Contemporary

Developments in
Employment Relations
[Writer]

[Institute]

[Date]

18
Question 1: Provide a brief analysis of the indeterminacy of employment relations and an
assessment of the factors which impact on employment relations. In your analysis, briefly
compare and contrast unitarist and pluralist approaches.

The nature of employment relationship is indeterminate in terms of that the worker’s capacity
and skills to work are bought by employer but there is no guarantee that such a capacity will be
employed to perform productive labour. Thus, employers are responsible for managing labour
and either control or secure the workers’ cooperation to make sure that employee power is
changed into constructive work (Keith, 2008). Majority of the benefits received by employees
from the exchange can be set. In particular, this is true of wages and conditions, assisting to
explain the reason behind why they are very frequently the focus of attention. The main aspect
regarding the indeterminacy of the employment contract and strategies of employment control is
that the employers or managers and workers are bound by a relationship that is contradictory and
antagonistic (Keith, 2008). This relationship is contradictory, not in the sense of logical
incompatibility, but as the management is responsible for pursuing the objectives of control and
releasing creativity both of which are intrinsic in the relationship with workers, and which
require diverse approaches. The reason behind antagonistic nature is that the managerial
strategies are related to the deployment of employees’ labour power in such a manner that allows
the generation of a surplus (Keith, 2008). Employees are the only people who have the potential
to lead to a surplus in the production process but they do not ascertain how their labour power is
deployed to achieve the objective.

The most important and initial thread working through research and policies about industrial
relations is that labour is more than a commodity and a set of human resources (Tapia, Ibsen and
Kochan, 2015). An inherent conflict of interests exists between employees and employers.
Conflict or dispute is an unavoidable event as employers always require highest level of input of
their employees even at a minimum cost, but employees want smart wages in exchange of less
amount and time of work.

Relationships between employees and employer called the employment relations, at times
referred to as industrial relations as well, through which performance of both management and
workers can be affected. There is a direct impact of quality of this relationship on the entire
organisation. Human resources, the domain of business concentrated on recruiting the new talent
pool and managing existing people as well, contributes a pivotal role to employment
relationships by means of various internal and external factors. Motivation is the internal factor
affecting internal relationships of employees with management. Employees with confidence in
raising and expressing their concerns to management typically are productive and content in the
workplace. Employees’ involvement in the organisation’s decision-making process can have a
constructive impact on working relationships. By rewarding employees for their hard effort, the
organisation’s work environment enhances. Moreover, HRM is another factor affecting the
working relationships. Internal promotion methods and respect for worker seniority are key
factors. Further, competitively smart wages are also a major factor in employment relations.
Employees always need to be valued. Knowing that wages are smart, competitive and
comparable to those paid for similar jobs by other organisations enhance employee morale.

Bargaining power is also influential factor. Joining a trade union by an employee to escalate
bargaining power within the organisation was once standard for majority of the workers. There is
the need for a system through which employees can communicate their grievances and settle
disputes. Although it is a positive factor, disagreements between the employees and employer on
issues that lead to voluntary work stoppages can be a detrimental factor for employment
relations. Lastly, outside influences are the external factors through which the employment
relation can be affected. These factors are private events in the employees’ lives that lead to high
absenteeism rates and inadequate job performance. Moreover, the government’s regulations on
employee safety and wellbeing, family leave and workplace rights can have major impacts on
employment relations.

The dynamics of how this relationship operate can be observed by mans of diverse angles, such
as unitarist and pluralist angles.

The unitary angle is based on a unitarist perspective in case of employment relationship. There is
a unity of interests possessed by both the workforce and the management, and any dispute
actually occurs because of inadequate employment practices (Wilkinson, Bacon and Redman,
2009). The unitary frame of reference dominates the modern-day employers. Hence, this angle
also underlies the modern-day HRM, which pays strong attention to the formulation of policies
that are beneficial to employers and employees at the same time, trying to resolve the
disagreements between both parties (Wilkinson, Bacon and Redman, 2009). It means that the
concept of unitarism is based on the belief that the all parties working together in the best interest
of organisation.

