The P(p)resent of work to the future of work #employeevoice #employeerelations#futureofwork

Summary: An attempt is made to understand and highlight the current state of the employment ecosystem in India covering internal and external aspects of employee voice or participation. In India employee have to negotiate, protest, voice out their concerns and perspectives with the organisations to surge ahead. If organisations are proactive they have built-in HR practices that capture the essence of employee perspectives. If there are no options provided by the organisation to capture and listen to employee concerns and perspectives instead of opting for quits are there any external options available and if there are then are they useful to employees?

Covered questions like reasons of unionisation and conflict or grievance management, if organizations proactively looks into these aspects they ensure a smooth baton takeover from present to future of work. Due to the talk of raise in the gig economy and upcoming new labour codes is critical to managing to present well to get into the future. What makes or does not make unionization an option to the employees?

Indian labour history had a strong tradition of Marxist and nationalist history(Shyam Sundar, 2006). Orthodox Marxist categories had limited purchase in a society where the organised proletariat was a small minority (Bhattacherjee & Ackers, 2010). Till present in India, only 28% of the workers are a part of the trade unions. To understand what makes or does not make unionisation an option to the employees we should try to understand what scope through which unions operate or want to operate then we have to focus on a couple of factors like what is the structure of the unions? & why is it the way it is? To answer this a quick analysis of labor history would tell us that unions in India operated under different challenges that have an impact on the way they function. Also at the individual who joins the unions and who don’t, gives us the peek into general contours of the sociology of the workplace in India.

What makes or does not make unionization an option to the employees?

From the individual worker or employee point of view if you look at the trade union movement in India and what benefits it can provide, one can surely notice various internal & external challenges that trade unions face today (Jit, 2017).

Internal Challenges

1.      Challenges Related to Leadership

The majority of unions are managed by professional politicians and lawyers who have no experience of physical work and no association with the corresponding union. Leadership is considered to be the lynch-pin of the management of trade unions. It is not leadership by the workers, but leadership by intellectuals. Trade Union Act (1926) has itself provided scope for outside leadership.

2.      Multiplicity of Trade Unions

The situation of the multiplicity of unions is set to prevail when many unions in the same industry or plant compete with each other for enrolling more members and getting recognition from the management Moreover, no conditions have been stipulated in the central law for the recognition of unions. Hence each union tries to influence the management for recognition.

3.      Inter-Union Rivalry

The existence of multiple unions in the same establishment may lead to rivalry among unions. These unions try to play down one another to gain greater influence among workers. The unions may try to malign the reputation of the rival unions.

4.      Small Size of Unions

India witnessed declining membership per union [union membership density]. The average number of workers per union was reportedly 3594 in 1927-28 which reduced to about 1552 in 1944-45 and to 877 in 1950-51. A very slight increase was noted in 1998 when the average number of workers per union was reported to be 979. More than 75% of the trade unions which have submitted returns have less than 500 members. The trade unions not submitting returns could have an even lesser membership(Jit, 2017).

5.      Financial Weakness

The primary source of finances for the unions is the membership subscription. The National commission of labor made the following suggestions to strengthen the financial position of unions:

? Raising the membership fee of union members. The government, however, did not accept this recommendation.

? Introduction of ‘check off system’ under which an employer, based on a collective agreement, undertakes to deduct union dues from the workers’ pay and then transfer the deducted amount to the union

6.      Uneven Growth of the Unions

Trade unionism is more or less restricted to major metros in India and that too in large scale units like automobiles, textiles, plantations, food industries, coal mines, chemicals, transport and communication, commerce and utility services etc. Some industries with a high rate of unionism are tobacco manufacturing (75%); iron and steel (63%); coal (61%); cotton textile (56%); banks (51%); mining (51%); railways (33%); insurance (33%) and plantation (28%). It varies from 30 to 37 percent in communication and transport; electricity and gas; and manufacturing industry etc(Jit, 2017).

