Dunphy, Sinead (2011) What type of dispute resolution systems are being used in the workplace? Undergraduate thesis, Dublin, National College of Ireland.
PDF (Bachelor of Arts)
Download (1MB) | Preview
PURPOSE: The objectives of this dissertation are: (1) Identify what type of dispute resolution systems are being used in the workplace (focus on Irish workplaces) (2) Identify levels of satisfaction using three metrics: Efficiency, equity and voice (3) Identify differences-if any- between the dispute systems in unionised and non unionised workplaces. Traditional dispute systems can be described as a system whereby “traditionally, and most frequently, employees peruse employment related claims against employers through litigation either at the state or federal level” (Mahoney and Klass, 2007). In contrast to these traditional dispute systems non-unionised workplaces began to resolve disputes using non adversarial systems. These became known as alternative dispute resolution (ADR) systems. ADR systems are less structured than the traditional systems and, according to Mahoney and Klass (2007), can be implemented when “non union employers are free to unilaterally design their ADR system. Given this flexibility, these systems and their implementation often vary widely across-and even within-organisations (Mahoney and Klass, 2007).
METHOD: To carry out my quantitative research I will survey various organisations by way of confidential questionnaire (see appendix A). Furthermore, to add a qualitative method of research, I will investigate dispute resolution systems in the workplace, by means of case studies. For this research I have conducted two case studies, one in a unionised workplace, and the second in a non-unionised workplace.
SCOPE: During the course of my research I have reviewed the most up to date literature on dispute resolution systems by leaders in the field. Including: Budd & Colvin’s 2008 paper: Improved metrics for workplace dispute resolution procedures: efficiency, equity and voice. This paper develops a metric for comparing and developing dispute resolution systems focusing on (1) Efficiency (2) Equity and (3) Voice, as standards. Efficiency is the effective, profit maximizing use of scarce resources and it captures concerns with productivity competitiveness and economic prosperity. Equity entails fairness in both the distribution of economic rewards and the administration of employment policies. Voice is the ability of employees to have meaningful input into workplace decisions both individually and collectively.
RESULTS: I have analysed the results in three ways. First the total population surveyed. Second the unionised workplaces surveyed. And third the non-unionised workplaces surveyed. I then compared and contrasted all results the results against each other. In addition to this I have analysed two case studies one from a unionised workplace and another from a non-unionised workplace. I also compared and contrasted these results against each other.
CONCLUSION: In comparison to union procedures, non union grievance procedures tend to score higher o efficiency and lower on equity and voice. The favouring of efficiency is seen most strongly in open-door policies that provide little protection of equity or voice (Budd and Colvin, 2008).
|Item Type:||Thesis (Undergraduate)|
|Subjects:||H Social Sciences > HD Industries. Land use. Labor > HD28 Management. Industrial Management > Conflict Resolution|
|Divisions:||School of Business > BA (Honours) in Human Resource Management|
|Depositing User:||SINEAD CORCORAN|
|Date Deposited:||11 Nov 2011 15:43|
|Last Modified:||27 Apr 2012 09:13|
Actions (login required)