On the other hand, pluralist perspective refers to the belief that the approach to make strong and
effective industrial relations is to recognise that the diverse employees’ groups have diverse
needs and demands (Fuller, Jewson and Unwin, 2009). Thus, the management needs to make
compromises on the issues.

The view of unitarists is that the same agenda is shared by both the management and the
employees within any organisation for any matter. Thus, unitarists consider it as ‘a unitary
outlook’ (Wilkinson, Bacon and Redman, 2009). Pluralism, on the other hand, rejects the power
exercised by the management by disbelieving in it. Pluralists also motivate that a specific system
or mechanism be pursued in the business or organisation’s interest (Fuller, Jewson and Unwin,
2009). It expects that power is adequately dispersed instead of concentrated in a few individuals’
hands. For employees, a large amount of opportunities are provided by pluralism that enables
them to raise their voice and opinions. However, the belief of unitarism is in the view of the
whole organisation as one big family unit.

Question 2:

1. Briefly critique the key features of the contract of employment.

In a dispute occurred between the British Medical Association (BMA) and National Health
Service (NHS) employers, in which BMA voted to strike over the continuing contractual
disagreement with the government, contract of junior doctors encountered the dispute over the
pay cut issue (Banfield, Kay and Royles, 2018).

In this conflict, the key feature is that the employee-employer relationship and contract of
employment is very complex in nature and multi-dimensional as well. This relationship of
employees is not only with the NHS employers but is also extended to the UK government.
Moreover, employee relationship through contract of employment is a developing concept.
Dispute and collaboration are done on the basis of the situation. With the transformations and
modifications in the industry’s structure and environment and in the parties’ views, the
relationship and contract of employment also change (Stone, 2007). Taking the economic factor
and enhancing the healthcare service into consideration, government reached to a decision to
restructure the doctors’ payment. Nevertheless, the view of BMA was totally different. They
argued that the government lacks the ability to protect the doctors’ welfare.

Another key feature of the contract of employment is to resolve disputes regarding the working
condition (Banfield, Kay and Royles, 2018). As the government’s pay-cut policy minimised the
doctors’ payments about their overtime and thus the BMA went to strike and demanded re-
negotiation over their employment contract (Banfield, Kay and Royles, 2018).

2. Identify the main sources of UK and EU employment relations law and include a brief
summary of some of the main developments in individual employment law.

In the UK, most employment law is civil law. The role of criminal law is pivotal in health and
safety law and immigration law. Statutes including the Acts of Parliament and sets of regulations
issued by government ministers under Acts are the main source of employment law (Taylor and
Emir, 2015). By means of statutes, most EU law has also been integrated into UK law. Cases
associated with employment statutes are usually heard in the employment tribunals. The
common law, which is based on the judge and he is the one who made it, has evolved over
centuries and the reason is that the cases are brought to court and appealed up through the court
hierarchy. The role played by other laws including contract, trust, and tort is pivotal in
employment regulation (Taylor and Emir, 2015). In the County Court or the High Court, most
common law cases are heard. One can appeal the case to the Employment Appeals Tribunal
(EAT) and on to the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court and, if the case is associated with the
EU law, to the European Court of Justice (Taylor and Emir, 2015). There are other institutions,
including Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) involved in the BMA and
NHS case, as well which perform a crucial part in the employment law system (Taylor and Emir,
2015).

The main development has been made in terms of the introduction of The Conduct of
Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses (Amendment) Regulations 2014 (SI
2014/3351) on 5 January 2015, prohibiting employment organisations from advertising vacant
positions completely in other European countries devoid of advertising in the UK. For more new
development, review Acas.org.uk (2018).
Question 3: Provide a brief summary on how you would advise on the purpose and scope of
statutory trade union recognition.

