Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Question Hymen 1997 describes collective bargaining as a hallow shell and argues that the only reason why some employers offer better conditions than those negotiated by unions in collective bargaining agreements is so that they remain ‘union free’. Examine this statement with reference to collective bargaining in Zimbabwe. The term collective bargaining was first used in 1891 by Beatrice Webb of the field of Industrial relations in Britain. It refers to the sort of collective negotiations and agreements that had existed since the rise of trade unions during the 18th century. It is stated that the right to bargain collectively with an employer enhance the human dignity, liberty and autonomy to influence workplace establishment and assist employees to voice their concerns. Collective bargaining has been defined by a number of scholars as follows: Is a crucial form of social dialogue between the employer and employees as they negotiate the terms of employment, working conditions as well as regulatory relations between employer and employee (ILO Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No.154). Is a process of decision making between parties representing employer and employee interests which implies the negotiation and continuous application of an agreed set of rules to govern the substantive and procedural terms of the employment relations (Windmuller et al, 1987). Collective bargaining can be simple defined as a way in which the workforce, through their unions, negotiate contracts with their employees to agree on the terms of employment, including pay, benefits, working hours, leave, job health and safety policies as well as life balance. Collective bargaining is also recognised as a standard which promotes social justice peace, fair work place relations and decent work, sustainable development, social and political stability. (ILO 1981). There are number of reasons which make employers see no value in collective bargaining and prefer that their employees should not be members of trade unions. The reasons will be outlined discussed in detail below: i) Employers enjoy bargaining advantage over employees. ii) Employers believe collective bargaining is a waste of time. 1|Page iii) Affect wage dispersion. iv) It is associated with lower productivity. v) Compress pay differences among workers. vi) It gives employees a voice. vii) Too much government intervention. Greater bargaining power The major reason for employers to see no value in collective bargaining is so that they enjoy bargaining advantage over employees. According to Hijzen and Martins 2019 an individual employee one has very little bargaining power, that is the less power if one is negotiating alone than as a group. Therefore, for one to be heard joining a union is not un option. A union is a powerful tool which compels employers to accept demand posed by employees for better working conditions (Rao, 2010). Therefore, workers under a union can have a strong voice, which will compel the employer to act because as an employer you can not turn a blind eye to the collective voice. Therefore, employers will see it as an advantage to them if workers are not union members as they can do as they please since there are no binding contracts. Waste of time and resources Some employers regard collective bargaining as a waster of time and resources (Malconson, 1997). For example, if you look into the salary negotiations for civil servants in Zimbabwe by the National Joint Negotiation Council (NJNC). The workers unions may spend even spend a week on negotiations. They may spend days without a resolution whilst expenses like hotel accommodation and other related expenses are encountered. Moreso, these negotiators are supposed to be at work and therefore production is compromised with these endless discussions. Too much intervention by the government. Collective bargaining should be carried out voluntarily, freely and in good faith. The parties involved should be free to engage in negotiations and there must be no interference from authorities in the decision to do so (1LO, 1949). However, in the Zimbabwean situation, government intervention exacerbates the organisations to see no value in collective bargaining and no need for trade unions. For example, in the negotiation for conditions of service for civil 2|Page servants. The government is in control such that trade unions become just a facilitative mechanism in the negotiations (Sibanda, 1999). The government has a final say on the conditions which force the unions to take or leave the offer. Moreso, if the government fail to reach a consensus with the employees, they impose the ‘no work- no pay principle’. Therefore, intimidating workers and breaching the rule that employees have a freedom to bargain. Such incidences encourage or force employers to see no value in collective bargaining, therefore strive to remain union free. No respect for collective bargain rules by government According to the ILO, 2010 ‘no threats should be used during the process of negotiation. Such rules and regulations concerning collective bargaining in Zimbabwe are crushed to the ground. For example, the leader for health and Doctors unions was once abducted and tortured so that he is silenced towards addressing worker’s concerns. Such actions by the government lead to employers seeing no value to trade union membership. Affect wage dispersion and pay differences Collective bargaining is said to affect wage dispersion in systems with no organisations setting salary independency. Wage dispersion is the smallest average among workers who are covered by sectorial bargaining. The lower dispersion in wages associated with sectorial bargaining impact reflects lower returns education, seniority and potential experience for workers covered by collective agreements (Denk, Rycx and Terraz :2019). Moreover, collective bargaining led to higher wages but at the same time leading to high unemployment levels as organisations may not afford pay levels. In addition to higher unaffordable levels collective bargaining has a tendency of bunching and minimising wage differentials among different grades in an organisation (Malconson: 1997). For example, in the civil service in Zimbabwe, the salary gap between someone with a diploma and a degree is just too thin. This led to low morale, and reduces performance of employees which in turn had an adverse effect on productivity (Acemoglu and Pischke: 1999). Therefore, with such happening’s employers see no value in employees being members of trade unions. 