Approaches Are Used To Achieve Good Industrial Relation
INTRODUCTION
Industrial relations system consists of the whole gamut of
relationship between the employees and employee and the employer which are
managed by the means of conflict and cooperation. A sound industrial relation
system is one in which the relationship between management and employees are
harmonious and cooperation than conflictual and create an environment conducive,
economic efficiency, motivation, productivity and development of employee which
will generate employee royalty and mutual trust.
To achieve good
industrial relation, there are many approaches identified to attain industrial
harmony
THE ACTION THEORY APPROACH
The action theory approach takes the collective regulation of industrial
labour as its focal point. The employer and employee operate within a
framework, which can at best be described as a coalition relationship. The
employer representative and employee representative, it is claimed, agree in
principle to cooperate in the resolution of the conflict, their cooperation taking
the form of bargaining. Thus, the action theory analysis of industrial
relations focuses primarily on bargaining as a mechanism for the resolution of
conflicts.
THEORETICAL
APPROACHES
Industrial relations scholars have described three major theoretical
approaches that contrast in their understanding and analysis of workplace
relations which are generally known as unitary, pluralist and radical.
THE PLURALIST APPROACH
Pluralism is a major theory in labour-management relations,
which has many powerful advocates. The focus is on the resolution of conflict
rather than its generation, or, in the words of the pluralist, on ‘the
institutions of job regulation.’ Kerr is one of the important exponents of
pluralism. According to him, the social environment is an important factor in
industrial conflicts. The isolated masses of workers are more strike-prone as
compared to dispersed groups. When industrial jobs become more pleasant and
employees’ get more integrated into the wider society, strikes will become less
frequent.
Fox distinguishes between two distinct aspects of relationship
between workers and management. The first is the market relationship, which
concerns with the terms and conditions on which labour is hired. This
relationship is essentially economic in character and based on contracts
executed between the parties. The second aspect relates to the management’s
dealing with labour, the nature of their interaction, negotiations between the
union and management, distribution of power in the organisation, and
participation of the union in joint decision-making.
MARXIST APPROACH
Marxism is, more or less, a general theory of society and of
social change with
Implications for the analysis of industrial
relations within capitalist societies and does not strictly explain the theory
of industrial relations. According to Hyman (1975) He argues that the issue of
conflict was not given proper analysis by the duo, as they focused on how any
conflict is contained and controlled, rather than on the process through which
disagreements and disputes are generated. Hyman asserts that the perspectives of
the duo however influential, is one sided Hyman further argues that unceasing
power struggle for control is a central feature of industrial relations. To
him, this struggle for control emanates from the nature and characteristics of
capitalist society. He summarized the major characteristics of capitalism as
(i) the ownership and or control of the means of production by a small minority
(ii) the domination of profit as the fundamental determinant of economic
activities (iii) the obligation on most of society to sell their productive
abilities on the market as commodity. Against this background, two major
classes are located within capitalist industrial relations which are also a
reflection of what obtains in society. Thus, capitalist industrialism bifurcate
society into two classes. These are the owners of means of production which is
the capitalist or bourgeoisie and the owners of labour, which are the workers
or proletariat. This being so, the interests of employers and employees are diametrically
opposed and conflictual. The capitalist endeavors to purchase labour at the lowest
possible price whilst labour on the other hand tries to sell his only asset at
the highest possible price in order to ensure his existence. The capitalists
tend to maximize profit whilst the workers tend to maximize wages/salaries.
Thus, in capitalist industrial society, the interests and aspirations of both
labour and employers are divergent and in conflict. The Marxist perspectives
typify workplace relations as a reflection of the incidence of societal
inequalities and the inevitable expression of this at the work place. To sum it
up, Hyman further states that industrial relations is all about power,
interests and conflict and that the economic, technological and political
dynamics of the broader society inevitably shape the character of relations
among industrial relations actors which he described as the political economy
of industrial relations. Conflict is viewed as a disorder precursor to change
and to resolve conflict means to change the imbalance and inequalities in
society in terms of power and wealth. Trade unions are viewed as employee
response to capitalism. Marxist theory emphasizes exploitation and alienation.
This perspective is critical of capitalist
society and its system of production, distribution and exchange and emphasizes
the importance of collective action including strike action and action short of
strikes (Rose, 2008). Hyman (1975) argues that given the nature of capitalist
society, industrial relations can be analyzed from a more radical perspective. This
theory is also known as the radical perspective.