This section takes the UK as an example to present a brief summary on how I would advise on
the purpose and scope of statutory trade union recognition. According to Dundon et al. (2004),
trade unions are basically the worker representatives are more common in the public sector
organisations, and this argument underpins the assumption that the public sector is the only
remaining sector wherein worker representatives have strong impact on the employment
relationship. In the UK, public authority union is given the right of consultation by common law,
where a practice of consultation in past has existed between a public entity and a trade union that
represents workers of such an entity. The Employment Relations Act (ERA) 1999 is the
legislation on trade union recognition that can be applied to the civil service as well (Smith and
Morton, 2006). Recognition may be granted to trade unions for the purpose of collective
bargaining pursuant to a procedure of statutory recognition. If the employer rejects, or not
succeed in meeting a trade union and in discussing wage, working duration and conditions, and
holidays, the Central Arbitration Committee may impose a binding procedure (Smith and
Morton, 2006).

More than a thousand agreements have been reached after the introduction of this statutory
recognition procedure in the UK. There is a highly sophisticated system of conciliation,
arbitration and enquiry in the UK, where trade unions are free to be made. When a trade union
conforms to the rules and regulations, it can ask for a voluntary list, which is a prerequisite for an
official document of independence: it recognises, among other advantages that a trade union may
get from the statutory rights and guarantees awarded to them. As an instance, the right to partake
in a variety of activities of unions, to get update for collective bargaining and for members to
stop working temporarily for performing the trade union obligations. There is no any restriction
imposed on the unions’ right to associate with organisations, whether they are national or
international. The right to go with or not go with a trade union is protected against dismissal and
selection for redundancy.

Question 4

1. Clarify the key terms used in employee involvement and participation

Employee involvement is also known as worker’s participation, which has been considered by
authors as various structural processes which have the strong potential to encourage and enable
employees to contribute, whether directly or indirectly, to and influence the organisational
decision-making and in the society as a whole (Keith, 2008). It is indicated by the following
definition that there is a variety of activities for employees to influence an organisation’s
decision-making processes. Typically, there is a direct or indirect form of employee
involvement. Direct involvement refers to that employees have the strong potential to make an
immediate impact on the firm’s decision-making processes, and general forms of this
involvement include employee surveys, team briefing, self-directed working groups and so on.
Indirect involvement is also known as representative involvement and it refers to a certain group
representing all employees involved in the firm’s decision-making process. Indirect involvement
also has some common forms including board representations, work councils or task forces
(Tapia, Ibsen and Kochan, 2015).

Therefore, employee involvement has been grouped into three subgroups, including informative,
consultative and delegative participation (Guillén and Dahl, 2009). Informative participation as
the employee involvement means downwards communication within the firm. Top-down
information is given to employees regarding the organisation and its market rivals, their own
department or their performance at the individual level. Information exchange integrates the
process of open communication and information disclosure. Consultative participation refers to
diverse management-made schemes to get employees’ views and can have a form of team
briefing, individual meeting and surveys from employees. Delegative participation is about a
variety of programmes through which capacity is given to employees to make decisions
associated with specific issues and integrates the forms like problem-solving groups and semi-
autonomous groups. (Guillén and Dahl, 2009)

2. Explain the extent to which they can strengthen employee voice in a union and non-union
context.

The employee voice is a concept covering the multiple situations. Thus, it has been defined as
the approaches used by employees to have a say, contribute to and potentially influence
organisational matters affecting their work and the managers’ and owners’ interests. Through
this definition, various voice mechanisms are combined that analysts frequently classify in
separate boxes (such as union and non-union). It lets employer to enact the collective form of
voice by implementing Non-union Employee Representative (NER) systems, be it adopted to
relegate a union presence to a lower or outer edge or to facilitate with an alternative to union
influence (Dundon et al., 2004), along with union forms of voice. There are many economies
where there is low trade union membership and bargaining coverage, and the economies like
China where the unions are established by the government as transmission belts for economic
policies made at the national level. In both types of economies, the unions are usually expected
to be more compatible with business goals and have their say to assist corporate or national
objectives. There are some trade unions operating independently that involve in the enterprise
level dialogue even in the most management-led interpretations of partnership with the aim of
taking advantage for their members (Dundon et al., 2004; Johnstone, Ackers and Wilkinson,
2010). Typically, employee voice refers to how employees are capable of having a say and
influence over work-related activities and organisational decision-making process (Johnstone,
Ackers and Wilkinson, 2010).