3|Page Too rigid and lead to frustrations. Collective bargaining may fail to accommodate the individual needs for smaller organisations. This is characterised by bunching salaries for both large or small organisations together by using the concept of ‘lowest common denominator’. Some small organisations can not sustain the salaries pegged through collective agreement. (Aidt and Tzannatos: 2008). This in turn lead to low productivity, high labour turnover as the organisation may not have the capacity to pay the agreed salary scales. (International organisation of employers:2009). Collective bargaining may be too rigid and very slow to change in this dynamic ever-changing environment. This is encompassed by failing to accommodate basic requirements of the today business. This led to less importance and need to many employers. Although there are a number of reasons which necessitates employers to view collective bargain as of less value. The process of collective bargaining and membership of trade unions is also valuable for the following reasons:i) Manufacture consent ii) Protection of both parties iii) Standardise working conditions iv) Clear communication v) Reduce discrimination vi) Sense of security vii) Provision of collective goods. Reduce discrimination There are situations where employers may discriminate basing on gender, sexual orientation, religion, race any many more. According to Bender, Heywood and Kidd .2017 the duty of a trade union through collective bargaining to ensure or coerce management in an organisation to desist from such practices but to give employees fair treatment at all times. With the existence of trade unions, labour related matters and decisions by management are closely monitored, which has the positive effect of minimising discrimination in the workplace (Ouali: 2013). Therefore, in this case collective bargaining and trade union membership is very important and it can not be avoided at all cost. 4|Page Sense of security This is sole purpose for union membership. The belief by employees is that unions can secure protection from unemployment and ill health. In some situations, trade unions may help employees in getting the retirements benefits and even go to an extent of coercing employers to invest in the welfare of employees (Industrial relations, 2007). Trade unions and collective bargaining plays an important role in the protection of employees, so they are very valuable as they protect both parties, that’s is employer and employee. Settlement through consensus and dialogue. Collective bargaining had the advantage of settling issues through negotiations and agreements. IF collective bargaining is eliminated, confrontations and misunderstandings may emanate between employers and employees (Shrestha. 2010). This therefore give a clear picture that collective bargaining is a necessary evil in organisations which cannot be overlooked. Clear communication and efficiency Collective bargaining ensures a two-way communication between the two concerned parties. By so doing the correct message is delivered to the right people on time and is clearly understood. This helps in creating and maintaining positive long-term relationships and reduce misunderstandings (Askenazy and Forth, 2016). Moreso, work efficiency can be achieved in a peaceful atmosphere. The union goals will blend well with organisation goals so that the main objective of the organisation is achieved. If relations are good between employer and employees, management will always be open to negotiations (Freeman, 1988). Therefore, this clearly elucidates the value placed by unions and collective bargaining in an organisation. Standardise working conditions Collective bargaining and trade unions may promote uniform wages or salaries. These eliminate wage competition factors, leading to management being weakened to resist the existence of unions. This may be on the pretext that union wages may be lower than those offered under single-employer bargaining (Blanchflower and Freeman, 1992). Therefore, the existence of collective bargaining and trade unions is justified. 5|Page Protection of both employer and employee The primary objective of collective bargaining is to protect the interests of both the employee and the employer in the employment relationship (Laroche, 2016). Therefore, both parties should embrace the value of trade unions and collective bargaining in the workplace. Provision of collective goods. This can encourage employers to accept collective bargaining because several types of collective goods can be noted, depending on the structure of collective bargains (Windolf, 1989). In conclusion, employers may view collective bargaining and trade unions as valueless but in actual fact they are more protective to the employer than the employee. Therefore, both the employer and employee are benefiting somehow through unions and collective bargaining. References Acemoglu, D. and J. Pischke (1999), “The structure of wages and investment in general training”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 107/3, pp. 539-572. Aidt, T. and Z. Tzannatos (2008), “Trade unions, collective bargaining and macroeconomic performance: a review”, Industrial Relations Journal, Vol. 39/4, pp. 258-295. Askenazy, P. and J. Forth (2016), “Work Organisation and Human Resource Management: Blanchflower, D. and R. Freeman (1993), “Did the Thatcher Reforms Change British Labour Performance?”, NBER Freeman, R. (1988), “Union density and economic performance: An analysis of U.S. Garnero, A., F. Rycx and I. Terraz (2019), “Productivity and wage effects of firm-level collective agreements: Evidence from Belgian linked panel data”, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 223, OECD Publishing, Paris. Hijzen, A. and P. Martins (2016), “No extension without representation? Evidence from a natural experiment in collective bargaining”, IZA Discussion Paper, No. 10204. ILO Convention concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize,1948 (No.87) , Article 2. 6|Page ILO Convention concerning the Application of the Principles of the Right to Organize and to Bargain Collectively, 1949 (No.98) Article 1(1). ILO: World of work report, 2010. International Labour Organization (1996-2021) Tools and resources for business on collective bargaining. International Organisation of Employees (2009), Bureau for Employer’ Activities. Laroche, P. (2016), “A Meta-Analysis of the Union-Job Satisfaction Relationship”, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 54/4, pp. 709-741 Malcomson, J. (1997), “Contracts, hold-up, and labour markets”, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 35/4, pp. 1916-1957. Ouali, N. (2013), Racism and discrimination at work: a challenge for European trade unions. Rao, P.S.2010. Human Resource Management (Text and case). Ist Ed. Himalaya Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. Mumbari, India. Sibanda, A.E. (1991) Workers’ Collective Bargaining and Tripartism in the formulation of Employment Policies in Tanzania, Zambi and Zimbabwe: An introduction to comparative Labour. Discussion Paper Series 8; Zimbabwe Institute of Development Studies. Windmuller, JP and A Gladstone. 1984. Employers’ Associations and Industrial Relations. Oxford: Clarendon. 7|Page