Industrial relations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Protest against industrial relations reform in Melbourne (15 November 2005). Industrial relations is a multidisciplinary field that studies the employment relationship.[1][2] Industrial relations is increasingly being called employment relations or employee relations because of the importance of non-industrial employment relationships;[3] this move is sometimes seen as further broadening of the human resource management trend.[4] Indeed, some authors now define human resource management as synonymous with employee relations.[5] Other authors see employee relations as dealing only with non-unionized workers, whereas labor relations is seen as dealing with unionized workers.[6] Industrial relations studies examine various employment situations, not just ones with a unionized workforce. However, according to Bruce E. Kaufman "To a large degree, most scholars regard trade unionism, collective bargaining and labor-management relations, and the national labor policy and labor law within which they are embedded, as the core subjects of the field."[7] Initiated in the United States at end of the 19th century, it took off as a field in conjunction with the New Deal. However, it is generally a separate field of study only in English-speaking countries, having no direct equivalent in continental Europe.[1] In recent times, industrial relations has been in decline as a field, in correlation with the decline in importance of trade unions,[7] and also with the increasing preference of business schools for the human resource management paradigm.[8]

Contents

1 Overview 2 History 3 Theoretical perspectives o 3.1 Pluralist perspective o 3.2 Unitarist perspective o 3.3 Marxist/Radical perspective 4 Industrial relations today 5 Notes 6 Further reading

Overview
Part of a series on Organized labour

The labour movement[show] Labour rights[show] Trade unions[show] Strike action[show] Labour parties[show] Academic disciplines[hide]

Industrial relations Labour economics Labour history Labour law

v t e

Industrial relations has three faces: science building, problem solving, and ethical.[9] In the science building phase, industrial relations is part of the social sciences, and it seeks to understand the employment relationship and its institutions through high-quality, rigorous research. In this vein, industrial relations scholarship intersects with scholarship in labor economics, industrial sociology, labor and social history, human resource management, political science, law, and other areas. Industrial relations scholarship assumes that labor markets are not perfectly competitive and thus, in contrast to mainstream economic theory, employers 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 behavior, conflict is seen as a natural part of the employment relationship.

Industrial relations scholars therefore frequently study the diverse institutional arrangements that characterize and shape the employment relationshipfrom 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 labor law regimes, to "varieties of capitalism" (such as corporatism, social democracy, and neoliberalism). When labor 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.[10] The pluralist camp sees the employment relationship as a mixture of shared interests and conflicts of interests that are largely limited to the employment relationship. In the workplace, pluralists therefore champion grievance procedures, employee voice mechanisms such as works councils and labor unions, collective bargaining, and labor-management partnerships. In the policy arena, pluralists advocate for minimum wage laws, occupational health and safety standards, international labor standards, and other employment and labor laws and public policies.[11] These institutional interventions are all seen as methods for balancing the employment relationship to generate not only economic efficiency, but also employee equity and voice.[12] In contrast, the Marxistinspired critical camp sees employer-employee conflicts of interest as sharply antagonistic and deeply embedded in the socio-political-economic system. 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
Industrial relations has its roots in the industrial revolution which created the modern employment relationship by spawning free labor markets and large-scale industrial organizations with thousands of wage workers.[9] As society wrestled with these massive economic and social changes, labor problems arose. Low wages, long working hours, monotonous and dangerous work, and abusive supervisory practices led to high employee turnover, violent strikes, and 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, with Sidney Webb and Beatrice Webb's Industrial Democracy (1897) being the key intellectual work. Industrial relations thus rejected the classical econ. Institutionally, industrial relations was founded by John R. Commons when he created the first academic industrial relations program at the University of Wisconsin in 1920. Early financial support for the field came from John D. Rockefeller, Jr. who supported progressive labormanagement relations in the aftermath of the bloody strike at a Rockefeller-owned coal mine in Colorado. In Britain, another progressive industrialist, Montague Burton, endowed chairs in

industrial relations at Leeds, Cardiff and Cambridge in 1930, and the discipline was formalized in the 1950s with the formation of the Oxford School by Allan Flanders and Hugh Clegg.[13] Industrial relations was formed with a strong problem-solving orientation that rejected both the classical economists' laissez faire solutions to labor problems and the Marxist solution of class revolution. It is this approach that underlies the New Deal legislation in the United States, such as the National Labor Relations Act and the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Theoretical perspectives
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (October 2012) Industrial relations scholars have described three major theoretical perspectives or frameworks, that contrast in their understanding and analysis of workplace relations. The three views are generally known as unitarism, pluralist and radical. Each offers a particular perception of workplace relations and will therefore interpret such events as workplace conflict, the role of unions and job regulation differently. The radical perspective is sometimes referred to as the "conflict model", although this is somewhat ambiguous, as pluralism also tends to see conflict as inherent in workplaces. Radical theories are strongly identified with Marxist theories, although they are not limited to these.

