In essence you will be emphasizing he strengths (appropriateness) of one perspective and the weaknesses (inappropriateness) of the other perspective. 3. Your argument should be fully supported by reference to the Fox article, other articles available to you on Model, academic publications in the college library or other appropriate academic sources. Academic research must be the basis of your exploration of the topic. 4. You may draw on personal experience to illustrate your discussion. You should, however, avoid an over-reliance on personal experience as this will weaken rather than strengthen the integrity of your work. . Your Bibliography must include appropriate reference to Fox’s article as well as a number of other academic writers in the industrial relations field. Contents 1. Introduction and Pluralist Perspectives 2 3. Perspectives in Employment Relations 2 2. Unitarian 44. Conclusion 5 Bibliography 6 Industrial Relation is a field of studies that includes a set of phenomena that regulates inside and outside the workplace, which is concerned with determining and controlling the employment relationship.
This paper explains the basis of employment relationship and analyses the motivations of employees in line tit the main set of frame of references which will influence behavior and help managers to shape methods to understand social phenomena. Fox recommends ways in which frame of reference plays an important role on employment relations and organizations, positing that “Ones attitude towards anything depends on ones frame of reference” (fox. 966:1) This indicates that it depends on the person’s values and beliefs and determines judgment which in turn shows the persons motivated behavior in response to objects when they are professed. More specifically, the theory of frame of reference helps to access behavioral outcomes and institutions not only in the individual but also in a group as a whole. This allows a separation between the employer and employees’ ideology. In this essay on the Unitarian and Pluralist perspectives there will be three main strands.
Firstly, I will evaluate the two perspectives to the extent of what they mean and why they are important, with an emphasis on of their respective strengths and weaknesses. Secondly, I will discuss the key principles by placing them in an employment relationship and workplace to observe what implications arise from each perspective, such as conflict. I will also see how management controls both perspectives using their own arbitrary ideologies in shaping their actions.
Finally, I will discuss the possible future direction of the employment relationship with my final conclusion and opinion. 2. Unitarian and Pluralist Perspectives The Unitary perspective is based on the disposition of a capitalist society or viewed as one happy family, with an emphasis on cooperative relations at work. This assumes that the organization is or should be an integrated group of people or team with a single authority and loyalty structure with a set of common aloes, interests and objectives shared by all members of the organization.
Guinness, Wallace, and McMahon describe the Unitary perspective when considering industrial relations as: “… The Unitary perspective on employee relations systems is all that an employment units should be cohesive and harmonious with total commitment to the attainment of a common goal with a structure and purpose with shared goals, values and interests with one source of authority and the staff relations are set upon a plinth of mutuality and harmony” (Guinness, Wallace and McMahon, 2004, p. 26).
A key strength f the Unitary outlook is the inclination to integrate employer and employee’s respective interests so it can enhance employee commitment and loyalty. Employees are seen as important stakeholders of organization so their well being is considered in ensuring the welfare of organization. Unitarianism assumes that all stakeholders are rational members who will find common interests. This provides a steady rationale for stressing common goals so that a stable employment relations system can be achieved.
Conflict is perceived as disruptive and is resolved by coercion which includes the law or management power. Therefore read unions are deemed as unnecessary or an intrusion from the outside. Salomon intimates: “the managerial prerogative is used so that managers have the right to manage and make decisions is regarded legitimate rule, rational and accepted and any opposition to it is seen as irrational” (Salomon, 2000, app). The inherent weakness of a Unitarian approach is the lack of realization between an employer and employee that there is a power inequality which in turns generates conflict.
In addition, it is unclear how an individual worker’s sentiment can be integrated into an organization’s objectives because of the fact the Unitarian yester is very normative and lacks description of how common interest can be identified and shared across organization. Unitarianism only assume that members are rationale enough to reach solid decisions on how the individual’s and organization’s respective interests are to be combined.
Storey describes a typical weakness of Unitary perspective as: “Unitary perspective is very normative and lacks description of how common interest can be identified and shared across organizations and does not provide any HRS guidelines plus can pursue Unitarianism effectively”‘ (Storey 2000 : 12). The Pluralist views society as being post capitalist and made up of powerful and divergent sub groups, where ownership is distinguished from management and authority and power in society are more distributed.