7.      Politicization

Historically, the growth of trade unionism in India has been inseparably intermingled with the freedom struggle, giving it a political base. The politicization of unions has mostly led to the exploitation of workers' strength and unity by political parties for achieving their political objectives. These political leaders have no commitment to the organization.

8.      Undemocratic Leadership

Workers are rarely involved in decision making. Office bearers are quite often nominated than elected.

9.      Workers’ Illiteracy and Ignorance

The working class in India is mostly illiterate, poor and ignorant

10.  Apathy of Workers

Workers are often caught up in the race of earning their living and have no time, energy or interest in getting involved in union activities. Workers may also sometimes lose interest in the union activities if they get disillusioned with union leadership or when their grievances are not addressed. The apathy of workers can gradually corrode the very basis of unionism(Jit, 2017).

11.  Lack of Statutory Support

There is no central legislation to make it mandatory for management to recognize one or more unions. ‘Code of discipline’, at best, recommends voluntary recognition of trade unions.

External Challenges

1.      Global Competition

Cutthroat competition resulting from the globalization of business is leading to a massive workforce reduction. Hence trade unions are resisting the productivity-enhancing measures of the company as they render the workers redundant(Jit, 2017).

2.      Changes & use of Technology

Rapid changes in technology have led to skill obsolescence in workers, hence the loss of their control over jobs. This has become a major challenge for trade unions. Workers’ skills have to be updated for the security of their jobs and the survival of their company. Lost jobs also mean depletion in union membership. No proactive reaching out activities through social media.

3.      Lack of Government Support

The Government’s attitude is shifting from being labor-friendly to being investor-friendly.

4.      Managerial Strategies and HRM Policies

New HR practices are emerging that emphasize individualism, the direct participation of workers, unit level (rather than industry level) bargaining, etc. This has further weakened union power and increased managerial power.

Who joins the unions and why?

What motivates some workers to join the unions and stops others from doing so? In the study conducted by A.Gani 1996 (Gani, 1996) to assess the influence of independent variables on unionization decision (dependent variables), three sets of variables were used: demographic attributes, job characteristics, and politico-union factors. Basing which Union membership and its determinants by the employees are explained.

Members’ reasons for joining the union's (Gani, 1996)

1.      Working-class strength and solidarity

2.      protection against victimization

3.      Higher wages, fringe benefits, and bonuses, etc.

4.      Job security

5.      Better working

6.      and welfare amenities

7.      Fair promotions and

8.      advancement

9.      Labour Management Co-operation

10.  pressure from fellow workers

11.  Because all the employee are members

Other pointers are:

·   Young workers are careful to avoid any threat to their jobs and hence modest in their involvement in unions. But as employees mature in age they encounter more problems and develop a bond with the union. Towards the end of their working career, they start withdrawing from the union ranks (Gani, 1996).

·  Propensity to unionize tends to increase with the increase in skill levels.

·  The rural-urban nexus has been observed as strongly influencing the unionization process. Urban, as opposed to rural, upbringing, is found to be more conducive to unionization. It is the rural character of the Indian working class that has contributed, at least in part, to the low level of unionization in this country(Gani, 1996).

·  That if the unions are instrumental in improving wages, workers will develop a more favorable attitude towards them and join the unions.

·  Workers’ propensity to unionize has been found to be negatively related to job satisfaction. The results, therefore, add weight to the psychologists’ view that union joining is a response to frustration and dissatisfaction with various aspects of a job (Berger et al., 1983; ) Guest and Dewe, 1988(Guest & Dewe, 1988).

·  Employees who held a left-wing political ideology were found to be more unionized than those having rightist leanings(Gani, 1996).

The present results support the argument that in India, on the whole, a union is considered as an instrument that can better workers’ lot economically, ensure the security of their service and encourage workers’ overall strength and solidarity. In India, the higher-order motives are as yet accorded only a minor place (Gani, 1996).

