Essay on Employee Relations

Employee relations is a reference point to any area of subject matter that has commonly been used relatively over the recent years. Before it became commonly used, ‘industrial relations’ was the term used in this case. The use of employee relations over industrial relations offers a platform for a broader view of encompassing the presently-dominant service sector that in many developed countries offers 70 percent of their workforce which has been changing to being composed of a women labor force and in part-time, with temporary and term-based contracts that includes both union and non-union scenarios and relationships (Department for Business, 2010). The main objectives of this employee relations are to raise the level of morale and productivity among the employees. In a nutshell, employee relations tends to improve the operations at the workplace by promoting a good relationship between employees with their fellow employees and between the employees and employers to achieve its objectives.

Employee relations covers:

Dispute prevention and resolution.

Tripartite social dialogue

Facilitation of the negotiation, consultation and the exchanging of information among the key players

Collective bargaining

Other methods of conflict resolution like social dialogue, that involves corporate social responsibility and agreements based on international frameworks,

With the areas mentioned above employee relations aims at developing the best working environment for employees to avoid any events of conflict between them and their management, and in case any occurs it is dealt with as soon as possible and very effectively.

There are factors that are essential to make the goals of employee relations work effectively in the workplaces between the employee and their employers (Knights & Hugh, 2016). The following are the important factors that make employee relations work effectively:

There needs to be a strong and independent task force between the employees and their employers that facilitates the accessing of better information to enable better dialogue methods.

Political will needs to be available to facilitate the social dialogue between the two parties.

There needs to be an effective legal platform and institutional framework.

An upholding for the respect of fundamental rights that promote freedom of association and reinforcing collective bargaining.

Employee relations bring human resource management (HRM) to life because managerial strategies with integrated and distinctive approaches to manage the employees for effective productivity (Boxall, 2014, p. 580). The HRM approach promotes the most effective way to handle employees as an investment that needs management for it to work well and offer good returns to the organization. HRM handles the employees specifically as a unit and not as a group in a union (Leat, 2008). This is a really good approach to managing the employees where their affairs are looked to individually handling their negotiation, contracts and pay.

There are a variety of dimensions to this relationship. It can be simply viewed as a buyer-seller situation of labor capacity. This is an economic exchange situation. There are also other factors that are considered in this relationship like the legal and psychological dimensions (Nikoloski, Dimitrova, Koleva & Kacarski, 2014 p. 118). The element of power and authority in the relationship is also evident where the employer is authoritative and powerful to their employees who are mandated to be subordinate to them. This makes this relationship also asymmetrical since the employer has more power. The relationship is also relatively continuous because of the contract basis terms. Despite this, for this relationship to work there needs to be cooperation and to commit to the current agreements between the two parties morally.

There are different employee relations outcomes in an organization as a result of the interaction and employment relationship between the involved parties. These reactions can be viewed as processes, procedures or practices at one level and on another scale, they can be termed as the strategy of securing the interest of each party (Nikoloski , et al., 2014, p. 118). Examples of such processes or procedures are: the involvement of the employees in the making of decisions or the controlling of the labor process, the handling of management issues such as disciplining of employees or handling their grievances and steering towards the achievement of equal opportunities (Talvik, 2015). Conclusively, employee relations work effectively to emphasize the relationship between the employees and their employer and their fellow employees for better communication and operation.

The case study below will illustrate on an organization’s employee relations procedures and practices.

Case study: The Southern Railway dispute.

This conflict began between the Southern Rail and its employees over security and safety while working in consideration to the staffing plan that was to be initiated by the company. This conflict led to a declaration of the strike by the employees under their union Real Maritime and Transport Union (RMT) (Calder, 2016). The Southern Rail management felt it could shift from the Driver Conductor Operation (DCO) to Driver Only Operation (DOO) because of their new acquisition of trains that had automated doors which could be operated from the drivers controlled. The employees, on the other hand, argue that the course of their action is not about opening and closing of doors, but it is about the safety, security, and accessibility in the train during their operation. From the previous years, the trains operation under this belt were operated based on the DCO basis to ensure passenger safety (Calder, 2016).

The employees argue that this move is only beneficial to the Southern Rail in profits as they decrease the number of staff in their operations not considering the security and safety of the passengers and staff on board. They term this move by the Southern Rail as a selfish one to maximize profits at the cost of their employees (Calder, 2016). They justify this as the cause of their strike. The strike has really an adverse effect on the nation because many commuters could not access their different workplaces. This will impact greatly on the country’s economy negatively. There was also a problem with how the situation was being dragged on for months. The RMT felt that the government was not playing its part well in the conflict resolution making it a political dispute with nationwide implications (Calder, 2016).

