GSBS6042 Employment Relations : Organizational Decision Making Process

Most future managers will either have an opportunity to work on an overseas assignment or will work with colleagues from another country. Having a greater understanding of employment relations in these countries may improve manager effectiveness. The purpose of this assessment is to critically examine employment relations research as it relates to your home country and another country of relevance to you. Select your home country and a country in which you are likely to work in the future, or a country from which you are likely to have co-workers.

 

 

Review the research literature and media articles on employment relations in these two countries. Compare and contrast contemporary employment relations practices in these two countries with examples of employment related practices. Discuss the sources of these issues with reference to theory.

Your analysis should demonstrate a clear understanding of the relevant academic literature. There is no minimum or maximum number of articles that you should read or include, but as a rough guide, a thorough analysis.

Introduction

Globalization has resulted in extending employment relation across borders, which has created concrete business development and a prodigious competition among large scale organizations (Godard, 2014). Globalization has been found to accentuate differences among coordinated market economies andliberal market economies, and at the same time create trajectorial changes specifically for LMEs. Taking convergence concept as the primary focus, this report will discuss the employment relation between Australia (home country) and India (host country) and identify issues that need to be addressed for better relation in future.

With the progress of time, development of tourism industry and information technology industry between the two nations has created a huge demand of talented workforce. According to Pocock et al., (2013), liberal market economy is comprised of competitive market arrangements with collective bargaining at the firm level. However, Neesham and Cox, (2017) pointed out that culture and society has become the most common hindrance for Indian employees while working in Australia. On the contrary, Inversi et al., (2017) highlighted that Indian employees are eager to work in Australia because of higher exchange rates, which in turn helps them in higher earnings. Therefore, it can be said that even through there are individuality issues, still employment relation is feasible by firms through limiting resource consumption and talent acquisition through limited wages (Bosmans et al., 2016).

Theme 1: Contemporary Employment Relations Practices between Australia and India

Employment Relation can be considered as the legal link between the employers and employees under certain working condition. According to Hannan and Hannan, (2017), the minimum wage rate of Australian organizations is $18 per hour. While considering the example of Telstra in Australia, the employees get minimum wage of $18 per hour. The employers cannot even undercut the minimum wage rate of the employees, even if the employees are willing to receive minimum wage rate. On the other hand, Labour.gov.in, (2017) opined that minimum wage rate of Indian organization is INR 513 per day. The employers of Telstra in India are liable to pay at least 513 per day to their employees. However, the legal authority is not much concerned about the situation, when vulnerable employees want to work for the employers at a wage rate lower than the minimum wage rate.

According to Fair Work Ombudsman, (2017), Fair Work Act of Australia has made a boundary for the working hours of the employees in Australian organizations. No adult workers in Australia are required to work more than 40 hours in a week. Moreover, the employers of Telstra in Australia are not allowed to force the employees to work more than 40 hours in a week. On the other hand, Koti and Janaki, (2016) opined that Fair Work Act of India has made working limits for the employees of Indian organizations. In India, no adult workers are required to work more than 48 hour in a week. Moreover, the employers of Telstra in India have set 48 hours of working for its employees.

According to French et al., (2014), National Employment Standard of Australia suggests that every employee of an organization has right to get at least 30 paid leaves. Annual leave are actually accumulated from the 1^st day of employment, even of the employees are in probation period. Therefore, the employers of Telstra in Australia are liable to provide 30 paid leaves to the employees. On the other hand, Reddy, (2016) opined that National Employment Standard of India suggests that every employee of an organization is liable to get at least 27 paid leaves. Therefore, the employers of Telstra in India are liable to provide 27 paid leaves to the employees. It can be found that the numbers of paid leave are quite less in India than in Australia.

The process of collective bargaining and the freedom of trade union are quite responsible for marinating the effective employment relation in an organization. There are significant differences among different countries regarding the collective bargaining process and employment relation. According to Fairbrother, (2015), Australian organizations allow enough freedom to the trade unions and staff representatives towards negotiating the interests of the employees with their employers. Moreover, the employers of Telstra in Australia use decentralized approach in collective bargaining process. Moreover, the collective bargaining process is completely regulated by International Labor Organization (ILO). Therefore, the employees of Telstra are quite flexible and open towards negotiating their interest level with the employers with the help of trade union or staff representatives. On the other hand, Mahmood, (2016) opined that Indian organizations do not much allow the trade union towards negotiating the matter of prerogative such as promotions, redundancy and transfers. Therefore, the employees of Telstra in India get less scope in bargaining their issues with the management.