Why workers do not join unions

·   Workers with a higher level of education would tend to be more individualistic and they would see their personal advancement as depending more on movement from their jobs rather than collective action.

·  Guest and Dewe, 1988(Guest & Dewe, 1988) study suggest that a high positive attitude towards the supervisor leads the workers to foster negative feelings towards the union.

·    A.Gani 1996, (Gani, 1996) recorded a significant relationship between employees’ desire to participate in workplace decisions, on the one hand, and union density on the other. However, during the survey, some trade unions were found to be reluctant to get involved in participation programs because of their fear that the real intent of such moves might be to shift the rank-and-file loyalty from union to management.

·        The “fear of victimization” and the “fear of being branded disloyal to the organization” also kept a fairly large number of non- members away from unions. They are afraid of reprisals by management. Although reprisals for union-related activities are illegal in India, employees fear that they will occur nonetheless. (Gani, 1996).

·   Most of the union leaders emphasized the migratory character of the workers, the temporary nature of their jobs, illiteracy, and fear of victimization as factors operating on workers’ decision not to join a trade union(Gani, 1996).

·  In the new age service sector unions movement does not have tripartite agreements with the employer’s body & government along with low collective bargaining therefore their ability to influence policymaking or redressal is very low. Dependence on labour laws for legitimacy of their existence is preferred than proactively reaching out towards aspirations & the needs of the union member or workers. Grievance to dispute is the time test route followed by unions.

Major causes of grievances reported by the respondents (Cooke & Saini, 2015). Promotions. career development, or internal transfer

1.      Performance appraisal

2.      Pay and conditions

3.      Job grading or classification

4.      Relations with line managers (e.g. unfair treatment 'victimization)

5.      Work practices. work allocation, or the pace of work

6.      Amenities

7.      Working time, annual leave, or time off

8.      Service matters

9.      Discrimination

10.  Physical working conditions or health and safety

11.  Bullying at work

12.  Harassment

In the same study by Cooke & Saini (2015), it appears that equity and individual advancement are the main issues of the contention. This indicates that the major sources of grievances affect managerial and professional employees more than shop floor workers. Secondly, the union is considered as an instrument that can better workers’ economically, ensure the security of their service and encourage workers’ overall strength and solidarity (Gani, 1996) not looking for skill development or re-employment and worker empowerment.

 Or we can even say that In India the sources of grievances affect professional employees more than shop floor workers. Most of the Indian middle class fall into professional employees [people like you and me] and who lack unions support. Export-oriented tertiary economies like India are powered more by professional employees labour therefore having a systemic approach to the DRS [dispute resolution system] would be critical for the organisation for long term planning. Now, who is there to check the rigor of DRS, since most of the tertiary services are running in SEZ’s/ or labour law exemptions Indian States?! Another trending aspect is State supports labour flexibility either in an open manner or by slyly depending on the dictates of “mass politics” (Shyam Sundar, 2015).

As per the theory of Structuration of Giddens which highlights the working of different forms of structure (social forces) and the human agency, the relationship between the two (agency & structure) can be used to understand our shared reality. This dynamic relationship is manifested as the conflict in an organisation. The difference of opinions /conflict /grievance resolution is a lynchpin for unions or organisation. But at the same time what we need for contemporary organizations is conflict management and not conflict resolution. Conflict management does not necessarily imply avoidance, reduction, or termination of conflict. It involves designing effective strategies to minimize the dysfunctions of conflict and enhancing the constructive functions of conflict in order to enhance learning and effectiveness in an organization(Rahim, 2002).

Complementarities model:

For effective conflict management, the complementarities model proposed by Corinne Bendersky, 2003 (Bendersky, 2003) says DRS dispute resolution system typically comprises of a combination of three types of components: rights-based processes/interest-based neutrals, and negotiated processes.

Picture: Complementary approach Source: Bendersky 2003

A complementary approach pays close attention to the locus of decision-making authority and treats conflict resolution as negotiated processes and outcomes. Where components are well-integrated, they mitigate the limitations of each other and a positive synergistic effect may be achieved, and vice versa(Cooke & Saini, 2015).