The employees are adamant about the course of their action in the strike. This case needs to be handled with care concerning collective bargaining to resolve this conflict. There are different approaches to achieve this collective bargaining, but in this case, the bargaining positions are laid in the following way for the employees to achieve the goal:

The Southern Railway is misleading its passengers when they tell them that it is safe to use either DCO/DOO because they are a universal concept. It is inappropriate for them to consider the application of DOO because it is working everywhere without considering the specific conditions of their railway lines and their employees.

The passengers were also not giving full information about DOO. Passengers were furious with the employees for the strike, but it was unfortunate that the information communicated to them about the DOO was not fully accurate and not the whole information was released about them (Foster & Boyle , 2016).

There is growth in the number of passengers commuting with the railway line making it necessary for security and safety measures to be boosted in these railway lines (Foster & Boyle , 2016). A driver alone cannot handle a large number of passengers using these trains, so clearly the DOO is a wrong move that does not serve the interests of the public at large.

The role of the parties involved in the dispute in resolving the conflict.

The company.

The company assures its employees that all the onboard staff their jobs are secured until 2021 when the franchise will also be closing its operations. During this period also, there will not be any reduction in their salaries. The employees were also guaranteed about a better pay for them during overtime. The company also stated that despite inflation scenarios, they have guaranteed the employees a pay rise over the next two years (White, 1998, pp. 238-244). From an independent research conducted for 15 years, the company affirms that it is the driver that is responsible for the closing of train doors. They additionally say that with the acquisition of new trains the driver has a clear view and monitoring of the CCTV mounted to the train. This CCTV system allows the driver to monitor the train and in case of anything, the appropriate action can be taken.

The company argues that 30% of trains in the UK operate with the driver operating the doors and 50% of the UK train operations operate this way. They assure the employees that the current tradition conductor will retain their positions while any second on board staff member will be a safety competent training to better the services offered (Foster & Boyle , 2016). The company emphasizes that this move is to better the services they provide and they won’t neglect their passengers. They acknowledge that there are passengers with special needs that need another staff member on board (MacMillan, 1999, p. 46). For these passengers and the safety of any other passenger at large, there will be an On board supervisor. Lastly, the company stresses on the points that they are after modernizing and bettering of their train services with the modern technology because of the increased demand on their train routes. The drivers will operate the doors while the on board supervisors will attend to the passengers.

The Union

The union states that they had been pushed to the wall and had no choice but to strike. They claim that prior to the strike they had offered to suspend it if the company would also suspend their proposal that was to be implemented August of the same year. The company did not adhere to this. The union also wrote to the Secretary of state for Transport together with the Rail Minister requesting for an early meeting to find a solution to this conflict, but they never responded back (Foster & Boyle , 2016). They continued to receive mixed messages from the Ministry because of the exit of the old Minister and entry of a new one. A senior railway official Peter Wilkinson states that he will not allow the employees to continue with the strike for long and he would ensure that he pushes them out of their course and let them decide if they are willing to go back to their jobs or they leave the industry if they cannot keep up (Rose & Busby, 2017, p. 677). The former Railway Minister Claire Perry criticized the actions of Southern Railway in a record stating that the South Railway were not employing the appropriate measures to handle the situation.

The Union adamantly state that they are willing to change the situation once they have a negotiation and agreement between them and the Southern Railway with the Government being involved. They refer to a similar case involving the Scot Rail services that was resolved in a similar manner (Calder, 2016). The use of arbitration or mediation would have been appropriate in the solving this case involving the government or any other relevant stake holders.

Potential implications of any disciplinary actions against employees or grievances resulting from this dispute.

The employees in this strike face some possible causes of action from the company because they are paralyzing the company’s business operation losing revenue for the company. Despite this though this disciplinary actions should be in accordance with the law (Hann & Teague, 2011, p. 533). The following disciplinary actions might be taken on the employees:

The employees might be subjected to pay deductions for the days they are on strike because the strike is a breach of contract (Boxall, 2014, p. 580). The course of their action does not affect their position as employees of the company

Due to the deduction in pay, deductions to pension schemes will also be no collected while this is a security to the employee after retirement.

The work of the striking employees might also be assigned to another group of temporary employees making the striking workers not to receive their pay as it is being channeled to the workers replacing them (Bhattacherjee & Ackers, 2010, p. 108).

Possible causes of action for the company or employees at any resulting employment tribunals.

There are several possible causes of action by either party in the dispute at any employment tribunal that may arise after the industrial action (Hann & Teague, 2011, p. 534). The following are the possible causes of action in any employment tribunal by both parties:

The employees are entitled to the submission of an ET1 form to a regional tribunal firm after the acquisition of an Early Conciliation certificate. This is in attempt to make a conciliation to employment disputes before a tribunal claim can be issued (Foster & Boyle , 2016).

