0
Is unitarism the most appropriate way to think about contemporary industrial relations?
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Unitarism is one perspective on industrial relations that assumes common goals between employers and employees. However, other perspectives, such as pluralism, recognize divergent interests among different groups in the workplace. The most appropriate way to think about contemporary industrial relations may involve considering a combination of unitarist and pluralist perspectives to address the complexities of modern workplace dynamics.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What are types of labor relations theories?
Types of labor relations theories include unitarism, which assumes that employer and employees share common goals and interests; pluralism, which acknowledges conflicting interests between management and labor and emphasizes the need for balance and negotiation; and radicalism, which views the capitalist system as inherently exploitative and advocates for worker empowerment and collective action.
What is the difference between pluralism and unitarism?
Pluralism is a theory that acknowledges and supports diversity in society by allowing for multiple sources of authority and power. Unitarism, on the other hand, promotes the idea of a single, unified source of authority and power within a society, often favoring centralized decision-making and control.
What are types of labor relations theories?
Types of labor relations theories include unitarism, which assumes that employer and employees share common goals and interests; pluralism, which acknowledges conflicting interests between management and labor and emphasizes the need for balance and negotiation; and radicalism, which views the capitalist system as inherently exploitative and advocates for worker empowerment and collective action.
What is the difference between pluralism and unitarism?
Pluralism is a theory that acknowledges and supports diversity in society by allowing for multiple sources of authority and power. Unitarism, on the other hand, promotes the idea of a single, unified source of authority and power within a society, often favoring centralized decision-making and control.
Comparison of Indian federalism with Canadian federalism?
The privy council played an important role in Canadian constitution. In due period by the process of interpretation made the center weak and raised the provinces. This was due to french majority state. On the contrary the Indian government was not a result of a compact between several sovereign units but a result of conversion of unitary system into federal-system. Here the movement is from unitary to union. From unitarism to federalism. Instead of the work 'federalism' the word 'union' w2as deliberately selected by framers of Indian Constitution. Thus even though there are different states in India, India is a one country, a union.
Compare and contrast unitarism and federalism briefly?
Federal and unitary systems of government have many similar qualities therefore it becomes difficult to decipher between the two. In order to illustrate the difficulty in trying to distinguish between the two, I will first define what each system of government involves and then attempt to compare and contrast. Federalism is the creation of two layers of government, the federal government and the constituent states, which equally share the legal sovereignty of a country. Each tier of government has its own specific functions. The central government is allocated with the external political issues i.e. Foreign affairs and national defence. The constituent states' main concern is with legislation and education although the intricacies of each depend on which state you are examining. Unitary governments when a country's sovereignty lies solely with a central tier of government. Subnational authorities do exist alongside the centre and they may make their own individual policies, however this is only permissible if first approved by the central government. The authority of the country lies absolutely within the central government and the lower levels could be abolished if the centre so wished. Although they appear very similar in operation federal and unitary systems of government immediately individualise themselves from one another in their definitions. Within federalism the constituent states have a shared responsibility with the central government and their existence is protected. The only way they could be removed or modified would be by amending the constitution. The lower levels of the unitary system, however, only exist because they permitted to. The subnational authorities could be abolished almost immediately if the national government so demanded. Federal and unitary systems of government are classed as the two main solutions to the "territorial organisation of power1," Federalism, with some 22 federations in existence today, is becoming increasingly more popular with larger countries seeking to unite a multiethnic and multinational population. Australia, Canada and the United States of America, four of the world's largest countries, are federal. "Federalism seems to promise the military and economic advantages of size while maintaining, even encouraging, more local identities. Federalism, permits diversity within unity and is thus an important model for a world of strong national and ethnic identities.2," (Hague, Harrop and Breslin)
What's Henri fayol's administrative theory 14 principal of management?
