Employee Relations In A Non-union Environment

By Author: Anthony W Bills
Total Articles: 158
Comment this article

Employee Relations in a Non-Union Environment
Introduction
The employee relationship comprises of a body of work aimed at maintaining the relationship between the employer and the employee resulting into satisfactory motivation, productivity and morale. Basically, it deals with prevention and resolution of problems of individual arising from the work place. In this case, supervisors are advised on how to improve the misconduct and the poor performance of the employees. Therefore, the regulatory and progressive displine as well as other requirements are put in place in resolving the appeals and grievances of the employees and effecting displinary actions. Employees are provided with essential information in order to promote good understanding of management policies and goals. In addition, this information helps them in correcting misconduct, off or on duty, poor performance as well as addressing their issues which are personal in work places. They are given advices on matters concerning legislation, applicable regulation, grievances, rights of appeal ,whist blower protection, agreements on bargaining among others ...
... (Singh2003:108).
This concept is centered to managers to assist the managers and supervisors to navigate the myriad found in workplaces for it is guided by day to day requirements and rules. Even though this concept may sound simple, in real sense it’s more complicated than the customer relationship. This is because; customers have options of moving to other competitors when their interests are not met unlike the employee. Also customers experience company at some point while the employees are in it for most of their time. The constituents of this relationship involves good interaction, open and clear communication, being sympathetic to one another, being responsive , the feeling of closeness and feeling of empathy with each other. Proper management of this relationship will constitute a reciprocal exchange in terms of value between the employer and the employee. Each of the part must be willing to participate and contribute for it to work. Management of this relationship is very fundamental for it determines their performance. Their productivity is improved through employee morale, loyalty, turnaround, communication and change of readiness. This relationship can be likened to the tip of an iceberg for in most cases it focuses on how to improve the productivity rather than interacting with the employee which is just but one of the many factors determining the quality of the relationship.
For along period of time, the question as to whether technology has contributed to the improvement of employee relationship has remained unanswered. Currently it has been established that it has a greater hand in it. This can be evidenced by the fact that most companies have human resource systems which ensure the timely and accurate payment of salaries to their employees, performance measurements systems for performance to monitor and give feedbacks on performance by connecting it to the bonus schemes. In some instances, the structure of organization helps to make the lines of reporting and the responsibilities o the employees clear and programs of managing knowledge help them to share knowledge on the happenings of the company. For this to benefit the company there should be clear rules and guidelines on its use for it should be coupled with a culture that values the employees for it to contribute positively. In essence, without a good management adoption of the employee values the technology can turn out to be a destructive force of spreading a negative morale. The tools of these relationship breaks down the dependency of control systems and hierarchical command and introduces a self organizing culture among the employees that collaborate on the needed points.
In most cases the management of this relationship is carried out through labor unions which act as a representative of the industry workers. They are legalized and recognized bodies which are very prominent among the employees in public sector. For instance in United States these unions bargain collectively over the salaries and wages, working conditions, benefits, and represents the members in an event of violations of provisions of the contract. However, some employers have taken the route of managing these relationships without the unions. This involves developing of achievable goals with employees, employers put themselves in their shoes in employee order to understand what they are striving to achieve and at the same time how it is related to your business. Also, the employer should explain the needs from the employees in order to achieve the business objective as well as knowing the terms of the contract. In most cases, this environment has more flexibility and the relationship is based on the employer being a good listener to the needs of the staff, balancing their needs and those of the business and finally having a plan of uniting them and harnessing powers upon them. Since this relationship is one on one the employer enjoys several benefits compared to using unions (Roddrguez-Merchan 2004:312).
To begin with, by having in place a human resource plan acts as a roadmap is key factor to the success of this relationship. This is because giving it a top priority develops a competitive advantage for the employer and the employees not only on the cost but also on the ability and quality to develop an innovation and respond quickly to the existing market changes. In this case, they are the ones to deliver the business brand and therefore there is a need to make sure it is well planned of how it happens. Though getting the entire team to work towards the same direction may be a challenge and time consuming to the employers, it has been established that it is only those who invest time in planning and trying to learn how to build these positive relations achieve the rewards through lower turnover, higher productivity, good feedback from the guest as well as a stronger success from the bottom line (Singh2003:108).