Pluralist perspective
In pluralism, the organization is perceived as being made up of powerful and divergent subgroups, each with its own legitimate loyalties and with their own set of objectives and leaders. In particular, the two predominant sub-groups in the pluralist perspective are the management and trade unions. Consequently, the role of management would lean less towards enforcing and controlling and more toward persuasion and co-ordination. Trade unions are deemed as legitimate representatives of employees, conflict is dealt by collective bargaining and is viewed not necessarily as a bad thing and, if managed, could in fact be channelled towards evolution and positive change.

Unitarist perspective
In unitarism, the organization is perceived as an integrated and harmonious whole with the ideal of "one happy family", where management and other members of the staff all share a common purpose, emphasizing mutual cooperation. Furthermore, unitarism has a paternalistic approach where it demands loyalty of all employees, being predominantly managerial in its emphasis and application.

Consequently, trade unions are deemed as unnecessary since the loyalty between employees and organizations are considered mutually exclusive, where there can't be two sides of industry. Conflict is perceived as disruptive and the pathological result of agitators, interpersonal friction and communication breakdown.

Marxist/Radical perspective
This view of industrial relations looks at the nature of the capitalist society, where there is a fundamental division of interest between capital and labour, and sees workplace relations against this background. This perspective sees inequalities of power and economic wealth as having their roots in the nature of the capitalist economic system. Conflict is therefore seen as inevitable and trade unions are a natural response of workers to their exploitation by capital. Whilst there may be periods of acquiescence, the Marxist view would be that institutions of joint regulation would enhance rather than limit management's position as they presume the continuation of capitalism rather than challenge it.

Industrial relations today

By many accounts, industrial relations today is in crisis.[9][14][15] In academia, its traditional positions are threatened on one side by the dominance of mainstream economics and organizational behavior, and on the other by postmodernism. In policy-making circles, the industrial relations emphasis on institutional intervention is trumped by a neoliberal emphasis on the laissez faire promotion of free markets. In practice, labor unions are declining and fewer companies have industrial relations functions. The number of academic programs in industrial relations is therefore shrinking, and scholars are leaving the field for other areas, especially human resource management and organizational behavior. The importance of work, however, is stronger than ever, and the lessons of industrial relations remain vital. The challenge for industrial relations is to re-establish these connections with the broader academic, policy, and business worlds.

Notes
1. ^ Jump up to: a b Ackers, Peter (2002) "Reframing Employment Relations: The Case for Neo-Pluralism," Industrial Relations Journal. doi:10.1111/1468-2338.00216 2. Jump up ^ Kaufman, Bruce E. (2004) The Global Evolution of Industrial Relations: Events, Ideas, and the IIRA , International Labour Office. 3. Jump up ^ Philip Lewis; Adrian Thornhill; Mark Saunders (2003). Employee Relations: Understanding The Employment Relationship. Financial Times/Prentice Hall. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-273-64625-9. 4. Jump up ^ Paul Banfield; Rebecca Kay (2008). Introduction to Human Resource Management. Oxford University Press. p. 114. ISBN 978-0-19-929152-6. 5. Jump up ^ Ed Rose (2008). Employment Relations. Financial Times/Prentice Hall. p. 96. ISBN 978-0-273-71008-0.

6. Jump up ^ John R Ogilvie; Susan T Cooper (2005). CLEP Principles of Management W/ CD-ROM (REA) - The Best Test Prep for. Research & Education Assoc. p. 141. ISBN 978-0-7386-0125-0. 7. ^ Jump up to: a b Bruce E. Kaufman (2008). "The original industrial relations paradigm: foundation for revitalizing the field". In Charles J. Whalen. New Directions in the Study of Work and Employment: Revitalizing Industrial Relations As an Academic Enterprise. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 31. ISBN 978-1-84720-452-3. 8. Jump up ^ Daphne Taras (2008). "How industrial relations is marginalized in business schools: using institutional theory to examine our home base". In Charles J. Whalen. New Directions in the Study of Work and Employment: Revitalizing Industrial Relations As an Academic Enterprise. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 124. ISBN 978-1-84720-452-3. 9. ^ Jump up to: a b c Kaufman, The Global Evolution of Industrial Relations. 10. Jump up ^ Budd, John W. and Bhave, Devasheesh (2008) "Values, Ideologies, and Frames of Reference in Industrial Relations," in Sage Handbook of Industrial Relations, Sage. 11. Jump up ^ Befort, Stephen F. and Budd, John W. (2009) Invisible Hands, Invisible Objectives: Bringing Workplace Law and Public Policy Into Focus, Stanford University Press. 12. Jump up ^ Budd, John W. (2004) Employment with a Human Face: Balancing Efficiency, Equity, and Voice, Cornell University Press. 13. Jump up ^ Ackers, Peter and Wilkinson, Adrian (2005) "British Industrial Relations Paradigm: A Critical Outline History and Prognosis," Journal of Industrial Relations. 14. Jump up ^ Ackers, "Reframing Employment Relations." 15. Jump up ^ Whalen, Charles J. (2008) New Directions in the Study of Work and Employment: Revitalizing Industrial Relations as an Academic Enterprise, Edward Elgar.