How to approach on complementarities model:

Organisation can better manage their present if they merge SHRM [OR HR/OB] perspective with IR perspective. What it means is;

SHRM with its HR/OB traditions focuses primarily on horizontal conflicts—between peers of workers, managers, or professionals—in which hierarchical power differentials are not especially salient(Bendersky, 2003). ‘Participation’ of employees thus became a critical aspect of SHRM based DRS IR scholars also believe that workplace conflict should be managed but not eliminated. However, IR belief is rooted in the assumption that conflict is inevitable (Fox, 1966), given the fundamentally irreconcilable interests of managers and workers. IR researchers, thus, have traditionally focused on ‘vertical’ conflicts of interest between workers and managers within organizational settings. Therefore employee voice is the focus of union or IR researchers.

So a complementary model in a way talks about the balance of horizontal [participation] & vertical interests [employee voice].

So complementary model in a way talks about the balance of horizontal [participation] & vertical interests [employee voice] which in turn would lead to employee commitment, engagement and finally a sense of empowerment. Employee empowerment enables employees to make important decisions related to their work and take more responsibility for their jobs. The logic behind empowerment is to foster accountability, build morale and confidence, and create a sense of belongingness in the employees or workers, which is the resultant of commitment levels of employees and supported by SHRM practices.

Conclusion:

Globalisation is an opportunity to combine a pluralist perspective of IR experts & with an individual perspective of SHRM to implement a complementary model of grievance or conflict management. This combination has to be negotiation-based and keeping the rights-based approach as the last alternative. But point is accepting that difference of opinion is natural between employee and employer and to arrive at consensus dialogue is the necessary ingredient. In many scenarios, it is the employee voice that affects the dialogue which impacts participative decision-making in turn results in procedural justice. But to ensure dialogue happens unions are the bedrock, harbinger, and solution given the past & present Indian labour history and utility of labour institutions by the employees i.e. most of us. Can organisation take up this void that belongs to unions?  What do you have to say?! Please share.

Bibliography

Bendersky, C. (2003). Organizational dispute resolution systems: A complementarities model. Academy of Management Review, 28(4), 643–656. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2003.10899444

Bhattacherjee, D., & Ackers, P. (2010). Employment relations in India : old narratives and new perspectives. Industrial Relations Journal, 41(2), 104–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2338.2009.00557.x

Cooke, F. L., & Saini, D. S. (2015). From legalism to strategic HRM in India? Grievance management in transition. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(3), 619–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-015-9417-0

Deshpandé, R., & Raina, A. (2011). The ordinary heroes of the Taj. Harvard Business Review, 89(12), 119–124.

Fox, A. (1966). Managerial Ideology and Labour Relations. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 4(1–3), 366–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.1966.tb00936.x

Gani, A. (1996). Who joins the unions and why? Evidence from India. International Journal of Manpower, 17(6–7), 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437729610149330

Guest, D. E., & Dewe, P. (1988). Why Do Workers Belong to a Trade Union?: A Social Psychological Study in the UK Electronics Industry. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 26(2), 178–194. Retrieved from https://10.0.4.87/j.1467-8543.1988.tb00745.x

Jit, R. (2017). Challenges of Trade Union Movement in India. Global Journal of Enterprise Information System, 8(2), 20. https://doi.org/10.18311/gjeis/2016/7656

Rahim, M. A. (2002). Toward a theory of managing organizational conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 13(3), 206–235. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022874

Shyam Sundar, K. R. (2006). Second National Commission on Labour (SNCL) and Reform of Industrial Relations System. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 42(2), 252–270.

Shyam Sundar, K. R. (2015). Industrial Conflict in India in the Post-Reform Period Who Said All Is Quiet on the Industrial Front? Economic and Political Weekly, L(3), 43–53.

Web link:

*National Commission on Labour https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Commission_on_Labour