7HR01 Strategic employment relations

Question 1 (AC 1.1)

Employment Relations Perspectives and Their Influence on People Professionals

Introduction

Employment relations refer to the interactions between employers, employees, trade unions
and regulatory bodies and determine workplace policies and managerial authorities. Three
dominant perspectives, unitarist, pluralist, and radical offer different frameworks for
understanding these dynamics. This essay provides an overview of these perspectives,
discusses practical implications of these perspectives and critically evaluates the approach
followed by my organisation and its effects on people professionals.

The Unitarist Perspective

Unitaristview of the organisation treats the organisation as an entity where management

and employees have common vision and goals. The conflict is assumed to result from
miscommunication instead of from different interests. There is a tendency in this approach
to direct communication without a third party, instead of leading with leadership. In non-
unionised organisations, HR strategies under unitarism focus on motivation, talent
management, and aligning employees with corporate objectives (Simms, 2022). On the
other hand, limitations associated with this model are manifested. This argument is further
that it is understating the structural power imbalances, that they downplay the voice of the
employees and the so forth. As Ackers (2014) points out, it is unitaristic, in the sense that it
takes employees to be always naturally bound to managerial interests, to ignore grievances
inside the workplace. One way that can lead to dissatisfaction and disengagement and
ultimately result in retention are suppression of dissent.

The Pluralist Perspective

According to the pluralist perspective there are multiple interest groups both between
management and those employees of the organisations. It therefore accepts that conflict in
the workplace is inevitable and must be handled through structured negotiation which may
involve the collective bargaining and trade unions. Following this model, organisations
make efforts to mitigate power asymmetries in favour a formal dispute resolution process
(Thomas and Turnbull, 2024).
Pluralism helps give fair wages and working conditions in unionised environments,
through dialogue between workers and employers. HR professionals are important role
players as in negotiating agreements, to comply and still in conflict resolution. However,
pluralism also has challenges. Adversarial negotiations between employer and unions
slows down decision making and leads to errors in the negotiation process. However,
Simms (2022) states that while pluralist systems make the system fair, they can stifle
flexibility in the organisation.

The Radical Perspective

Radical perspective based in Marxist theory understands the employment relations are
rather radical and inherently conflict based as power is unequally distributed. The piece
argues that employers continually seek to exploit labour, therefore the imperative for
strong representation by workers (through unions and activism) is required (Ackers, 2014).
In radical employment relations, collective action is given the premium, and labor
protections and systemic changes for combatting workplace inequities are given the lens.

In sectors with active labor movements, workers can use strikes and bargaining power to
seek better conditions, and this was understood as perspective. Radical model is effective
at raising awareness to workplace inequality, however, its creation also creates an
antagonistic relationship between employees and management, such that collaboration is
not feasible. Thomas and Turnbull (2024) note that although radicalism sheds light on
labour exploitation, there are fewer cooperative solutions for workplace harmony.

Employment Relations Approach in My Organisation

As far as organisation I belong to, wherein I work as a multinational technology company,

we operate in unitarist manner – which means it promotes collaboration, communication of
problems and tasks and performance driven engagement. Absence of trade union
representation and active labour representation at workplace motivates the conflict
management within the workplace which mainly happens through the interventions of
HRs, leadership programs and employee recognition initiatives. This model shifts the focus
of people who are working in HR towards the centre of the conflict resolution, talent
management and engagement strategy. There are internal surveys and open door policies to
encourage feedback provided by employees. However, the absence of formal structures of
bargaining raises doubts whether workers interests do get adequately represented. Simms
(2022) suggests that unitarist organisations might offer up an illusion of inclusivity in the
service of continuing engendering managerial authority and restricting workers’
negotiation power.

