Employee Involvement in Employment Relations Process Order Instructions: I need an essay in the following subject: Identify the methods through which employees are involved with the employment relations process.
Do employees have a legitimate say in the organization’s decisions or have employers simply manipulated employees into believing they have a say?
The following conditions must meet in the essay:
1) I want a typical and a quality answer which should have about 1400 words.
2) The answer must raise appropriate critical questions.
3) The answer must include examples from experience or the web with references from relevant examples from real companies.
4) Do include all your references, as per the Harvard Referencing System,
5) Please don’t use Wikipedia web site.
6) I need examples from peer reviewed articles or researches.
Appreciate every single moment you spend in writing my paper
Employee Involvement in Employment Relations Process Sample Answer
Employment Relations Process
Introduction
In general terms, employee employment relations deal with the hypothesis and practice related to the management and control of employment deals. It is more concerned with the social and political aspect of the job revelated the allocation of power between executive and employees. It also delves into an expression of disagreement and the shared and regulatory structures within which the job relationship exists (Scott-Ladd, Travaglione & Marshall 2006).
To shed more light on the topic, this essay discusses a number of hypothetical perspectives of the job relationship and how specific viewpoints can inform methods used to deal with employees. It then investigates advancements in employment relations concerned with the fall of organizational unionism. The essay then summarizes the range of methods by which workers can have a say in organizational decision-making relating to operational and strategic challenges. The essay also looks at partnership methods of employee relations that employers use.
Employment Relations
Typically, employment relations deal with the organization and control of the job relationship in its political, social, legal, and also the economic context (Wilkinson et al. 2004). Key trends in employee relations include a fall in trade union connection, recognition and power, a fall in joint bargaining and the rising individualization of the job relationship.
The variety of explanations given for union fall over the past three decades includes variable industrial structures, socio-political opposition towards the union progress; greater individualization and adaptability of the management of workforce, changing social stances and an increasingly varied labor market (Ackers & Wilkinson 2003). Traditions in the administration of the job relationship differ between states. They are influenced by leading cultural values and organizational structures like the level of intervention in economic movement.
Often employed interchangeably, participation tends to mean practices which give the opportunity for cooperative decision-making, whilst involvement is linked with practices which look to engender worker contribution and dedication to organizational goals.
Beaumont (2003) discerns four wide categories of employee connection and participation initiatives that offer differing extents of influence over the process of decision-making. The process includes downward communication, increasing problem-solving, envoy participation and financial involvement. Partnership deals depend on the notion of mutual gains for executive and employees. However, some critics question the degree to which such results are achievable.
Employee Involvement in Employment Relations Process and Approaches to employee relations
The relations processes comprise of the methods adopted by managers to deal with workers either jointly through their unions or independently (Pyman et al. 2006). They will rely on the organizations’ expressed or indirect employee relations guidelines and strategies. The manner in which guidelines are created and how they work will be affected by, and will have an influence on, all employee relations environment. The development of policies also factors in employee influence.
Industrial relations procedures are those characteristics of relations that deal with the connections between managers and trade unions (Ackers & Wilkinson 2003). They are made up of: methods applied in recognizing trade unions; official methods of shared negotiation; collaboration as a method used for employee relations; all informal contacts on employment concerns that occur in the office between administration and trade union members or officials; aspects of all industrial relations scene like union association in the places of work, the check-off, meetings and strikes.
Negotiating methods and aptitude as a feature of shared bargaining are two different ideas which managers and employees choose to discuss from different perspectives (Wilkinson et al. 2004). Additionally, it is important to note that there exist employee relations processes used for contribution, participation as well as communication.
The results of these developments are various types of procedural and necessary agreements and employment measures, including coordination of terms and circumstances, and the methods used by institutions to administer with and even without trade unions (Pyman et al. 2006).
Four methods of creating employee relations regulations have been recognized by many Industrial Relations experts. The first is adversarial through which the organization makes a decision on what it wishes to work on and workers are anticipated to fit in (Katz & Darbishire 2000). Employees only exercise influence by refusing to collaborate. The second method is the traditional approach. The traditional ideas create a good working relationship but the administration proposes courses of action and the personnel react through its chosen representatives (Hoel & Beale 2006). The third method is a partnership. Through this method, the organization involves workers in the creation of regulations and execution of policies, but keeps the right to control. The fourth is power sharing. Through power-sharing workers are involved in the daily and strategic processes of making decisions in the workplace.
Adversarial approaches are less common today compared to the last half century. The traditional approach is the most common but more concern is being shown in partnership. Power sharing is evident but rare in the work place.
Against the backdrop of an inclination for a single approach, employee relations policies articulate the values of the institution on what kind of relationships between executive, workers and their trade unions are required. The policies also express the manner in which they should be sorted. A joint venture policy will aspire to develop and sustain a positive, creative, cooperative and credulous climate of worker relations (Beaumont 2003).