UNITARY APPROACH
The unitary perspective views the organisation as pointing towards a
single or unified authority and loyalty structure. Emphasis under the unitary perspective is placed on common values,
interest and objectives. Those
subscribing to this view see all organizational participants as a team or family thereby implicitly emphazing shared
values, shared goals and common destiny.
Unitary in essence implies the absence of factionalism within the
enterprise (Fajana, 2000).Conflict is viewed as irrational and the sacking of
striking workers is preferred to consultation
or negotiation. Conflict is regarded as pathological or evil or bad. Trade unionism is outlawed and suppressed as
it is viewed as an illegitimate intrusion or encroachment on management’s right to manage. According to Rose
(2008), under the unitary
perspective, trade unions are regarded as an intrusion into the organisation
from outside, competing with
management for the loyalty of employees. The unitary theory tends towards authoritarianism and
paternalism. It is pro- management biased and emphasizes consensus and industrial peace. The underlying assumption of this
view is that the organisation exists
in perfect harmony and all conflict is unnecessary (Rose, 2008).
Social action
approach
The
social action approach
considers the organisation from the position of the individual members or
actors who
will each have their own goals. This perspective regards conflicts of interests
as normal behavior
and part of organizational life (Rose, 2008).
Social action the Social action theory represents a
contribution from sociologists to the study of organizations. It attempts to
view the organisation from the standpoint of individual members or actors of industrial
relations. The theory seeks to analyze why the actors take certain lines of action. Social
action arises out of the
expectations, norms, attitudes, values, experiences, situation and goals of the
individuals working
in the system. Thus, according to Green while the system approach is up-down,
the
social action theory is a bottom-up approach.
Salamon (2000) opines that the importance of the social action theory of industrial relations
is that it weakens the fatalism of structural determinism and stresses that the individual
retains at least some freedom of action and ability to influence events in the direction
that he/she believes to be right or desirable. Social action theorists emphasis the use of
interview, survey and participant observation in determining the reality of both society and
of organizations.
THE HUMAN RELATIONS APPROACH
In the words of Keith Davies, human relations are “the
integration of people into a work situation that motivates them to work
together productively, cooperatively and with economic, psychological and
social satisfactions.” According to him, the goals of human relations are: (a)
to get people to produce, (b) to cooperate through mutuality of interest, and
(c) to gain satisfaction from their relationships. The human relations school
founded by Elton Mayo and later propagated by Roethlisberger, Whitehead, W.F.
Whyte, and Homans offers a coherent view of the nature of industrial conflict and
harmony.
The human relations approach highlights certain policies and
techniques to improve employee morale, efficiency and job satisfaction. It
encourages the small work group to exercise considerable control over its
environment and in the process helps to remove a major irritant in
labour-management relations. But there was reaction against the excessive
claims of this school of thought in the sixties. Some of its views were criticized
by Marxists, pluralists, and others on the ground that it encouraged dependency
and discouraged individual development, and ignored the importance of technology
and culture in industry. Taking a balanced view, however, it must be admitted
that the human relations school has thrown a lot of light on certain aspects such
as communication, management development, and acceptance of workplace as a social
system, group dynamics, and participation in management.
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH
The term, human resource management (HRM) has become
increasingly used in the literature of personnel/industrial relations. The term
has been applied to a diverse range of management strategies and, indeed,
sometimes used simply as a more modern, and therefore more acceptable, term for
personnel or industrial relations management. Some of the components of HRM
are:
(i)
Human resource
organisation;
(ii)
Human resource planning;
(iii)
Human resource systems;
(iv)
Human resource development;
(v)
Human resource
relationships;
(vi)
Human resource utilization;
(vii)
Human resource accounting;
and
(viii)
Human resource audit. This
approach emphasizes individualism and the direct relationship between
management and its employees. Quite clearly, therefore, it questions the
collective regulation basis of traditional industrial relation
Conclusion
The practice of employment/industrial relations
has benefited immensely from theoretical frameworks of leading theorists in the
field of industrial relations. It has been observed that despite the criticisms
leveled against some of these theories they have stood the test of time and
have contributed immensely to scholarship and practice. Among these theories,
there are areas of commonalities and differences as could be deduced from the
comparative analysis.
REFERENCES
Asika, N.M. (1995). “Theoretical Perspectives
on the Issue of Administration” UNILAG.
Fajana, S. (2000). Industrial Relations in Nigeria:
Theory and Features (2nd ed.).
Lagos: Labofin and Company.
Hyman, R. (1995). “Industrial Relations in
Theory and Practice.” European
Journal of Industrial Relations,
Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 17–46.
Hyman, R. (1975). Industrial Relations: A Marxist
Introduction. London:
Macmillan.
No comments:
Post a Comment