Critical Evaluation of the Unitarist Approach

However, the unitarist model has its advantages and its disadvantages. Without relevant
representation, employees may not have means to assert salaries, workplace conditions and
job security and security. Unrealistic expectation and dissatisfaction can arise from the
assumption that employees are with management when the cases include wage disparity or
heavy workload (Ackers, 2014). An important drawback is excessive dependence of
managerial discretion. In unitarist organisations, where decision making should be shared,
employees still live under autocratic systems with HR acting as a mediator instead of being
true about workers. As they state in Thomas and Turnbull (2024), in that case even in non
unionised situations structured employee representation such as advisory panels can
enhance workplace democracy without the rigidities of the unionised system. Hybrid
employment relations approach including pluralism oriented elements may be a good way
to mitigate these challenges. Structuring the dialogue so that employees can provide
feedback through recognised forums, going for transparent policies for remuneration, and
putting in place participatory decision making framework could make workplace fairer.
Simms (2022) also states that organisations that combine some authority authority with
structured employee input exercise higher levels of engagement and lower turnover.

Conclusion

These theories provide different insights about workplace dynamics, managerial control
and the employee representation. There are three approaches to conflict resolution and
power distribution according to the unitarist, pluralist and radical perspectives. The model
my organisation is based on is a unitarist model with focus on leadership lead engagement
and direct communication. This approach is efficient, but it has downside regarding
employee voice and bargaining power. HR can adopt fair policies or not, onides
professionals get involved to ensure people policies are fair. Elements of pluralism, such as
structured employee representation, could be integrated into the workplace democracy
making organisational stability in the longer run a certainty.

Question 2 (AC 2.2)

The Impact of the Labour Market and Organisational Strategy on Employment

Relations Management

Introduction

The external pressures, in particular labour market conditions and organisational strategic
priorities, do shape employment relations strategies. How businesses manage the
workforce dynamics, employee engagement and industrial relations is influenced by global
economic shift, technological advancement as well as their employee expectations.
Employment relations must be balanced based on efficiency, fairness and sustainability,
and this must be done by HR professionals. The aim of this paper is to investigate the
management of employment relations under the influences of current labour market trends
and organisational strategies.

Labour Market Influence on Employment Relations

Talent availability, bargaining and workforce policies are related to labour market
conditions. For industries that have skills shortages, retention strategies such as career
development programmes and competitive compensation need to be put in place by
organisations. According to Malik (2022), companies in tight labour market concentrate on
employee wellbeing and engagement to decrease turnover and maintain performance. The
firms can invest to make strategic human resource management to increase job satisfaction
and long term retention when demand for skilled workers is high.

On the one hand, in an oversupply of labour market, employers have more control over
employment terms compared to the plausible of the market. However, too much cost
cutting, cutting wages, benefits etc. can lead to frustration and industrial disputes.
However, Stor (2024) cautions that although there may be good market conditions for
employers, they need to display fair employment practises to avoid excess turnover and
poor productivity. Precarious work is now part of work relations, including short term
contracts and gig jobs. In such arrangements, workers enjoy limited form of job security as
intervention by HR is required to ensure compliance with labour regulations and fair
treatment for the workers.

Like the labour market, trade unions and collective bargaining evolve as well. In working
life this involves collective agreements with agreed on employment terms, as for example
in sectors with strong union membership. Nevertheless, as many industries have witnessed
a decrease in unionisation, employment relations have been increasingly shifted towards
direct direct employer-employee engagement. According to Hirst et al. (2023),
organisations are more likely to rely on employee feedback mechanisms and incentive
based on performance to preserve stability. Although these approaches are flexible, any
such approaches must be done with care to not undermine worker representation or
fairness.

Organisational Strategy and Employment Relations

The policies of workforce management and employment relations are shaped by an

organisation’s strategic priorities. Cost leaders companies emphasis on efficiency, lean
workforce model and cost containment making them to dissension between employer and
employee. Stor (2024) discerns that while cost-cutting is good for profitability, it is also
likely to be counterproductive in case the costly of employee engagement not
counterbalanced with fairness in employment. On the other hand, in case of firms
following differentiation strategy, investment in the realm of talent retention, workplace
culture and employee satisfaction takes place. These are organisations that are based on
collaborative employment relations and where HR professionals agree on policies to
promote motivation and well-being.

In particular, employment relations are further influenced by technology driven strategies.

Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and new digital platforms are reshaping the structures
of work and skill requirements. As explained by Malik (2022), technology increases
efficiency, but it also requires the strategic workforce planning to overcome the fears of
displacement of jobs. To adapt to the new roles, HR professionals need to implement some
reskilling programmes and career transition support for their employees to ensure that the
workforce remains stable.
Globalisation introduces another dimension of employment relation complexity, especially
on multinational corporations which have to respond to different regulatory environments.
Companies must develop employment relations strategies that are consistent with different
sets of labour laws, cultural expectations and industry standards. As elaborated by Hirst et
al. (2023), multinational firms should be able to formulate flexible employment relations
strategies combining the worldwide corporate policies with specific activities of the
country where business is run. If they are not manages well these challenges may lead to
reputational risks and compliance issues that will impacted workforce stability negatively.

Interaction Between Labour Market Conditions and Organisational Strategy

Significant problems exist for employment relations in relation to the interplay between
labour market conditions and organisational strategy. Engagement programmes, career
development, competitive compensation are some things that become top priority for
businesses in highly competitive business industries to retain talent. Companies adjust
selectively to labour market conditions: they can put a premium on flexibility and
efficiency of costs when conditions help them, but are required to strike a balance between
workforce morale and engagement for productivity.

Changing expectations of the employees towards both work life balance, diversity and
corporate social responsibility, also complement employment relations strategies. Stor
(2024) mentions that if organisations don’t pay attention to these expectations, they risk
higher turnover and lower commitment from their employees. Given the high degree of
dynamism of labour markets, employment relations need to be embedded into the wider
corporate strategies in order to align the HR policies with both the interests of the
organisation and the interests and well being of the workforce.

Conclusion

Labour market conditions and organisational strategic goals, interact in determining the
employment relations strategies of an organisation. In tight labour markets, organisations
adopt employee centric policies to attract and keep the talent while surplus labour
conditions provide more room for managerial control. Yet this does not mean that market
conditions can be dismissed as unimportant to fair and sustainable workforce management.
However, employment relations are shaped by organisational strategies such as cost
leadership, differentiation and digital transformation in terms of HR priorities and
workforce structures. With globalisation, technological change and shifts in worker
expectations, HR professionals in businesses must come up with employment relations
strategies that will balance efficiency and fairness for the sake of long term stability.

Question 3 (AC 3.4)

Strategies to Improve Employee Engagement and Their Impact on Organisational

Performance

Introduction

Employees’ engagement is a key for organisation’s success as it determines the amount of

productivity, intellectual ‘weelthy’ and workplace morale. These employees are more
committed, motivated and satisfied and their performance and business outcomes are
better. Today, organisations are finding ways to enhance employee experience as well as
long term growth of the organisation in terms of manpower. This paper presents two
different means of improving engagement, career development opportunities and the use of
flexible work arrangements, which are then assessed against organisational performance
through quantifiable measures.

Career Development and Learning Opportunities

The best strategy to improve employee engagement is in the investment in career

development and continuous learning. People who see opportunities for rising in the
organisation will remain committed and thus reduce turnover rate and increase the
satisfaction of their job. As mentioned in Stor (2024), professional development initiatives
including training programmes, mentorship, leadership pathways all play a direct role on
employee retention and organisational performance. If employees know where they are
headed, their motivation is enhanced to do their best and productivity and innovation
increase.

Structured learning and development (L&D) programmes provide support for the
acquisition of new skills by employees, required by the organisation to change and adapt to
needs. Based on his argument, Malik (2022) suggests that strategic human resource
management (SHRM) practises that combine employee development with business
objectives produce a culture of engagement and performance excellence. Organisations
that are proactive in helping employees’ upward progression through promotion to internal
potential and upskilling initiatives have a great work experience especially when they’re
good at valuing employees and getting them involved in their responsibilities.

Some key performance indicators with which to measure the impact of career development
initiatives on engagement are a number of factors. Employee satisfaction surveys, retention
rate, and internal promotion rates are some parameters which indicate the effectiveness of
career development practises in engaging employees effectively. In addition, the success of
the training programs can be ascertained by performance of the metrics like productivity
improvement, innovation rates, and skill proficiency. Organisations that record and rate
participation in professional development activities can alter their L&D strategies to pull in
line with the needs of the workforce.

