Partnership at work: Comparison and evaluation

Anglia Polytechnic University, Ashcroft International Business School
Business Studies Field, Chelmsford, 30 January 2004
Semester 1, 2003/2004

Partnership at work: Comparison and evaluation

by

Sebastian Meyer

Table of Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Advantages and disadvantages of particular groups  1

2.1. Employer 1
2.1.1. Advantages  1
2.1.2. Disadvantages  2

2.2. Employees  2
2.2.1. Advantages  2
2.2.2. Disadvantages  3

2.3. Trade Unions  4
2.3.1. Advantages  4
2.3.2. Disadvantages  4

3. Evaluation of the prospects for success  5

3.1. Introduction  5
3.1.1. Example 1: Scottish Power 5
3.1.2. Example 2: Tesco  5
3.1.3. Example 3: United Distillers & Vintners  6

4. Comparison with previous approaches 6

4.1. Unitarism – Partnership at work 6

4.2. Pluralism – Partnership at work 7

Bibliography 11

Appendix

1. Introduction

Partnership at work is the relationship between employers, employees and their representatives. The existing assignment deals with this approach which was created in 2001 of the TUC (Trade Unions Congress) Partnership Institute to help organisations to improve their relations to trade unions. It should illustrate the advantages and disadvantages of each particular group and evaluate the prospects for success of this approach. The last element of the structure deals with a comparison of partnership at work to previous approaches.

2. Advantages and disadvantages of particular groups

2.1. Employer

2.1.1. Advantages

First of all the possible partnership advantages for an employer should be assessed at this point. The main advantage can be described as a planning security. Due to long-term pay deals with duration of at least 2 years unions offer organisations the opportunity to concentrate on other matters (IDS Studies Partnership Agreement Oct. 1998 p. 8). In this way it is for the concerning company also possible to invest, for example, in additional buildings or fleet of vehicles because there will be no increase in salary over the considered period of time. The enhancement of productivity is mentioned as the second advantage for employers. To achieve higher productivity staff has to be trained better and act more flexible. When the employees are acquainted with this behaviour more responsibility can be delegated to them which were previously carried out by supervisors (Hollinshead 2003 p. 118). A changing process in the working time is another benefit. At first sight this is not an obvious advantage for employer. Nevertheless the working time and especially the working year can be reorganised into a form which is more appropriate to respond faster to customer needs (Hollinshead 2003 p. 118).

2.1.2. Disadvantages

Besides the already cited advantages employers have additionally to reckon with disadvantages of partnership at work. For many employers the most important disadvantage of this approach is the increasing influence of unions in decision making on internal matters (Hollinshead 2003 p. 118). Claydon takes an additional step and argues that partnership may represent another ‘union Trojan horse’ (Hollinshead 2003 p. 119). Due to this rising influence employers are worried about the lack of union’s managerial skills (Salamon 2000 p. 230). It is obvious that unskilled participants in business negotiations do not have the necessary resources and knowledge to decide which objective is the most important for the company and their employees and which can be neglected. Furthermore the protection against unfair dismissal is stated at this point as second disadvantage for employers in the TUC partnership approach. In the case of ‘Blue Circle Cement’ the company offered their staff maximum employment security (IDS Studies Partnership Agreement Oct. 1998 p. 5). As a countermove the employees commit themselves to acquire additional skills and to develop flexibility. Generally speaking this is a suitable attempt but at the beginning of an economic downward trend with decreasing demand companies produce less. Therefore it is inevitable to set workforce free to cut costs and do not grant protection against unfair dismissal in an inappropriate manner.

2.2. Employees

2.2.1. Advantages

[...]