The Employment Relationship | John Budd - danunah.info
The industrial relations viewpoint shapes existing U.S. policies on collective . 4. The need to educate individuals as lifelong learners because of ever-changing technologies. 5. Four Schools of Thought about the Employment Relationship. -need to educate individuals as lifelong learners because of ever-changing technologies four schools of thought about the employment relationship are?. New developments in the industrial relations and human resource towards work and its management have undergone significant change over the past . Page 4 .. There are, however, a number of studies from this school of thought that.
In this vein, industrial relations scholarship intersects with scholarship in labour economicsindustrial sociologylabour and social historyhuman resource managementpolitical sciencelawand other areas. Industrial relations scholarship assumes that labour markets are not perfectly competitive and thus, in contrast to mainstream economic theoryemployers typically have greater bargaining power than employees.
Industrial relations scholarship also assumes that there are at least some inherent conflicts of interest between employers and employees for example, higher wages versus higher profits and thus, in contrast to scholarship in human resource management and organizational behaviourconflict is seen as a natural part of the employment relationship.
Labor Relation Theories: Schools of thought and unions
Industrial relations scholars therefore frequently study the diverse institutional arrangements that characterize and shape the employment relationship—from norms and power structures on the shop floor, to employee voice mechanisms in the workplace, to collective bargaining arrangements at company, regional, or national level, to various levels of public policy and labour law regimes,[ citation needed ] to varieties of capitalism  such as corporatismsocial democracyand neoliberalism.
When labour markets are seen as imperfect, and when the employment relationship includes conflicts of interest, then one cannot rely on markets or managers to always serve workers' interests, and in extreme cases to prevent worker exploitation. Industrial relations scholars and practitioners, therefore, support institutional interventions to improve the workings of the employment relationship and to protect workers' rights.
The nature of these institutional interventions, however, differ between two camps within industrial relations.
In the workplace, pluralists, therefore, champion grievance procedures, employee voice mechanisms such as works councils and trade unionscollective bargaining, and labour—management partnerships. In the policy arena, pluralists advocate for minimum wage laws, occupational health and safety standards, international labour standardsand other employment and labour laws and public policies.
- Navigation menu
- Purchase Solution
- Related BrainMass Content
From this perspective, the pursuit of a balanced employment relationship gives too much weight to employers' interests, and instead deep-seated structural reforms are needed to change the sharply antagonistic employment relationship that is inherent within capitalism. Militant trade unions are thus frequently supported. History[ edit ] Industrial relations has its roots in the industrial revolution which created the modern employment relationship by spawning free labour markets and large-scale industrial organizations with thousands of wage workers.
Low wages, long working hours, monotonous and dangerous work, and abusive supervisory practices led to high employee turnover, violent strikesand the threat of social instability. Intellectually, industrial relations was formed at the end of the 19th century as a middle ground between classical economics and Marxism ,[ citation needed ] with Sidney Webb and Beatrice Webb 's Industrial Democracy being a key intellectual work.
Institutionally, industrial relations was founded by John R. Commons when he created the first academic industrial relations program at the University of Wisconsin in Wight Bakkewhich began in Chamberlain at Yale and Columbia universities.
Industrial relations - Wikipedia
Industrial relations was formed with a strong problem-solving orientation  that rejected both the classical economists' laissez-faire solutions to labour problems and the Marxist solution of class revolution. By the early 21st century, the academic field of industrial relations was often described as being in crisis.
So, we're going to talk about two different fundamental assumptions about labor, about employment, and then based on those two assumptions, we'll look at different schools of thought, those different schools of thought that we just outlined in the previous slide.
Let's take the first assumption, and that's the assumption on the left of the slide if you're looking at the slide, and that is, "Is labor a commodity?
And, if the answer to this question, if you're a paradigmatic perspective, and your answer to this question is that labor is a commodity, that it's bought and sold like any other commodity, then you are likely represented by a, kind of, mainstream economics, neoclassical economics approach. And, the way in which you believe that the workplace should be governed is via competitive markets.
Competitive markets, when it comes to the buying and selling of labor, or to the labor relationship, the employment relationship, is through competitive markets.
So, that's if the answer to this question about labor as a commodity is yes. If your answer to this question is no, that labor is not a commodity, then you open the door to the three other perspectives that we talked about on the previous slide, the human resource management perspective, the industrial relations perspective, and the critical industrial relations perspective. So, I'll come back to each one of those.
But, let's talk about the second assumption that stands at the heart of how we think about labor relations and how the workplace should be governed, and that's the question, "Are employers and employees equals in this competitive labor market? And, if the answer to this question is yes, that you think that they are equal, that you think that labor and management have equal power in this relationship, then it brings us back again to the mainstream economics perspective, to the neoclassical economics perspective.
And, again, the way in which one who believes that the parties are equal and that labor is just a commodity like any other commodity, the way in which the workplace is governed given these responses to these assumptions is through competitive markets. If your answer is no, then it brings us back to these three other perspectives.
Week 1 Lesson 2
And, the way in which we distinguish between these three other perspectives, the HR, the industrial relations, and the critical industrial relations perspective is based on the third question, which is "Are there inherent conflicts of interest between employers and employees?
And, if your answer to that is no, if your answer to that question is no, that there aren't inherent conflicts of interest, then you're likely to take a unitarist approach, or a human resource management approach, which believes that management and employees don't have inherent tensions or conflicts of interest between them, and management and labor, and employees, can have a single interest or agenda that they're trying to obtain, hence, the term the unitarist approach.
But, if your answer is yes to this question of whether there's an inherent conflict of interest between employers and employees, then you likely fall under either the industrial relations or the critical industrial relations perspective.