Flexible Work Arrangements

A second important strategy to boost engagement of employees is the adoption of flexible

work arrangements. Today, employees increasingly desire work life balance and
organisations that can provide that tend to be more engaged and more productive. Effective
engagement tool is flexible work model, like remote work option, hybrid schedule,
compressed workweek, etc. Simms (2022) highlights that ‘job autonomy’ and ‘work life
integration’ had high correlations to engagement with flexibility a definite factor in a
contributing to reducing burnout and increasing job satisfaction.

Flexible work arrangements have benefits for employees but also in organisational
performance. As such, Hirst et al. (2023) suggest that organisations that implement work
structures that entitle employees to be adaptive have lower absenteeism, are more efficient
and have higher talent retention. In other words, employees who can personalise their
schedules to suit their needs will usually be more focused and deliver higher quality work.
Furthermore, organisations that welcome flexibility will be more appealing to a diverse
mix of bodies – working parents, disabled workers, international talent – all of which
raises innovation and inclusivity to a higher level.
Engagement surveys, productivity reports, and polar trends of absenteeism will help in the
measurement of the effectiveness of flexible work policies. This will allow organisations to
assess whether flexibility leads to higher reported levels of job satisfaction and lower stress
levels by employees. In addition to this, metrics including employee retention rate,
workload efficiency as well as project completion times serve as quantitative evidence of
the impact that flexible arrangements have on the whole performance. Thomas and
Turnbull (2024) suggest that organisations which constantly assess the performance of
remote and hybrid work policies using data based insights are able to optimise engagement
strategies and continue to be efficient in business.

Evaluating the Impact of Engagement Strategies on Organisational Performance

It is evident that career development initiatives as well as flexible work arrangements have
a major impact on organisational performance through increasing motivation and
commitment of a workforce. These strategies can be gauged by the use of both qualitative
and quantitative metrics.

Since the individuals who have the feeling they are worth something and that someone
cares about their professional development are less likely to search for other opportunities,
employee retention is enhanced by career development initiatives. The results suggest
successful engagement because of increased learning programme participation and internal
promotion rates. Malik (2022), identified that organisations that align skills development to
strategic business and objectives are more efficient and more innovative, and have a
conclusive link between engagement and performance.

Organisation performance is affected by flexible work arrangements, which reduce

turnover and improve employee well being. Lower absenteeism and improved work-life
balance lead to increased focus and productivity. It is in recognition of this that Hirst et al.
(2023) point out that organisations that monitor engagement through digital collaboration
tools, time management assessments and real time feedback can adjust their flexibility
polices to continuously improve their supports for staff engagement.

Both strategies can also be measured by financial performance indicators, which include
cost savings due to a lowered turnover, increased revenue from innovation driven
employees, and operational efficiency through having a well engaged workforce. This is
supported by Ackers (2014) who stresses that organisations with high levels of
engagement outperform competitors in profitability and result suggests the alignment of
engagement strategies with the long term business sustainability needs.

Justification for the Recommended Strategies

Because they may be used in a variety of industries and are known to positively impact
workforce satisfaction, career development and flexible work arrangements are justified as
primary engagement strategies. On the long-term aspect, Career development helps with
'long term engagement' though professional growth and on the other hand, flexibility helps
with ‘immediate job satisfaction’ and ‘work life balance’. Together, these strategies form a
holistic employee engagement strategy, that takes the employee aspirations as well as the
personal well being into consideration.

From the competitive point of view, an organisation that makes an investment in employee
growth and well being has a strategic advantage when it comes to the issue of attracting
and retaining top talent. In an era of evolving employment relations towards more
employee centric models Thomas and Turnbull (2024) argues that organisations will
become more loyal to their workforce if they focus on those that engage their employees
through benevolent benefits. One other thing that Simms (2022) adds is that engaged
employees assist in the creation of a positive organisational culture, which offers to sustain
a positive reputation of the business with regard to its brand and its ability to remain
competitive in the market.

Integration of career development and flexible work policies in the employment relations
strategies enables the organisations to sustain workforce commitment towards innovation
and high performance. These approaches are in line with the demands of the labour market
at present and the new generation of employees and businesses are setting themselves up
for long term success in an emerging workplace environment.

