The Pluralist framework of industrial Relations in the UK has been replaced with HR management Discuss - Essay Example

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AND HR MANAGEMENT of The Pluralist Framework of IR in the UK has been Replaced with HR Management Prior to the industrial revolution, the relationship between employers and employees were not well- defined and was often dictated by the employer. However, in the wake of industrial revolution, the employer- employee relationship became well- defined and terms clearly stated. Over the years, this relationship has gradually improved and become highly developed in response to conditions and terms of employment. Among scholars and practitioners of labour issues, there have been arguments regarding industrial relations (IR) and Human Resources (HR) management. The debates have been centred on whether pluralist framework of IR has been replaced with HR management or not. According to Salmon (2000), IR is a multidisciplinary field that studies the relationship of employment in both employment situations and in the unionized workforce. On the other hand, HR management refers to an organizational function that concentrates on recruitment, management, and providing direction to employees in a given organization (Armstrong, 2006). The pluralist framework is a system of managing industrial/ employee relations, which determines the employment relationship and resolves conflict through the institution of trade union recognition and the process of collective bargaining at enterprise, industry, and national level. On the other hand, HR management is a strategic and integrated approach to the management of people. HR management is about employees’ management. Recent evidence about HRM application suggests that there is a decline in the collective aspects of the employment relationship in favour of individualism. HRM is the practical version of unitarist management theory in the 21st century. It is undisputable that the Pluralist framework of IR in the UK has been replaced with HR management. In confirming the validity of this proposition, the following themes will be examined and how they have undermined pluralism and replaced it with HRM: economic, political, social, and technological factors. To begin with economic factors contributed in a major way towards HRM replacing the IR. According to Silva (1999), the major economic objective of IR was to ensure efficient production of goods and services while at the same time determine adequate employment terms and conditions in the interest of the society, employees, and employers through consensus brought about by negotiations (8). In addition, it aimed at ensuring the highest level of productivity among the employees by ensuring maximum utilization of time. To achieve this, IR often sought to avoid disputes among all labour stakeholders and ensured that disputes were settled and consensus reached. The logic behind this was economic since scarcity of resources including time is a major challenge to productivity. It is evidently clear that IR is anchored on the pluralist outlook in the sense that it covers not only the employer- employee relationship but also the relationship between unions and employers, and between both employer and employees, and the state through collective relations (Silva, 1999, p. 10). All these are aimed at enhancing productivity in order to boost the economic aspect of the organization in the long- run. However, over the years, organizations have realized that their productivity depends in great part on the wellbeing of the employees within the organization and less on external factors (Mckeena and Beech 2008, 22). Most of these organizations have adopted HRM while gradually abandoning IR; they have shifted their attention towards management of human resources rather than on collective relations management. Wilson (2009) argues that IR often defeat the economic sense of any given organization in the long-run because the productivity of individual employee is given meagre consideration (55). He further argues that HRM makes more economic sense by ensuring that there is efficient production of goods and services. This is because HRM practices and policies such as recruitment, training, team- building, motivation, and appraisal among others are geared towards boosting employees’ productivity, which eventually leads to efficient production of goods and resources (48). In addition, social factors have greatly contributed to the IR being replaced by HR management. Essentially, employment not only seeks to provide profits to the owners of means of production but also act as a means of providing social support to the society. According to Ackers and Wilkinson (2003), IR also strived at providing social protection; for instance through social security, safety and prohibition of vices such as child labour (11). Its greater focus was on the collective aspect rather than on a specific aspect of individual relations of employer and employee. This has not changed with HRM since HRM also is concerned with the social protection. However, the notable difference lies in the fact that HRM addresses social protection from an individual perspective. HRM as a practice is based on the belief that if an individual employee is comfortable and his/ her wellbeing is improving, then the society’s wellbeing in general will improve since an individual is part of the society (Armstrong, 2006, 26). Monetary and non- monetary rewards, communication, and participatory approach of HRM ensure that an individual is secure therefore guaranteeing social security as well. The HRM unitarist outlook sees the commonalities of interest between the organization, employees, and the society. It thus concentrates on ensuring the