Disciplinary action is the process, which deals with the job related behavior and code of conduct, which does not meet the expected and communicated performance standard. The intension behind such disciplinary actions is to rectify the behavior of the employees and provide them with the opportunity to improve their behavior and performance. According to Nesheim and Smith, (2015), the employers of Australia mostly create non-threatening working environment. Moreover, they use counseling process as the disciplinary action for rectifying the behavior of the employees and provide them advice specifying specific actions for improving their performance. Therefore, the employees of Telstra in Australia face non-threatening disciplinary actions for rectifying their behavior. On the other hand, Adascalitei et al., (2015) opined that the working culture of Indian organizations are highly strict and the employers uses warning letter and even immediate suspension as their disciplinary actions. Therefore, the employees of Telstra in India face strict disciplinary actions in their workplace.

According to Charlesworth and Macdonald, (2015), Australian organizations are less likely to pay higher wage to the female employees. Moreover, Australian has the largest gender pay gap, where the female employees are always likely to receive less salary than those of male employees. In the year 2015, the estimated gender pay gap in Australia was around 26%. Therefore, the female employees of Telstra in Australia get less salary than the male employees. On the other hand, Reddy, (2016) opined that India has also gender pay gaps between the male and females employees. However, Indian organization has already improved the gender pay gaps, where the female employees have started to receive almost equal salary as compared to male employees. Therefore, the female employees of Telstra in India are less likely to face gender pay gaps.

According to French et al., (2014), there is no direct national and state wise industrial relation legislation for employee participation in the Australia. However, the Industrial Relation Act of Australia allows the works committee to facilitate state-based enterprise bargaining. Moreover, such work committee in Telstra can get the scope to participate in organizational decision making process. On the other hand, Lafferty and Malik, (2015) opined that the Industrial Relation of India does not even provide much freedom to the staff representatives towards participating in all kinds of organizational decision making process. Therefore, the employees of Telstra get less scope in participating in organizational decision making process and proving their ideas in organizational progress.

Theme 2: Employee Relation Issues between Australia and India

The employees being shifted from Australia to India can face huge issues related to conflict management. In case of Australian organizations, the employees get ample opportunities to raise their voice and issues for getting any resolution through the help of trade union. Moreover, the Australian organizations allow enough freedom to the trade union or staff representatives towards raising the employee concern to the management and getting immediate resolution. The Strategic Choice Theory invented by Kochan, Katz and McKersie suggests the involvement trade union and staff representatives in resolving the issues of the employees. As per Godard, (2014), strategic choice theory suggest for decentralized bargaining power of the employees through trade unions. Therefore, such theory has largely contributed in the employment relation of Australia. However, India follows orthodox industrial relation, in which the employees get less scope to raise their voice through trade unions towards conflict management. Furthermore, while considering the shifting of any manager from Australia to India, the manager will also face issues in handling the employee conflict without the corporation of the trade unions.

While an employee or manager will be going to Indian Organization from Australian Organization, they will be facing in issues in getting and preparing the wage and leave policy. In case of employees shifting from Australia to India, their minimum wage rate and paid leaves will be reduced in India. Furthermore, a manager shifting from Australia to India will be facing issues in preparing the payroll with different compensation structure and working hours of the employees. Furthermore, the employees will also face the issues of long working hours, as the working hours in Australia is 40 hours/week, whereas, in India the working hours is 48 hours/week. The numbers of paid leaves are also less in India as compared to Australia. Therefore, the employees will facing highly pressurized, which can create issues in employment relation issues. While assessing the System Theory of John Dunlop, it has been found that the working hours and wage structure of the employees should be fixed based on the environmental condition and distribution level of the employees (Inversi et al., 2017). However, this theory has been perfectly implemented on Australian organization, but less implemented on Indian Organization.

The employees shifted from Australia to India will also face the issues of disciplinary management. The employees from Australia are mostly habituated with non-threatening disciplinary process, where the managers mostly use counseling process for rectifying the behavior of the employees. In such situation, the employees will feel de-motivated and threatened in the orthodox and strict disciplinary management process, where the managers are more likely to provide warning letter for rectifying the employee behavior (Neesham & Cox, 2017). Furthermore, while considering a manager shifted from Australia to India, he will also be facing in coping up with strict employment relation system and dealing with the employees in strict way.