Conclusion

It is enhancing the employee engagement through the career development initiatives and
flexible work arrangements that make an environment of the committed and motivated
workforce. Making career development available to employees helps increase job
satisfaction and organisational loyalty, flexible work helps both to increase work life
balance and reduce burn out. Through measuring retention rates, satisfaction surveys, and
productivity metrics, operational efficiencies, and any other metrics stated, these strategies
can be measured and figured out the impact. However, organisations that adopt and
continue to refine these strategies with measurable insights will perform better, have
market leading purposes, and ensure long term workforce stability.

Question 4 (AC 4.1)

Collective Bargaining in Unionised and Non-Unionised Environments

Introduction

Collective bargaining is one of the key mechanisms in the employment relations which
enable the negotiations on wages and working condition and disputes resolution between
employers and employees. There are different processes for an organisation that is
unionised or not unionised. Formal collective bargaining agreements are negotiated
between trade unions and employers on the one hand and, in the absence of unions and
according to established norms of conduct, the other hand are represented by other
mechanisms currently prevalent, such as individual bargaining, employee consultation. In
this essay two forms of collective bargaining are analysed: union led and direct employee
engagement, and the impact on pay determination and dispute resolution is evaluated. It
also discusses how these approaches apply to my organisation.

Unionised Collective Bargaining

Collective bargaining is between employers and recognised trade unions, which have been
recognised by employers as representatives of workers in a natural environment. The
formal negotiation leads to legally binding agreements (wages, benefits, and working
conditions) to be established. Through collective strength, trade unions represent workers
to negotiate in better terms, like fair salaries and employment protection. According to
Simms (2022), in industries where workers’ individual bargaining power is low, union
leadership collective bargaining is vital in enabling the negotiation of fair play as well as
resolving grievances at work.

It matters a great deal what collective bargaining does to the determination of pay. Wages
are generally set by procedural negotiations rather than in a unilateral manner and wages
are transparent in the progress. Stor (2024) asserts that organisations with strong union
presence provide better wage and stable employment conditions than those with no unions.
In addition, collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) usually incorporate job security
representation of working hours and overtime pay dealing with employee interests.

In unionised workplaces, procedures for such dispute resolution are established in CBAs.
Grievance mechanisms, arbitration and mediation make sure that industrial conflicts are
taking on a systematic approach decreasing the probability of industrial action. According
to Thomas and Turnbull (2024), collective bargaining frameworks that are well
functioning promote industrial stability by enabling employees to deal with issues in an
informal way rather than strikes or protests. Nevertheless, being caught in such a structure
now and then can create challenges by prolonging the negotiations and creating conflicts
between employers and unions, eventually affecting business operations.

Non-Unionised Collective Bargaining: Direct Employee Engagement

In non-unionised environments, collective bargaining occurs in different forms to such as

direct employee involving through consultation forums, works councils, and performance
based pay structures. Organisations do not have formal union representation, and
organisation’s employees work without negotiations with a management on salaries and
solve workplace disputes. According to Malik (2022), non-unionised bargaining models
define flexibility, and thus allow for tailor-made employment terms to the business needs
and market conditions.

In non-union, settings pay determination is usually made on the basis of individual

performance and market benchmarks, not collective agreements. Performance based pay
schemes, employee recognition programs and structured salary reviews guide employers in
attracting and retaining a talent. Thus, Hirst et al. (2023) suggest that although in this
approach, productivity is incentivised, income disparities may also persist due to
individuals bargaining about pay individually as opposed to as a group. Since there are no
union led negotiations, how much an employees salary increases or the benefits package he
gets are based on the employer’s discretion and may not be what employees expected.

In non unionised places of work, the mechanism of dispute resolution is dependent on

internal HR policies, employee feedback mechanisms and open door communication
strategies. To manage conflicts, organisations put in place grievance procedures, employee
assistance programs and workplace mediation services. An approach of this nature
possesses more managerial control, according to Ackers (2014), but may not have the
collective strength necessary to tackle the systemic problems of workplace, leaving
employees with little bargaining power when there is a dispute over what and how to be
paid or when the organisation intends to make changes to the way it is conducted.
Moreover, employees in non unionised settings may be apprehensive with regard to raising
issues without the blanket of a union, which may result in vexed issues being unresolved.