Declining union density in advanced economies, during the last few years, has transformed the
form of voice in majority of the countries from collective and unionised representation channels
to direct and individualised mechanisms, some of which exist together with unions as a twofold
procedure while others are completely non-union. The union-oriented form of employee voice
has all but moved out in countries where the space of representing employees concerns is
dominated by unions. Almost two decade ago, only a little proportion (5%) of British
organisations relied on union-oriented employee participation (Jason P. Hayward, 2017).
Comparable trends have also been seen in various countries of Europe, America and Australia
(Jason P. Hayward, 2017). In countries which voice mechanisms go beyond the conventional
mechanism of union, there is the urgent need for more pulverised and sometimes more
qualitative examination of how the various mechanisms actually work.

3. Provide a brief assessment of the link between employee voice and organisation
performance.

During uncertainty in the business context, it is crucial than ever that employee “voice” is paid
strong attention by employers. The reason behind this is that this approach has the strong
potential to enhance workplace performance and productivity as a whole by means of its impact
on the aspects of employee engagement, creativity, retention, and effectiveness.

Employee voice at work has two pertinent meanings. The first one is about the concept that
people always want attention. As an instance, sometimes people have to do things that they do
not like. When people are allowed to "speak their minds," they are then much more likely to
carry out their practical business. Consequently, workplace productivity and performance are
positively influenced. (Dundon et al., 2004)

Voice has recently been defined as a behaviour through which the status quo is constructively
challenged in order to enhance it. Making pioneering proposals for change, or adjustments to
standard methods, are perfect examples of this definition. As organisations can boost their
business grades when their workforce is fully motivated and engaged, their creativity is fully
supported, and their interests are lined up strongly with business outcomes, employers would
perform very well with the intention of promoting an environment where every single employee
feels he or she has the potential to raise and even exercise own voice. (Dundon et al., 2004)

When employees feel not having the necessary means, skill or know-how to have their say,
negative emotions in the form of dislike and resentment can “shut down creativity”, while falling
the aspects of motivation, performance and productivity (Jason P. Hayward, 2017). The feeling
in-authenticity may drive this, which is psychologically destructive. Thus, strong and effective
mechanisms for employee voice have the strong potential to protect a firm against a variety of
challenges arising from the psychological influences of being forced to remain quiet.

Moreover, employee voice can enhance employer branding and customer acquisition as well. If
there is lack of employee voice, employees can be frustrated, and it suggests that they take their
complaints elsewhere, frequently raising their concerns publically. This approach has the strong
potential to damage a firm’s overall capability of recruiting the talent pool. Organisations with
strong and effective mechanisms for employee voice let their workforce to redress grievances
and complaints internally and privately. This approach helps organisations in enhancing its
externally-facing employer brand, while creating an opportunity to develop a stronger yet longer
relationship with the workforce by immediate responding to their voice. (Jason P. Hayward,
2017)
Question 5: Briefly explain the differences between conflict and misbehaviour at work and
between official and unofficial industrial action. In your answer, give a brief review of some
contemporary trends in the type of conflict and industrial sanctions.