The shift of attention from unions to the use of effective people in managing skills to develop relationship and engage employees is of great significance. There is greater emphasis on the direct communication, motivating staff and managing the change of the organization. Therefore ,the principal concern on the employer on managing change in the organization will be based on developing and sustaining a good climate where the employees will feel valued and hence inspired to work effectively and even perform better which is advantageous to the employer (Fields 2006:89).
Contrary to the traditional approaches of managing personnel which rely on bureaucratic approaches such as giving of regular increments of pay in instances of enforcing control in work environments, the employer places more emphasis on technical ways of managing the culture of the organization. Therefore, the employer implements this by attempting to manipulate values, beliefs and symbols in workplace. According to Gennard & Judge (2005:387), the organizational behaviors are not guided by the rules and beliefs but the bond of the strong culture among the employees where they have love for the company, customer and the product. Therefore the employers sometimes put some efforts to ensure that the staffs have opportunities to enjoy themselves despite of the work pressure. Organizing for activities such as piped music, social events as well as dressing –up days are meant to build a relaxed atmosphere which help to improve their morale and also results to positive customer service (Gennard & Judge2005:387).
In addition, the employer has the recognition that for the business performance to improve he can put necessary intervention measures designed to allow involvement of the employee hence resulting to increased commitment in the organization. Usually, this is based on the assumption that when the employees are committed they are more satisfied; they achieve higher productivity and prove to be more adaptable. In this case the employer designs jobs in a systematic manner which allows the workers to enjoy a sense of discretion and autonomy and that other robust arrangements used in order to enable them to participate in making decisions trough sophisticated techniques of communication. In this case they develop a strong sense of belonging to the company and therefore they are committed and determined to achieve success hence greater efficiency in the performance (Fields 2006:89).
This form of management creates harmonious and cooperative nature of relations between the employer workers and managers. They are very free and communicate openly on issues affecting the organization hence reduction of the conflicts compared to weak or even non existent labor unions. Even though there is cordial relationship there may arise conflicts such as frictional, easily resolvable, down to short term such as differences in personality or from external agitators. Further, the employer is able to manage the workers in a way which enhances the performance of the business compared to trade unions. In the past the managerial goals comprised efforts to control the workers and accommodating the unions power this has ended and currently the employer seeking to make his company most admired has to adopt proper and effective human resource techniques for engaging workers and thus get better performance (Roddrguez-Merchan 2004:312).
However, the employers operating this mode of operation in keeping the relationship have faced several problems. First of all, the employer undergoes a complex compensation process because unions they bring about consistency and fairness compensation of the employees. In some instances, since the salary schedules may not be very pen to the employees they have a fear of employees knowing each others salary unlike in unions where they are clearly spelt out. The employer faces a challenge of negotiating salaries with the employees which may result in to unsystematic salary schedules .in addition, the administration of the benefits is difficult. Gollan (2007:200) says that, the employer has the responsibility of selecting vendors for the benefits and large, national and state unions which offer plans which could be purchased by the company or by some individual employees. He has to spend considerable efforts and time searching for these vendors which is entirely the role of the union (Gollan 2007:200).
By operating one on one with the employees, they are responsible of preparing comprehensive budget for the salaries which could have been eased by the union. In this case, he has to know what amount will their salaries be as well as the future benefits. Leat (2007:348) reveals that, in doing this; they will be able to forecast the future financial requirement of the company which is not very common among the non –union organization. In essence, the employer faces a challenge s of managing the employees’ displine just like any other organization. In an event f unions the contracts usually have a code of conduct for the employees together with set of steps and rules considered fair by both the union and the employer. In this case since the code of conduct is designed by the employer the employees may consider it more punitive on their side because they were not involved in decision making which may decrease their morale hence affecting their performance negatively ( Leat 2007:348).
Further studies have shown that, mostly the employments relationships in non union companies are usually socially negotiated. Even in the absence of the trade unions the workers are not merely passive of the prevailing conditions but rather they exert some considerate amount of pressure in return which shapes the management of relationship with the employees. Even though the employer may allow the workers to have some freedom in interacting with them many employees tend to use that as a loophole by overlooking the superior powers of employers which is very obvious in non existence of trade unions. Besides, they face a challenge of consistency on the side of employees. For instance, the employer can change the workers expectations without notice which may affect the employees for not knowing what expected of them. The employer the does not benefit from a more content work force and has to spent more time and resources on training the workforce on coping with organizational changes
(Beardwell 1996:200).
In instances where the paternalism prevails, there is existence of a big gap between the employer and the employee because of the lower level of dependence. According to Fields (2006:89), such differences which form the basis of paternalism are not significant because at the same time the employer puts many efforts to ensure a sense of identification with the company in the workforce. Therefore, the unequal nature of this relationship is only legitimized by the reference of bonds formed by mutual duty as well as the obligation which may reduce the productivity of the workforce. In dictatorial management the employer may unknowingly exert excessive force on the employees by treating them as factors of production and resources to be used and discarded when need be in a way that favors the objectives of the organization. In this case, the performance improvements are achieved not because the workers are engaged and committed but due greater control over workers and employees intensified activities exercised by the managers. This may bring about “oppression mind set” among the workers resulting into resignations and bad reputation of the company (Campling 1999:3)
In summary, the existence of good employee relationship ensure that employees are treated like valued assets, a source of competitive advantage of the company through their adaptability, commitment and quality. Therefore much emphasis is placed on supporting their well being by ensuring the sophisticated stress in work place is managed s that they can balance with he real life .as result the company experiences more engaged work force which has high commitment and morale driving improvement in performance of the business.

Reference list
Beardwell, I.(1996) Contemporary Industrial Relations: A Critical Analysis. New York: Lincoln Press.P.200
Campling,T.J.(1999) Bargained Out: Negotiations Without Unions In Australia. New york: mark publishers. p 3.
Fields.(2006) Career Opportunities In Advertising And Public Relations.P89.
Gennard,J And Judge, G(2005) Employee Relations. London: Free Press.P387.
Gollan,P.(2007) Employee Representation In Non Union Firms New York: Prentice Hall Publishers.P200.
Leat, M.(2007) Exploring Employee Relations. Washington Dc: world bank Press .P348.
Roddrguez-Merchan,E.(2004) Non Unions .London: Macmillan Press. P 312.
Singh, P.N.(2003)Employee Relations Management. London: Oxford Press. P108.

Author's bio:

The author is associated with the www.urgentdissertations.com and he can help you with research papers,term papers,dissertations,thesis,course work