Application to My Organisation

As my organisation functions in the non unionised environment, we did not have the
option to rely on the direct employee engagement strategies for the pay determination and
the dispute resolution. Salaries are set by performance evaluations, comparative market
evaluations, and individual negotiations and not collectively agreed upon. The HR and
managers are supposed to encourage employees to discuss salary expectations with them,
and if the undergo performance metrics and industry standards, changes are made
accordingly. This system therefore has the advantage of blockchain allowing for rewards
on merit but may lead to pay inequity as the negotiation from one employee to another
varies.

The organisation has espoused structured procedures of grievance, an employee feedback

survey and an open door policy for employees to give issues to management directly.
While fostering the deployment of a culture of transparency, this approach is devoid of
collective bargaining power like in the unionised workplaces and employees can possibly
have limited influence on the broader organisational policies. Malik (2022) adds that
organisations that do not have formal union representation need to make sure that
employee engagement mechanisms are strong enough to address the workplace issues.
While offering its advantages in flexibility and efficiency, non unionised approach may not
always offer employees the same level of protection and the same level of negotiating
power as unionised collective bargaining. It might be possible to strengthen an
organisation’s ability to address workforce concerns through introducing additional
employee representation mechanisms such as works councils or advisory committees,
while retaining the benefits of a non unionised structure.

Critical Evaluation of the Two Approaches

Collective bargaining has different advantages and disadvantages for unionised and non
unionised models. But with collective bargaining, union, the pay negotiations are
structured, job security and the existence of a formalised dispute resolution process – but
sometimes with rigid policies and protracted disputes. This forms of employee engagement
leads to weaker collective bargaining power but allows for more flexible functional climate
and individualised salary structure.

However, at the same time, organisations are faced with the requirement to have a flexible
workforce, but also, in fairness, the need to ensure fair employment practises. Thomas and
Turnbull (2024) maintain that unions provide strong worker protections and modern
employment relations need bargaining models for which flexible HR strategies are
necessary along with structured negotiation frameworks. An effective way to tackle these
perceived problems associated with non unionised setup could be through integration of
formal employee representation mechanisms within a non-unionised framework.

Conclusion

A fundamental role is accorded to collective bargaining within employment relations as

respect to wage structures as well as conflict resolution processes. With unionised
Collective Bargaining, fair wages and job security through structured agreements are
insured, but without unionisation, there is flexibility but not much employee bargaining
power on the table. My employer is none unionised and we pay directly the employee
engaging in or taking up employment and settling conflict between employees directly.
This approach is efficient and flexible, but not as strong on protecting for workers as
unionised bargaining. Employment relation strategies must be evaluated continually by
organisations with the engagement mechanisms being used for fair pay practises and
effective dispute resolution. There is a balance between achieving better performance in
terms of organisational performance while satisfying workforce satisfaction using balanced
approach with employee representation within a flexible platform.
References

Ackers, P., 2014. Rethinking the employment relationship: a neo-pluralist critique of

British industrial relations orthodoxy. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 25(18), pp.2608-2625.

Hirst, G., Curtis, S., Nielsen, I., Smyth, R., Newman, A. and Xiao, N., 2023. Refugee
recruitment and workplace integration: An opportunity for human resource
management scholarship and impact. Human Resource Management
Journal, 33(4), pp.783-805.

Malik, A. ed., 2022. Strategic human resource management and employment relations: An
international perspective. Springer Nature.

Simms, M., 2022. Employment Relations, Unionisation and the Future of Human Resource
Management. In The Emerald Handbook of Work, Workplaces and Disruptive
Issues in HRM (pp. 29-47). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Stor, M., 2024. Employee retention and company performance results: the mediating role
of HRM outcomes in foreign subsidiaries of Central European MNCs. Employee
Relations: The International Journal, 46(7), pp.1422-1445.

Thomas, H. and Turnbull, P., 2024. The value of industrial relations research (ers):
Activism inside and outside the UK Academy. Industrial Relations: A Journal of
Economy and Society.