When they are expressed, policies give procedures for action on worker relations matters and can assist to guarantee that these matters are dealt with every time. They give the basis for explaining management’s aspirations (its worker relations plan) on important matters such as trade union recognition and shared negotiation.
Employee Involvement in Employment Relations Process and Role of Employees in Decision Making
Participation of employees in decision-making procedures has resulted in victorious value creation in a lot of organizations (Morgan & Zeffane 2003). Though the degree to which employees must participate in managerial decision making is a matter of public discussion. A number of people say that workers’ trade unions should contribute to the management as identical partners while others believe in limited or bounded involvement, or, the participation of workers to a narrow extent. On the other hand, there are numerous techniques through which workers can participate in the organizational decision-making process of their institutions.
The first is participation in board meetings. Representation of workers at the board is identified as industrial democracy (Scott-Ladd, Travaglione & Marshall 2006). Indeed it can play an essential role in defending the interests of workers. The envoy can put the challenges and matters affecting workers in front of the executive and direct the board affiliates to invest in worker benefit schemes and remuneration processes.
The second is participation by virtue of part ownership of a company. It is a method of ensuring workers’ contribution in managerial decision making process is making them a part of shareholders of the organization (Witt, Andrews, & Kacmar 2000). Inducing them to purchase equity shares, giving loans, and offering financial assistance to allow them to purchase equity shares happen to be some of the methods to keep them concerned with the process of making decisions.
The third is participation by way of shared negotiation. Shared negotiation refers to the contribution of workers through group agreements and by settling on particular rules and regulations (Marchington & Wilkinson 2005). This is a good way to ensure worker participation in decision-making processes. It ought to be well managed otherwise each party attempts to consider itself more important than others by defending selfish positions.
The fourth is participation by way of proposal systems. Proposal systems aim at encouraging workers to design unique thoughts. They refer to ideas that can solve multiple problems especially on issues such as expenditure reduction, waste control, security measures, and remuneration system (Witt, Andrews & Kacmar 2000). Building a developed process can increase the value of the managerial functions and generate a healthy surrounding and work traditions. For example, many multinational companies are known to have launched amazing regional suggestion schemes that have solved many issues. They receive many ideas from their employees and all organizations accept to fully discuss most of the issues.
The fifth is participation by way of absolute managerial control. This approach is referred to as a creative system of personal management where employees unions acts as an executive (Marchington & Wilkinson 2005). Through chosen boards, they assume full control of organizational administration. In this method, employees directly deal with the majority of managerial aspects or industrial matters through their own representatives in positions of decision making.
Employee Involvement in Employment Relations Process Conclusion
Employee relations are a term exploited for a huge number of practices and procedures. They are also a means by which workers can contribute to managerial decision-making processes. The degree to which diverse types of employee voice encourages employees to influence executive decisions varies depending on their vigor, extent, type and level. Employees can, therefore, have a legitimate say if managers support implementations of organizational policies that seek to improve employee relations with management and other employment processes.
Employee Involvement in Employment Relations Process References
Ackers, P & Wilkinson, AJ 2003, Understanding work and employment: Industrial
relations in transition, Oxford University Press.
Beaumont, P. B. (2003). Information and consultation. CIPD Publishing.
Hoel, H & Beale, D 2006, Workplace bullying, psychological perspectives and industrial
relations: Towards a contextualized and interdisciplinary approach, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 44(2), 239-262.
Katz, HC & Darbishire, OR 2000, Converging divergences: Worldwide changes in
employment systems (Vol. 32), Cornell University Press.
Marchington, M., & Wilkinson, A. (2005). Direct participation and involvement. Managing
human resources: personnel management in transition, 398-423.
Morgan, D & Zeffane, R 2003, Employee involvement, organizational change and trust in
management. International journal of human resource management, 14(1), 55-75.
Pyman, A, Cooper, B, Teicher, J & Holland, P, 2006, A comparison of the effectiveness of
employee voice arrangements in Australia, Industrial Relations Journal, 37(5), 543-559.
Scott-Ladd, B, Travaglione, A & Marshall, V 2006, Causal inferences between participation
in decision making, task attributes, work effort, rewards, job satisfaction and commitment. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27(5), 399-414.
Wilkinson, A, Dundon, T, Marchington, M & Ackers, P 2004, Changing patterns of
employee voice: Case studies from the UK and Republic of Ireland. The Journal of Industrial Relations, 46(3), 298-322.
Witt, LA, Andrews, MC & Kacmar, KM 2000, The role of participation in decision-
making in the organizational politics-job satisfaction relationship. Human Relations, 53(3), 341-358.