Further reading

Ackers, Peter; Wilkinson, Adrian (2003). Understanding Work and Employment: Industrial Relations in Transition. Oxford University Press. Blyton, Paul; Bacon, Nicolas; Fiorito, Jack; Heery, Edmund (2008). Sage Handbook of Industrial Relations. Sage. Budd, John W. (2004). Employment with a Human Face: Balancing Efficiency, Equity, and Voice. Cornell University Press. Commons, John R. (1919). Industrial Goodwill. McGraw Hill. Hyman, Richard (1975). Industrial Relations: A Marxist Introduction. Macmillan. Bruce E. Kaufman (1993). The Origins & Evolution of the Field of Industrial Relations in the United States. Cornell University Press. ISBN 978-0-87546-192-2. Kaufman, Bruce E. (2004). Theoretical Perspectives on Work and the Employment Relationship. Industrial Relations Research Association. Kaufman, Bruce E. (2004). The Global Evolution of Industrial Relations: Events, Ideas, and the IIRA. International Labour Office. Kelly, John (1998). Rethinking Industrial Relations: Mobilization, Collectivism and Long Waves. Routledge. Salamon, Michael (2000). Industrial Relations: Theory and Practice. Prentice Hall. Webb, Sidney; Webb, Beatrice (1897). Industrial Democracy. Longmans, Green, and Co.

Nichols, Theo (1997). The Sociology of Industrial Injury. London: Mansell Publishing Limited. Mullins, Laurie J (2005). Management and Organisational Behaviour. FT Prentice Hall.

Industrial relations has become one of the most delicate and complex problems of modern industrial society. Industrial progress is impossible without cooperation of labors and harmonious relationships. Therefore, it is in the interest of all to create and maintain good relations between employees (labor) and employers (management). Concept of Industrial Relations: The term Industrial Relations comprises of two terms: Industry and Relations. Industry refers to any productive activity in which an individual (or a group of individuals) is (are) engaged. By relations we mean the relationships that exist within the industry between the employer and his workmen. The term industrial relations explains the relationship between employees and management which stem directly or indirectly from union-employer relationship. Industrial relations are the relationships between employees and employers within the organizational settings. The field of industrial relations looks at the relationship between management and workers, particularly groups of workers represented by a union. Industrial relations are basically the interactions between employers, employees and the government, and the institutions and associations through which such interactions are mediated. The term industrial relations has a broad as well as a narrow outlook. Originally, industrial relations was broadly defined to include the relationships and interactions between employers and employees. From this perspective, industrial relations covers all aspects of the employment relationship, including human resource management, employee relations, and union-management (or labor) relations. Now its meaning has become more specific and restricted. Accordingly, industrial relations pertains to the study and practice of collective bargaining, trade unionism, and labor-management relations, while human resource management is a separate, largely distinct field that deals with nonunion employment relationships and the personnel practices and policies of employers. The relationships which arise at and out of the workplace generally include the relationships between individual workers, the relationships between workers and their employer, the relationships between employers, the relationships employers and workers have with the organizations formed to promote their respective interests, and the relations between those organizations, at all levels. industrial relations also includes the processes through which these relationships are expressed (such as, collective bargaining, workers participation in decision-making, and grievance and dispute settlement), and the management of conflict between employers, workers and trade unions, when it arises.

he main objectives of industrial relations system are: To safeguard the interest of labor and management by securing the highest level of mutual understanding and good-will among all those sections in the industry which participate in the process of production. To avoid industrial conflict or strife and develop harmonious relations, which are an essential factor in the productivity of workers and the industrial progress of a country. To raise productivity to a higher level in an era of full employment by lessening the tendency to high turnover and frequency absenteeism.