Difference between Conflict and Misbehaviour

Misbehaviour is an individual-centred approach and also refers to “any intentional action by

members of organizations that violates core organizational and/or societal norms” (Parks and
Bradley, 2012, p.316). The evidence of misbehaviour exists about members of an organisation
involved in sabotaging and misbehaving processes, irritating others, stealing, abusing or
damaging company property, deceptive behaviour with the government and even misleading
clients. The fundamental thread in the misbehaviour’s definition is the intention underlying the
misbehaviour, which results in classification of misbehaviour as either type S (whose purpose is
the self-benefit such as stealing), type O (for the organisation’s benefit and interest such as
deceptive behaviour with the government) and type D (intended to abuse or damage some
property such as abusing, sabotaging or damaging a firm’s property) (Parks and Bradley, 2012).
Irrespective of the type, misbehaviour is not in the interest of the company as it eventually costly
to it and individuals as well. Thus, management is responsible for addressing any form of
workplace misbehaviour and take strong action to eliminate it earlier (Parks and Bradley, 2012).

Conflict, on the other hand, is a natural phenomenon that occurs either in organisations,
associations or groups, on condition that people from diverse backgrounds come together.
Conflict increases in rate of recurrence, mainly where expectations involves that need to be
satisfied, or where the parties involved are meant to congregate for a longer time period with the
aim of pursuing either personal or corporate objectives. In the organisational context, conflict
refers to differences and disagreements taking place among workers at work. It potentially
includes disputes over a matter taking place between and among employees outside the set
working hours. The workplace conflict’s current definitions goes beyond basic discrepancies to
integrate interpersonal conflicts arising from personality clashes and problems in working with
one another, but both have the potential to negatively impact the individual and organisational
performance (Taksa and Barnes, 2012). The conflict’s contemporary definition also includes
workplace complaints in the form of disagreements with strategies, policies and managerial
decisions made at the organisational level, through which conflicts occurs between employees
and the employer.

Official and Unofficial Industrial Actions

When conflicts or disputes occur between employers and employees, there is every reason for
endeavours to be spent to make sure that it is settled before it steps up to an industrial action,
mainly in those work environments where trade unions exist. Many times at short intervals,
employees are in disagreement with their management or employers because of various issues,
such as they want better work environment or conditions, smart wage, and so on. If these issues
are still unresolved, the ultimate result may be in the form of an industrial action. Regarding the
labour relations, an industrial action refers to any initiative, such as strikes, taken by trade unions
with the aim of reducing organisation’s productivity. (Davies, 2011)

In labour relations, modern-day trends indicate unionisation and its increasing levels (Davies,
2011). The trade unions are voluntarily joined by many employees to get protection for, and
enhance, their employment interests. In case of an unresolved conflict between employees and
employers, the role of trade unions is pivotal as they intervene to locate the best possible
solutions, and if fail they lead to an industrial action, which is ‘official’ if there is a formal
support by a trade union (Levesque and Murray, 2006). The right and appropriate legal
procedure, since industrial actions refers to a breach of employment contracts, needs to be
pursued to make sure that there is a protection for action against illegitimate employment
actions, such as dismissal and lack of pay (Davies, 2011). Some employees, at times, may
consider an industrial action such as a go-slow devoid of the support of their trade unions. These
types of actions are actually ‘unofficial’ and often not protected and hence, employees risk
dismissal.

Question 6

1. Explain what is required to advise, coach and guide line managers in the skills for handling
grievance or disputes in the workplace.

Frustrated or disengaged employees may limit an organisation’s ability to deliver the customer
service experience in such a way that creates loyal customers. Hence, it is a critical yet essential
requirement of coach and guide line managers to equip themselves with the appropriate
knowledge and skills required to manage grievances or disputes in the workplace devoid of fear
or favour.