to forecast and plan - prevoyanceexamine the future and draw up plans of actionto organisebuild up the structure, material and human of the undertakingto commandmaintain activity among the personnelto co-ordinatebind together, unify and harmonise activity and effortto controlsee that everything occurs in conformity with policy and practiseFayol also synthesised 14 principles for organisational design and effective administration. It is worthwhile reflecting on these are comparing the conclusions to contemporary utterances by Peters, Kanter and Handy to name but three management gurus. Fayol's 14 principles are:specialisation/division of labourA principle of work allocation and specialisation in order to concentrate activities to enable specialisation of skills and understandings, more work focus and efficiency.authority with corresponding responsibilityIf responsibilities are allocated then the post holder needs the requisite authority to carry these out including the right to require others in the area of responsibility to undertake duties. Authority stems from:that ascribed from the delegation process (the job holder is assigned to act as the agent of the high authority to whom they report - hierarchy)allocation and permission to use the necessary resources needed (budgets, assets, staff) to carry out the responsibilities.selection - the person has the expertise to carry out the responsibilities and the personal qualities to win the support and confidence of others.The R = A correspondence is important to understand. R = A enables accountability in the delegation process. Who do we cope with situations where R > A? Are there work situations where our R< A?"judgment demands high moral character, therefore, a good leader should possess and infuse into those around him courage to accept responsibility. The best safeguard against abuse of authority and weakness on the part of a higher manager is personal integrity and particularly high moral character of such a manager ..... this integrity, is conferred neither by election nor ownership. " 1916A manager should never be given authority without responsibility--and also should never be given responsibility without the associated authority to get the work done.disciplineThe generalisation about discipline is that discipline is essential for the smooth running of a business and without it - standards, consistency of action, adherence to rules and values - no enterprise could prosper."in an essence - obedience, application, energy, behaviour and outward marks of respect observed in accordance with standing agreements between firms and its employees " 1916unity of commandThe idea is that an employee should receive instructions from one superior only. This generalisation still holds - even where we are involved with team and matrix structures which involve reporting to more than one boss - or being accountable to several clients. The basic concern is that tensions and dilemmas arise where we report to two or more bosses. One boss may want X, the other Y and the subordinate is caught between the devil and the deep blue sea.unity of directionThe unity of command idea of having one head (chief executive, cabinet consensus) with agree purposes and objectives and one plan for a group of activities) is clear.subordination of individual interest to the general interestFayol's line was that one employee's interests or those of one group should not prevail over the organisation as a whole. This would spark a lively debate about who decides that the interests of the organisation as a whole are. Ethical dilemmas and matters of corporate risk and the behaviour of individual "chancers" are involved here. Fayol's work - assumes a shared set of values by people in the organisation - a unitarism where the reasons for organisational activities and decisions are in some way neutral and reasonable.remuneration of staff" the price of services rendered. " 1916The general principle is that levels of compensation should be "fair" and as far as possible afford satisfaction both to the staff and the firm (in terms of its cost structures and desire for profitability/surplus).centralisationCentralisation for HF is essential to the organisation and a natural consequence of organising. This issue does not go away even where flatter, devolved organisations occur. Decentralisation - is frequently centralisaed-decentralisation !!! The modes of control over the actions and results of devolved organisations are still matters requiring considerable attention.scalar chain/line of authorityThe scalar chain of command of reporting relationships from top executive to the ordinary shop operative or driver needs to be sensible, clear and understood.orderThe level of generalisation becomes difficult with this principle. Basically an organisation "should" provide an orderly place for each individual member - who needs to see how their role fits into the organisation and be confident, able to predict the organisations behaviour towards them. Thus policies, rules, instructions and actions should be understandable and understood. Orderliness implies steady evolutionary movement rather than wild, anxiety provoking, unpredictable movement.equityEquity, fairness and a sense of justice "should"pervade the organisation - in principle and practice.stability of tenureTime is needed for the employee to adapt to his/her work and perform it effectively. Stability of tenure promotes loyalty to the organisation, its purposes and values.initiativeAt all levels of the organisational structure, zeal, enthusiasm and energy are enabled by people having the scope for personal initiative. (Note: Tom Peters recommendations in respect of employee empowerment)esprit de corpsHere Fayol emphasises the need for building and maintaining of harmony among the work force , team work and sound interpersonal relationships.to