Australian employees will also be facing issues of lack of Participation and Commitment in organizational success, while they will be shifted in India. In Australia, the employees are habituated with employment relation that is cooperative, harmonious and have equal distribution of power. The employers also value the ideas of the employees in organizational progress. Therefore, in Australia the employees are highly participative and committed in organizational success. As per the Scientific Management Theory of F.W.Taylor, the employment relation should be harmonious and the managers should develop each person to the greatest of their capabilities through allowing them in decision making process (Nesheim & Smith, 2015). Therefore, it can be said that Scientific Management Theory has largely contributed in the employment relation of Australia. However, the employment relation of India does not necessarily follow Scientific Management Theory. The managers being shifted to India from Australia can also face lack of employee participation and commitment and complexity in making organizational decision in non-participatory employment relation.

Recommendation

Indian organizations should highly value for the cultural differences of the employees coming from Australia. Moreover, the migrant employees or managers should get suitable working arrangement as per their working patterns. Furthermore, the managers of the Indian organizations should set the leave policies by considering the cultural values of the employees.

The employers of Indian organizations should consider the ideas of the employees in organizational progress. In this way, the employees coming from Australia would get high level of value in their workplace, which can improve the participation and commitment level of the employees.

Indian organizations should provide adequate freedom to the trade union and staff representatives towards better managing the employee conflicts. On the other hand, the employees of Indian organizations should get much freedom towards raising their voice and issues to the management for immediately resolving those issues. This kind of employment relation will be suitable for the Australian employees.

Conclusion

While concluding the study, it can be said that employment relation is highly dependent on Industrial legislations and corporate governance. While comparing the employment relation of Australia and India, it has been seen that Australian employees get better salary package than the Indian employees. The Australian employees are more likely to face wage, working hours and leave policy disputes, while they are shifted to Indian organizations. On the other hand, Australian organizations allow more freedom to the trade unions for conflict management than those of Indian organizations.

References

Adascalitei, D., Khatiwada, S., Malo, M. Á., & Morano, C. P. (2015). Employment protection and collective bargaining during the Great Recession: A comprehensive review of international evidence. Revista de Economía Laboral., 12(1), 50-87.

Bosmans, K., Hardonk, S., De Cuyper, N., & Vanroelen, C. (2016). Explaining the relation between precarious employment and mental well-being. A qualitative study among temporary agency workers. Work, 53(2), 249-264.

Charlesworth, S., & Macdonald, F. (2015). Women, work and industrial relations in Australia in 2014. Journal of Industrial Relations, 57(3), 366-382.

Fair Work Ombudsman. (2017). Fair Work Ombudsman. Retrieved 15 September 2017, from https://www.fairwork.gov.au/how-we-will-help/templates-and-guides/fact-sheets/minimum-workplace-entitlements/maximum-weekly-hours

Fairbrother, P. (2015). Rethinking trade unionism: Union renewal as transition. The Economic and Labour Relations Review, 26(4), 561-576.

French, B., Boyle, M. V., & Muurlink, O. (2014). Workplace Bullying in Australia: The Fair Work Act and its impact. New Zealand Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(2), 69-81.

Godard, J. (2014). The psychologisation of employment relations?. Human Resource Management Journal, 24(1), 1-18.

Hannan, E., & Hannan, E. (2017). Minimum wage rise ‘devastating’. Theaustralian.com.au. Retrieved 15 September 2017, from https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/industrial-relations/minimum-wage-to-be-lifted-by-33-per-cent-to-1829-an-hour/news-story/

Inversi, C., Inversi, C., Buckley, L. A., Buckley, L. A., Dundon, T., & Dundon, T. (2017). An analytical framework for employment regulation: investigating the regulatory space. Employee Relations, 39(3), 291-307.

Koti, J., & Janaki, D. (2016). ILO, WTO & Indian industrial relations. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 51(3), 371-386.

Labour.gov.in. (2017). Labour.gov.in. Retrieved 15 September 2017, from https://labour.gov.in/gazette-notification

Lafferty, G., & Malik, A. (2015). Editorial commentary: Employment relations in today's India. International Journal of Employment Studies, 23(1), 3.

Mahmood, Z. (2016). Trade unions, politics & reform in India. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 51(4), 531-550.

Neesham, C., & Cox, J. W. (2017, January). Employment as a Human Relation: Revisiting Human Value and Radical Needs. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2017, No. 1, p. 12005). Academy of Management.

Nesheim, T., & Smith, J. (2015). Knowledge sharing in projects: does employment arrangement matter?. Personnel Review, 44(2), 255-269.

Pocock, B., Charlesworth, S., & Chapman, J. (2013). Work-family and work-life pressures in Australia: advancing gender equality in “good times”?. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 33(9/10), 594-612.

Reddy, D. S. (2016). Work without labor: Consumption and the imagination of work futures in India. Ephemera, 16(3), 21.