Search results

While our adversarial free (meaning minimal governmental interference) collective bargaining has been praised as a positive attribute of our labor‐management relations, it is hardly free and probably no longer even a positive attribute. This paper examines the process and explains how it has become limited to the point where the most crucial employment issues often no longer need to be bargained at all. Though the purpose of our labor laws was to resolve industrial strife through collective bargaining by balancing the power between employers and unions, our contemporary system can now often be characterized as limited, imbalanced, adversarial gamesmanship. Current research demonstrates the need for a more open and expanded bargaining agenda to meet the needs of both the changed workplace and the changed marketplace of today ‐ something the present process seems incapable of doing. Specific recommendations are offered to both management and labor which are derived from recent research.

To speak of collective bargaining as a collaborative process seems a contradiction. Since 1935 when collective bargaining was institutional‐ized in the Wagner Act, the process has assumed that the disputing par‐ties are enemies, competing for scarce resources with different objec‐tives. This article explains the implementation of a new theory of col‐lective bargaining which encourages truthfulness, candor, and the acknowledgement of shared goals and avoids the negative and self‐defeating power plays of the adversarial collective bargaining process. As a result of this process, grievances in the observed company declined from 40 per year under previous contracts, to 2 in 18 months under the current contract; anger and hostility have been nearly eliminated; and there is a real spirit of cooperation present in the plant.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the use of interest‐based bargaining as opposed to traditional adversarial bargaining when negotiating collective agreements in unionized libraries.

This paper explores existing theory, research and practice on the use of interest‐based bargaining in labor negotiations. It accomplishes this goal through a review of relevant literature and case studies, concentrating on practical application in a typical library labor environment. Two specific implementation models are described and the benefits and limitations of interest‐based bargaining are presented, supported by evidence from multiple examples.

Interest‐based bargaining offers significant benefits to organizations that adopt this approach when negotiating collective agreements, including improved working relationships between management and workers and longer term solutions to problems and issues. Library managers in unionized libraries could realize these benefits by implementing interest‐based bargaining strategies in coordination with a supportive union.

There is very little literature dealing with interest‐based bargaining in a library environment, so extrapolations from other industry examples have been used to illustrate the strengths of this approach.

Given the potential benefits of using collaborative negotiation approaches, and the increasing adoption rate in other labor industries including comparable public sector organizations, libraries have much to gain by investigating this option as either an alternative or an adjunct to traditional adversarial collective bargaining.

The paper presents a solid case for exploring the use of interest‐based bargaining in a library context.

Numerous management commentators have suggested that the 1980s have witnessed considerable change in employee relations at establishment level in Irish organizations. However, much of this analysis has been quite vague on the precise nature of such change. Employee relations management in Ireland has traditionally been associated with a strong collectivist, industrial relations emphasis. Attempts to evaluate the extent of change in management approaches to employee relations in the 1980s. In particular looks at issues such as developments in employment structure, flexibility and changing patterns of industrial conflict. Also considers the emergence of Human Resource Management (HRM) approaches in the Irish context.

In Britain, labor−management partnership has been the fulcrum of the Labor Government's employment relations programme since its election in 1997. The Involvement and Participation Association (IPA, 1997; website: http://www.partnership-at-work.com) − the influential employers’ organization − has been at the forefront of promoting labor−management partnership to improve productivity in UK firms through greater employee involvement and participation (see http://www.partnership-at-work.com). The Trades Union Congress (TUC; partnership institute website: http://www.partnership-institute.org.uk) and several of its constituent unions have also endorsed partnership with employers as a route to promote employee ‘voice’ at work, secure better bargaining outcomes and improve union membership levels and density (Undy, 2001). Union density in the UK private sector has declined from 19.9 per cent in autumn 1997 to 17.2 per cent in autumn 2005, while in the public sector it has declined from 60.9 per cent to 58.6 per cent over the same period of time (Grainger, 2006). Advocates of partnership argue that such arrangements deliver mutual gains to the parties involved, viz. higher productivity and profits for employers, better wages and higher employment security to workers and greater influence over management decisions for unions, which in turn help them to attract and recruit new members (e.g. Haynes & Allen, 2001; Deery & Iverson, 2005).

The authors provide a case study of a partnership agreement in the Tyneside maritime construction industry. They focus on the role of trade unions and the complex tensions that emerge between regional and local officials and workplace representatives. They argue that agreements can only be understood within the context of existing employee relations structures. Their conclusion suggests that the agreement had little impact on a “branch plant” of a national company and that it was often received with hostility and little commitment. As a consequence the partnership became a symbolic agreement with potential significance for external customers but no role in shaping workplace employee relations.

Considers the nature of Human Resource Management (HRM) in the Republic of Ireland. Identifies four variants of HRM in Ireland: “soft” HRM; neo‐pluralism; “hard” HRM; and traditional industrial relations. Then considers key areas of HRM policy choice and reviews alternative approaches to HRM practice in Irish organizations. Analyses the role of the specialist HRM function in Ireland using a HRM typology. Evaluates the evidence of change in HRM practice with a particular focus on key dimensions of change such as developments in employment forms and flexibility, the role of trade unions and the emergence of proactive approaches to HRM at establishment level.

The purpose is to review the effects of employee participation (EP) in decision-making, ownership and profit on job quality, worker well-being and productivity, and derive policy recommendations from the findings.

The authors summarise results of “declining labour power”, plus theoretical arguments and empirical evidence for the benefits of EP for job quality, satisfaction and productivity.

Worker well-being and job satisfaction are ignored unless they contribute directly to profitability. EP is needed to remedy this situation when employers have market power and unions are weak. The result can be a rise in both productivity and well-being.

The chief issue here is that there are data limitations, particularly on the well-being effects of participation.

Lots of encouraging examples in many countries need legislative help to multiply.

It is quite possible that there could be major implications for welfare and employment.

The authors make the case for public sector subsidies for employee buyouts and new cooperative start-ups, as well as legislation for works councils and profit sharing.

Considers the idea of linking decisions on business strategy, product market characteristics and personnel/human resource management policies. Initially explores some theoretical aspects of business strategy‐personnel policy linkages and then considers some empirical evidence from a survey of Irish organizations. While some of personnel literature suggests that organizations should adapt particular “best practice” modes in each personnel area, it is increasingly accepted that optimal personnel policy choice is linked to the unique characteristics of the individual organization. Consequently, argues that organizations need to achieve a fit between personnel policy choice and broader strategic considerations, particularly product market conditions and business strategy. However, the Irish survey evidence considered presents quite a mixed picture. While some organizations appear to be successfully aligning HR policies and business strategy this development does not seem widespread.