forecast and plan - prevoyanceexamine the future and draw up plans of actionto organisebuild up the structure, material and human of the undertakingto commandmaintain activity among the personnelto co-ordinatebind together, unify and harmonise activity and effortto controlsee that everything occurs in conformity with policy and practiseFayol also synthesised 14 principles for organisational design and effective administration. It is worthwhile reflecting on these are comparing the conclusions to contemporary utterances by Peters, Kanter and Handy to name but three management gurus. Fayol's 14 principles are:specialisation/division of labourA principle of work allocation and specialisation in order to concentrate activities to enable specialisation of skills and understandings, more work focus and efficiency.authority with corresponding responsibilityIf responsibilities are allocated then the post holder needs the requisite authority to carry these out including the right to require others in the area of responsibility to undertake duties. Authority stems from:that ascribed from the delegation process (the job holder is assigned to act as the agent of the high authority to whom they report - hierarchy)allocation and permission to use the necessary resources needed (budgets, assets, staff) to carry out the responsibilities.selection - the person has the expertise to carry out the responsibilities and the personal qualities to win the support and confidence of others.The R = A correspondence is important to understand. R = A enables accountability in the delegation process. Who do we cope with situations where R > A? Are there work situations where our R< A?"judgment demands high moral character, therefore, a good leader should possess and infuse into those around him courage to accept responsibility. The best safeguard against abuse of authority and weakness on the part of a higher manager is personal integrity and particularly high moral character of such a manager ..... this integrity, is conferred neither by election nor ownership. " 1916A manager should never be given authority without responsibility--and also should never be given responsibility without the associated authority to get the work done.disciplineThe generalisation about discipline is that discipline is essential for the smooth running of a business and without it - standards, consistency of action, adherence to rules and values - no enterprise could prosper."in an essence - obedience, application, energy, behaviour and outward marks of respect observed in accordance with standing agreements between firms and its employees " 1916unity of commandThe idea is that an employee should receive instructions from one superior only. This generalisation still holds - even where we are involved with team and matrix structures which involve reporting to more than one boss - or being accountable to several clients. The basic concern is that tensions and dilemmas arise where we report to two or more bosses. One boss may want X, the other Y and the subordinate is caught between the devil and the deep blue sea.unity of directionThe unity of command idea of having one head (chief executive, cabinet consensus) with agree purposes and objectives and one plan for a group of activities) is clear.subordination of individual interest to the general interestFayol's line was that one employee's interests or those of one group should not prevail over the organisation as a whole. This would spark a lively debate about who decides that the interests of the organisation as a whole are. Ethical dilemmas and matters of corporate risk and the behaviour of individual "chancers" are involved here. Fayol's work - assumes a shared set of values by people in the organisation - a unitarism where the reasons for organisational activities and decisions are in some way neutral and reasonable.remuneration of staff" the price of services rendered. " 1916The general principle is that levels of compensation should be "fair" and as far as possible afford satisfaction both to the staff and the firm (in terms of its cost structures and desire for profitability/surplus).centralisationCentralisation for HF is essential to the organisation and a natural consequence of organising. This issue does not go away even where flatter, devolved organisations occur. Decentralisation - is frequently centralisaed-decentralisation !!! The modes of control over the actions and results of devolved organisations are still matters requiring considerable attention.scalar chain/line of authorityThe scalar chain of command of reporting relationships from top executive to the ordinary shop operative or driver needs to be sensible, clear and understood.orderThe level of generalisation becomes difficult with this principle. Basically an organisation "should" provide an orderly place for each individual member - who needs to see how their role fits into the organisation and be confident, able to predict the organisations behaviour towards them. Thus policies, rules, instructions and actions should be understandable and understood. Orderliness implies steady evolutionary movement rather than wild, anxiety provoking, unpredictable movement.equityEquity, fairness and a sense of justice "should"pervade the organisation - in principle and practice.stability of tenureTime is needed for the employee to adapt to his/her work and perform it effectively. Stability of tenure promotes loyalty to the organisation, its purposes and values.initiativeAt all levels of the organisational structure, zeal, enthusiasm and energy are enabled by people having the scope for personal initiative. (Note: Tom Peters recommendations in respect of employee empowerment)esprit de corpsHere Fayol emphasises the need for building and maintaining of harmony among the work force , team work and sound interpersonal relationships.