benefit of the firm to these individual units of the society (Silva, 1997, 19). This contrasts to the IR pluralist outlook, which views conflict potential in the relationship of these individual units. It therefore focuses on achieving a harmonious relationship by engaging all these groups. It is difficult in achieving this harmony at a single instance that made HRM replace IR, in addition to the increasing importance of individual persons over the collective group (Silva 1997, 22). Moreover, the replacement of IR by HR management was in a significant way because of political factors. Firms occur within a society that is political. The political environment may either harm or develop the prospects of firms in any given state. This is because political factors are critical to a country’s stability, security, and prosperity. Concerning labour relations, political factors are influential majorly on wage systems, and working terms and conditions. Mckeena and Beech (2008), acknowledge that governments and governmental agencies play an important role in determining the wage system of a country and the laws and regulations governing employment. IR thrived in the past because most of the firms and companies were owned by the state or the state had a significant share. However, in recent years, private business entities have been in the rise and liberalization and privatization have become dominant in across the world. This has led to the reduced role of the government in the labour market, and increased importance of private sector in the market (Farnham 2010, 13). As a result, IR role has also diminished being replaced by the HR management. In the UK, most firms are privately- owned and there is HRM has gained prominence since companies are aiming to succeed in the competitive market. Besides, trade unionism has declined because most private firms offer better pay terms and working conditions higher than the one recommended by the government hence reduced tensions. The last theme to be considered in relation to HRM replacing IR is the technological factors. According to Ackers and Wilkinson (2003), technological advancements have greatly contributed to the transition from IR to HRM. Due to technological advancements in nearly all spheres of human life, the need for human labour has been altered or eliminated in some cases (67). Developments in technology have resulted to productivity to be centred on a single employee rather than collective responsibility. This has called for focus on productivity and efficiency of a single employee; a situation that diminishes the role of IR which is mostly focused on a group of employees, employers and trade unions. HRM policies aim at enhancing the wellbeing and eventual productivity of an individual employee (Wilson, 2009, 101). Most UK firms if not all have embraced technology in their production resulting to increased need for HRM thus replacing IR. In conclusion, from the discussion it is evidently clear that in the UK, the pluralist framework of IR has been replaced with HR management, a unitarist framework. It is evident that in the past especially during the industrial age, IR was the most dominant approach to employment issues. However, this has changed in the recent years especially in the advent of technological development. As has been noted, numerous factors have contributed to the increasing dominance of HRM at the expense of IR. In the UK, just like in many parts of the world, the need for economic growth has increased particularly with companies desire to increase their production in order to boost their revenues. In addition, social protection has been one of the prioritized aspects in the UK society; HRM has proved to address it better than IR since UK society is a capitalistic society and the emphasis is mostly on the individual. The rise of private corporations who are focused on profits and more so on the efficiency of their employees has lifted the status of HRM at the expense of IR. Individualization of HRM, which focuses on employer- employee relationship, rather than the representatives of employees are what constitute the main difference between HRM and IR. It is also worth pointing out that empirical evidences have shown that the force behind HRM introduction seems to have little relationship with IR. Instead, emergence of HRM was majorly because of the pursuit companies made to gain competitive advantage in the market by providing quality goods and services, competitive pricing, and innovation that is linked to high productivity. Finally, it is agreeable that even though IR is not extinct in the UK, HRM has replaced IR in most sectors and is the most predominant. Bibliography Ackers, P., and Wilkinson, A 2003, Understanding Work and Employment: Industrial Relations in Transition. Cambridge, MA: Oxford University Press Armstrong, M 2006, A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice (10th ed.), London: Kogan Page. Farnham, D 2010, Human Resource Management and its External Contexts, CIPD Publishers. Mckeena, E. and Beech, N, 2008, Human Resource Management: A Concise Analysis.2nd ed. London: FT Prentice Hall. Salamon, M, 2000, Industrial Relations: Theory and Practice. Prentice- Hall. Silva, S, 1999, Human Resource Management, IR and Achieving Management Objectives, Retrieved November 24, 2011 from http://www.ilo.org/public/english/dialogue/actemp/downloads/publications/srshrm.pdf. Silva, S, 1997, The Changing Focus of IR and Human Resource Management, Available: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/dialogue/actemp/downloads/publications/srshrm.pdf (Accessed: 2011, November 24). Wilson, P, 2009, Human Resource Development: Learning and Training for individuals and organizations.2nd ed. United Kingdom: Kogan Page Ltd. Read More