Acknowledging grievances is the first step. Employees always want to be paid attention about
their issues. For managers and employers, listening is the best approach than talk. Managers need
to allow their subordinates to communicate their ideas, after which the managers formally
acknowledge their grievance. This will encourage them go back to their work station. Quick
action upon determining the facts is an also important skill. After acknowledging the resentment,
setting on a mission is the next approach to prove the truth. The basic purpose is to determine
whether the allegations made by the employee are a genuine reflection of the situation as at that
specific time. There are many avenues for this purpose, and it is up to the management that will
take decisions on the best possible approach to meet this objective. After gaining the facts,
managers do not need to a large amount of time to act, because this approach may lead to some
turbulence.

Eliminating the root cause of the problem is also necessary. Once the root cause is eliminated,
managers will need to communicate the decision to the parties concerned. Managers do not need
to waste time in communicating the resolution. The management’s action or initiative might not
be satisfying to all, but employees have to comprehend the management’s stand. The
management’s course of action must be apparent and transparent in the employees’ minds.

2. Distinguish between third-party conciliation, mediation and arbitration.

Arbitration refers to the process that is subject to constitutional controls, such as Arbitration Act
1995, The Civil Procedure Act. This process arises where an individual or a private tribunal is
ordained to ascertain a conflict and make an ultimate binding decision which is known as an
award, which can be filed in court for implementation. Meditation refers to a non-binding
alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process wherein a mediator as an impartial party helps the
process of negotiation between the disputants. Finally, conciliation is not a universally defined
ADR process and may bear a variety of meanings in various jurisdictions. Locally conciliation
has been defined as a process used to examine the likelihood of two disputing parties
establishing and assuming prior friendly rapport.
 References
Acas.org.uk. (2018). Employment Law Update - Key Dates for 2017 | Acas. [online] Available
at: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3909 [Accessed 10 Mar. 2018].

Banfield, P., Kay, R. and Royles, D. (2018). Introduction to human resource management.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Davies, A. (2011). Workplace Law Handbook 2011: Employment Law and Human Resources.
Workplace Law Group.

Dundon, T., Wilkinson *, A., Marchington, M. and Ackers, P. (2004). The meanings and
purpose of employee voice. The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
15(6), pp.1149-1170.

Fuller, A., Jewson, N. and Unwin, L. (2009). Improving Working as Learning. Improving
Learning. Taylor & Francis.

Guillén, A. and Dahl, S. (2009). Quality of work in the European Union. New York: P.I.E. Peter
Lang.

Jason P. Hayward (2017). Focus: The Voice of the People. International Union Rights, 24(3),
p.10.

Johnstone, S., Ackers, P. and Wilkinson, A. (2010). Better than Nothing? Is Non-union
Partnership a Contradiction in Terms?. Journal of Industrial Relations, 52(2), pp.151-168.

Keith, S. (2008). Putting the record straight: industrial relations and the employment
relationship. Industrial Relations Research Unit, Warwick Business School, University of
Warwick, [online] 43(4), pp.359-369. Available at:
https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/48543/1/57265085X.pdf.

Levesque, C. and Murray, G. (2006). How Do Unions Renew? Paths to Union Renewal. Labor
Studies Journal, 31(3), pp.1-13.

Parks, G. and Bradley, S. (2012). Alpha Phi Alpha: A Legacy of Greatness, The Demands of
Transcendence. University Press of Kentucky, p.316.

Smith, P. and Morton, G. (2006). Nine Years of New Labour: Neoliberalism and Workers'
Rights. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 44(3), pp.401-420.
Stone, K. (2007). Revisiting the At-Will Employment Doctrine: Imposed Terms, Implied Terms,
and the Normative World of the Workplace. SSRN Electronic Journal.

Taksa, L. and Barnes, A. (2012). Rethinking misbehaviour and resistance in organizations.

Bingley: Emerald.

Tapia, M., Ibsen, C. and Kochan, T. (2015). Mapping the frontier of theory in industrial
relations: the contested role of worker representation. Socio-Economic Review, 13(1), pp.157-
184.

Taylor, S. and Emir, A. (2015). Employment law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wilkinson, A., Bacon, N. and Redman, T. (2009). The SAGE handbook of human resource
management. SAGE.