To establish and promote the growth of an industrial democracy based on labor partnership in the sharing of profits and of managerial decisions, so that ban individuals personality may grow its full stature for the benefit of the industry and of the country as well. To eliminate or minimize the number of strikes, lockouts and gheraos by providing reasonable wages, improved living and working conditions, said fringe benefits. To improve the economic conditions of workers in the existing state of industrial managements and political government. Socialization of industries by making the state itself a major employer Vesting of a proprietary interest of the workers in the industries in which they are employed.

The healthy industrial relations are key to the progress and success. Their significance may be discussed as under Uninterrupted production The most important benefit of industrial relations is that this ensures continuity of production. This means, continuous employment for all from manager to workers. The resources are fully utilized, resulting in the maximum possible production. There is uninterrupted flow of income for all. Smooth running of an industry is of vital importance for several other industries; to other industries if the products are intermediaries or inputs; to exporters if these are export goods; to consumers and workers, if these are goods of mass consumption. Reduction in Industrial Disputes Good industrial relations reduce the industrial disputes. Disputes are reflections of the failure of basic human urges or motivations to secure adequate satisfaction or expression which are fully cured by good industrial relations. Strikes, lockouts, go-slow tactics, gherao and grievances are some of the reflections of industrial unrest which do not spring up in an atmosphere of industrial peace. It helps promoting cooperation and increasing production. High morale Good industrial relations improve the morale of the employees. Employees work with great zeal with the feeling in mind that the interest of employer and employees is one and the same, i.e. to increase production. Every worker feels that he is a co-owner of the gains of industry. The employer in his turn must realize that the gains of industry are not for him along but they should be shared equally and generously with his workers. In other words, complete unity of thought and action is the main achievement of industrial peace. It increases the place of workers in the society and their ego is satisfied. It naturally affects production because mighty co-operative efforts alone can produce great results. Mental Revolution The main object of industrial relation is a complete mental revolution of workers and employees. The industrial peace lies ultimately in a transformed outlook on the part of both. It is the business of leadership in the ranks of workers, employees and Government to work out a new relationship in consonance with a spirit of true democracy. Both should think themselves as partners of the industry and the role of workers in such a partnership should be recognized. On the other hand, workers must recognize employers authority. It will naturally have impact on production because they recognize the interest of each other. Reduced Wastage Good industrial relations are maintained on the basis of cooperation and recognition of each other. It will help increase production. Wastages of man, material and machines are reduced to the minimum and thus national interest is protected. Thus, it is evident that good industrial relations is the basis of higher production with minimum cost and higher profits. It also results in increased efficiency of workers. New and new projects may be introduced for the welfare of the workers and to promote the morale of the people at work. An economy organized for planned production and distribution, aiming at the realization of social justice and welfare of the massage can function effectively only in

an atmosphere of industrial peace. If the twin objectives of rapid national development and increased social justice are to be achieved, there must be harmonious relationship between management and labor.

ndustrial relations is used to denote the collective relationships between management and the workers. Traditionally, the term industrial relations is used to cover such aspects of industrial life as trade unionism, collective bargaining, workers participation in management, discipline and grievance handling, industrial disputes and interpretation of labor laws and rules and code of conduct. In the words of Lester, "Industrial relations involve attempts at arriving at solutions between the conflicting objectives and values; between the profit motive and social gain; between discipline and freedom, between authority and industrial democracy; between bargaining and co-operation; and between conflicting interests of the individual, the group and the community. The National Commission on Labor (NCL) also emphasize on the same concept. According to NCL, industrial relations affect not merely the interests of the two participantslabor and management, but also the economic and social goals to which the State addresses itself. To regulate these relations in socially desirable channels is a function, which the State is in the best position to perform. In fact, industrial relation encompasses all such factors that influence behavior of people at work. A few such important factors are below: Characters: It aims to study the role of workers unions and employers federations officials, shop stewards, industrial relations officers/ manager, mediator/conciliators / arbitrator, judges of labor court, tribunal etc. Institution: It includes government, employers, trade unions, union federations or associations, government bodies, labor courts, tribunals and other organizations which have

direct or indirect impact on the industrial relations systems. Methods: Methods focus on collective bargaining, workers participation in the industrial relations schemes, discipline procedure, grievance redressal machinery, dispute settlements machinery working of closed shops, union reorganization, organizations of protests through methods like revisions of existing rules, regulations, policies, procedures, hearing of labor courts, tribunals etc. Contents: It includes matter pertaining to employment conditions like pay, hours of works, leave with wages, health, and safety disciplinary actions, lay-off, dismissals retirements etc., laws relating to such activities, regulations governing labor welfare, social security, industrial relations, issues concerning with workers participation in management, collective bargaining, etc.