect the interests of the common worker. Conflict with their industries lead to many strikes across the country in the coal, steel, and railroad industries, and several of these would ultimately end up leading to bloodshed. However, the existence of labor unions in the United States and their influence on their respective industries still resonates today, and many of our modern ideals that we have today carry over from what these labor unions fought for during through the Industrial Revolution.
Factories were known for their ill treatment of their employees, long hours and dirty and unsafe conditions. In 1866, unions started to form to improve working conditions for the workers. A fundamental problem faced by democratic societies is as long as people live their lives individually and go their separate ways and be selfish individuals, they are unlikely to meet collectively to resolve issues. There needs to be meaningful unity among people to alleviate this problem to get people obliged to one another, so there is a willingness to sacrifice for shared goals. Bonding of its citizens creates a democracy. Unions seemed to offer the middle class a chance to become a crucial part of fostering institutions of constitutional democracy. The unions have went through several transitions, but have always worked for the working force. I will discuss the history of the various unions, their wins and losses, and the struggle of the employee to achieve democracy in the workplace.
The balance of power between management and labor has long been an issue. Historically, employers had the upper hand, and workers were afforded few rights in terms of pay, working conditions, or fair treatment (Fossum, 2012). Individual workers found that they had little influence over their own work situations and were frequently at the mercy of employers. Over time though, some progress was made in drawing attention to the plight of workers. The power of organizing began to give groups of workers some voice in workplace matters. Unfortunately, however, initial attempts at unionization of workers during the nineteenth century were short-lived and often marked by violence (Fossum, 2012). It was not until the twentieth century that major legislation gave unions a sense of legitimacy and workers slowly gained some leverage in the employer-employee relationship.
When Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister the first thing she wanted to do was limit union power. She felt that union power applied to nationalized industrial monopolies resulted in poor service at exorbitant cost to the taxpayers. She pointed to inefficient work practices, overemployment and restrictive employment conditions such as the all union “closed shop”. These rules were dictated by union contracts and served to tie the hands of managers and the government alike. Mrs. Thatcher’s greatest grievance concerned the powers union leaders had over strikes ( Moskin 100).
The 21st Century has witnessed Asia’s rapid ascent to economic prosperity. As economic gravity shifts from the Western world to the Asian region, the “tyranny of distance [between states, will be] … replaced by the prospects of proximity” in transnational economic, scientific, political, technological, and social develop relationships (Australian Government, 1). Japan and China are the region’s key business exchange partners. Therefore these countries are under obligation to steer the region through the Asian Century by committing to these relationships and as a result create business networks, boost economic performance, and consequently necessitate the adjustment of business processes and resources in order to accommodate each country’s employment relations model (Wiley, Wilkinson, & Young, 2005). Cognizant of the fact that neither Japan nor China has given up on its external (protectionism or parity) adjustment tools, it is posited that they can nonetheless coexist since both “produce different things and in different ways” and as such avoid the cited perilous US and Mexico competition; but due to globalization, the operating environment portends a convergence or divergence of Industrial Relation (ER) strategies between China and Japan (Lipietz, 1997; Zhu & Warner, 2004).
An arbitrator’s function is usually to interpret the collective bargaining agreement between the parties, not to apply his or her standards of what is right in a given situation. The courts have sought to compel labour and management to a peaceful resolution of grievances through arbitration. The Supreme Court has given support to the arbitration process in a series of decisions, and judicial deferral to arbitration has become a basic tenet of national labour policy. Bibliography Byars, L. L. (1997). The.
Colvin, A. S. (2013). Participation versus procedures in non-union dispute resolution. Industrial Relations, 52(S1), 259-283.
The laws and regulations surrounding Industrial Relations since the 1900’s have, at each reform, placed tighter constraints on the amount of power unions are able to exert. The reforms have also radically increased managerial prerogative, through an increased use of individual bargaining, contracts and restrictions imposed on unions (Bray and Waring, 2006). Bray and W...
Traditional literature in the field of labor relations has focused immensely on its benefit towards the employer and in the process equating it to working rules. This has been so despite the field being expected to cover the process of, labor management, union formation, and collective bargain; all which are anticipated to create a positive employer-employee relationship. This relationship is said to be positive if there exist a balance between employment functions and the rights of the laborer. Also important to note, is that this relation is equally important to the public sector as it is to the private one. Therefore, to ensure a mutually conducive labor environment exists, effective labor management process and inclusive negotiation program should be adopted (Mulve 2006; Walton, 2008).
When it comes to contract negotiations, labor unions may differ from one and another throughout the different industries, but they usually share the same goals when it involves contract negotiations (Sloane & Witney, 2010). During these procedures, demands are usually made by from both parties, the employer and the union; this processes main goal is to negotiate a written agreement between each other covering a multitude of issues and concerns (Sloane & Witney, 2010). These talks are typically the most confrontational part of the relationship between labor unions and management, especially when it comes to wage issues (Mayhew, n.d.). This author will take a look the wages and wage-related issues, employee benefits, institutional issues, administrative clauses, and make recommendation that will would prevent wage-related grievances from happening.
...tems Theory of Industrial Relations have played an important role not only in understanding but also in maintain better industrial relations today which can be related easily in today’s market.
There are many different approaches and theories regarding industrial relations nowadays. In order to mount an opinion on which is the ‘best’ or most appropriate theory of industrial relations, each theory will have to be analyzed. The three most prevalent theories of industrial relations which exist are The Unitarist theory, The Pluralist theory and The Marxist theory. Each offers a particular perception of workplace relations and will therefore interpret such events as workplace conflict, the role of trade unions and job regulation very differently. I will examine each of these theories in turn and then formulate my own opinion regarding which is the ‘best’ or most appropriate theory.
The Marxist approach looks at industrial relations from a societal perspective. It views industrial relations as a small-scale version of a capitalist society. This approach surrounds itself with the assumption that industrial relations under capitalism are unavoidable, and thus would be a source of conflict. According to Marxist, industrial conflict is central to industrial relations, however actual altercations are uncommon. The approach also sees this as a form ...