This approach sees conflicts of interest and disagreements between managers and workers which causes competitiveness between sub groups of leadership, authority and loyalty. Fox argues that “it gives rise to a complex of tensions and competing claims which have to be managed in the interests of maintaining a viable collaborative structure” (fox, 1973, pop. Cit, p. 193). The role f management would lean less towards enforcing and controlling and more toward persuasion and co-ordination by using a dynamic process to achieve their objectives where employees, individual mangers and management are all judged.
Pluralist believe that effective industrial relations interventions can resolve conflict while it makes use of conflict management to engage groups that are in conflict so that resolutions can be discussed and implemented. The breadth of employee relations policies can make Pluralism beneficial for diverse organization and national cultures. Williams and Adam-smith states that: there is now an emphasis on developing procedures that are designed to resolve conflict in particular establishment of bargaining relationships with trade unions, given the plurality of interests that potentially and Adam- Smith, 2010, Pl 3).
Trade unions are deemed as legitimate representatives for employees so that they can express their interests and influence management decisions to achieve their objectives. Conflict is dealt with by collective bargaining and indeed is not always seen only as problematic because, if managed effectively, conflict often may lead to positive change. Realistic managers should accept that conflict will occur because there is a greater propensity for conflict rather than harmony.
Salomon articulates the following: “Trade unions and their representatives are as much an internal part of the organization which simply provides a highly organized and continuous form of expression for sectional interests which would exist anyway” (Salomon, 2000, pa). A typical weakness of Pluralist is that it dwells on the rules and procedures and discards the processes that contribute to the resolution of conflict. These rules can not adapt to emerging workplace conditions while Pluralist focuses too much n workers interests plus can lead to inefficiencies of collecting bargaining processes.
Kitty & Marching argue “Pluralist are incapable of realizing that the state also represents commercial interests and not just public interests” (Kitty & Marching, 1999: 1267). 3. Perspectives in Employment Relations In a Unitary perspective on employment relations there is an obligation by employees to adhere to trade unions it seems, without ever being prepared to fully engage with them. In practice, employees tend to accept the decisions of management and submit to the previous management power.
Fox suggests in is article (fox. 1966: 10) that “Modern workers are perfectly safe in the hands of their managers” (fox. 1966:10). Most managers in a Unitary system would stress about the common purpose of shared goals and objectives with the absence of conflict of interest between employer and employee if asked about their views on employment relations. These beliefs influence their behavior and, most importantly, are influenced by their management prerogative.
In respect of my own experience as an employee in the hotel industry, it is apparent that some mangers would show resentment towards trade unions and try to emphasis hat we are a happy team. Wallace also identifies management’s lack of real engagement with trade unions, enunciating that: ” the consequent rejection of collective bargaining is based upon management perceived legitimate prerogative to proceed without the incumbency of negotiations to attain consent to their decision making initiatives and responsibility'(Wallace, Gunnies et al. 2004, p. 27). The Unitary arrangement is essentially individualist which works best for an industrial relations system. Indeed, many industrial relations systems have shifted from collectivist paradigms to individual paradigms including some impasses in the UK so that the Unitary perspective will be useful for industrial relations system. In employment relations, Pluralism recognizes employers and employees interests which will be reconciled if the organization is to function effectively.
An essential characteristic of a Pluralist system is that any conflict that arises from different interests is managed and contained in a way that it prevents it causing too much disruption. Conflict is viewed as a feature of work that requires management by representative’s procedures and specialist institutions. The emphasis is on developing procedures like shop stewards that resolve conflict and collective bargaining from trade unions which is accepted and recognized to protect employees in the employment.
Williams and Adam- Smith again champion the need for trade unions in this regard, by combating an employer assuming that the organization alone is inherently in the shared interest of both employer and employee alike: “Managers cannot assume that the organization is characterized by shared interests and common goals in particular employees will have divergent interests and may want to express them through heir own independent institutions, trade union” (Williams and Adam-Smith, 2010, p. 13). 4. Conclusion This paper has evaluated two types of perspectives plus placed them in employment relations whereby had different outcomes to each perspective and it is suggested that some of these features will help the future of employment relations by staffing policies that should unify effort which will inspire and motivate workers. Rewards systems should be put in place to help loyalty and commitment in the organization, with the objectives of every individual employed in the business should discuss and integrated in the organization’s deeds.
In a Pluralist system the firm should have an industrial relations and personal specialists who advise managers and provide services relating to consultation and negotiation. Union recognition should be encouraged and representatives given scope to carry out their duties with collective agreements should be negotiated with union. In a Unitarian perspective they consider that there is only one source of leadership and conflict should have been avoided through the coalition of individual and organizational interests.