The employer is also entitled to the replying of a claim once the ET1 form of an employee has been approved and sent to him by a regional tribunal office. The employer is supposed to submit the response within 28 days after the tribunal officers send a copy of the complaint. The employer needs to respond to the ET1 claim with an ET3 to prevent the employer from losing the rights to contest that claim.

Necessary actions that can be taken to protect either the company’s or the employees’ position at an employment tribunal.

It is important that both the company and employee are protected in case of an employment tribunal. Different ways can be used to protect the company or the employees in case of an employment tribunal. In this case, the following can be used:

Using of a ‘protected conversation.’ This type of a conversation is applicable to the negotiations between an employer and an employee in reaching a mutually agreeable termination package without a future unfair dismissal claim (Glady, 2013, pp. 294-308).

A ‘settlement agreement’ can be employed so that an employee has an independent legal advisor to waive the employees’ statutory employment rights.

Alternative strategies that the company can employ to manage its employee’s relation in future.

It is important for the company to build a solid employees relations to avoid future cases of industrial actions from its employees. This can be achieved by working hand in hand with the human resource department by;

Developing of a shared vision in the company. The human resource department can design a way to share a common company mission despite the size of the company in a hierarchical manner going down to an individual (Odhong & Omolo, 2014, p. 150). An individual employee of the company should be able to relate to the broader goals of the company by understanding the role played by their contribution.

Being a goal of every company to foster an open communication system in it. Large companies have a complex structure that does not promote the basic interactions of employees speaking up and asking questions (Glady, 2013, pp. 294-308). This should be handled so that the employees’ relationship is not compromised.

Creation and maintaining of the company’s culture. This culture should be upheld despite the growth of the company to set a solid standard for the company that all the employees will embrace.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is important that every company establishes a solid employee relations so that industrial actions are avoided to help the company achieve its goals and missions. A good employee relations ensures the smooth running of a company happens. This basically starts with a good and open communication channel between the employees and their management. It is important to avoid industrial actions that hinder the operations and growth of a company.

References

Bhattacherjee, D. & Ackers, P., 2010. Introduction: employment relations in India—old narratives and new perspectives. Industrial Relations Journal, 41(2), pp. 104-121.

Boxall, P., 2014. The Future of Employment Relations from the perspective of human resource management. Journal of Industrial Relations, 56(4), pp. 578-592.

Calder, S., 2016. Southern Rail Strike: The Real Reason Unions have taken Industrial Action. [Online]

Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/southern-rail-strike-why-has-it-happened-explained-london-trains-doors-dispute-a7471381.html

[Accessed 3 May 2018].

Department for Business, I. a. S., 2010. Industrial Action and Law: A guide for employees, trade Union members and others, London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, United Kingdom.

Foster, P. & Boyle, D., 2016. Southern rail strike: union claims that walkouts justified by safety concerns are undermined by experts. [Online]

Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/13/southern-strike-passenger-misery-amid-worst-rail-disruption/

[Accessed 3 May 2018].

Glady, J., 2013. Trade unions and the pension crisis: defending member interests in a neoliberal world. Employee Relations, 35(3), pp. 294-308.

Hann, D. & Teague, P., 2011. The changing role of employment tribunals: The case of the Employment Appeals Tribunal in Ireland. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 33(3), pp. 531-549.

Knights, D. & Hugh, W., 2016. Labor process theory. New York: Springer.

Leat, M., 2008. Employee Relations, Edinburgh, United Kingdom: Edinburgh Business School Heriot-Watt University.

MacMillan, J., 1999. Employment tribunals: philosophies and practicalities. Industrial Law Journal, 28(1), pp. 33-56.

Nikoloski, K., Dimitrova, J., Koleva, B. & Kacarski, E. M., 2014. From Industrial Relations to Employment Relations with Focus on Employee Relations. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research, 18(2), pp. 117-124.

Odhong, E. A. & Omolo, J., 2014. An Analysis of the Factors Affecting Employee Relations in the Flower Industry in Kenya, a Case of Waridi Ltd, Athi River. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 5(1), pp. 147-160.

Rose, E. & Busby, N., 2017. Power Relations in Employment Disputes. Journal of Law and Society, 44(4), pp. 674-701.

Talvik, A., 2015. Best Practices in Resolving Employment Disputes in International Organizations. Geneva, International Labor Organization.

White, R., 1998. Waiver of Statutory Rights in Fixed Term Contracts: British Broadcasting Corporation v Kelly-Phillips. Industrial Law Journal, 27(3), pp. 238-244.