HRM 534 SU Arbitration & Research Priorities & Resources Discussion

User Generated

FY0626

Business Finance

HRM 534

Strayer University

HRM 534

Description

Two separate discussions:

Arbitration (Ch 10 and 11 attached)

Review the legalistic approach and problem-solving approach during the arbitration hearing process. Then, develop two approaches that an organization could use to make the typical arbitration procedure more effective than either of these approaches.

  • Review good faith bargaining.
  • Discuss the major advantages and major disadvantages of your approaches.
  • Provide your rationale for each approach. Research Priorities and Resources (Ch 22 attached)
  • Please respond to the following:
    • The course has covered a wide variety of talent management topics, and Chapter 22 highlights several ways to view the future of talent management. Review the talent management topics covered so far in this course. Prioritize five of these topics and locate one potential resource for each using the Strayer Library. For instance, for the topic of equity-based pay, you might select the Journal of Applied Corporate Finance as a resource to gain more data about this topic. List your five selected topics and resources, and provide a rationale as to why you selected these topics.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Copyright 2010. Pfeiffer. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law. CHAPTER 22 CRITICAL RESEARCH ISSUES IN TALENT MANAGEMENT Rob Silzer In general, research on talent management in organizations has been limited (see Gubman, 1998; Lawler, 2008; Lewis & Heckman, 2006), although much has been written about specific talent management components such as recruiting, selection, and performance management. Doing rigorous research in organizations is challenging because of the complexity of field research and the limited ability to hold some variables constant while others are studied. The field also lacks agreement on the appropriate type and level of outcome measures to use. Many of the previous chapters make suggestions for future research in specific areas of talent management. This chapter discusses the talent management areas that would benefit from further research investigation (see Table 22.1). Key Strategic Links At the beginning of this book, we identified the key strategic links in how talent management can be ingrained in a business organization. While business managers have generally developed strong links among the business environment, the business strategy, and business results, this process in the past has often bypassed human resource (HR) and talent management systems. Business executives 767 EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY AN: 300763 ; Rob Silzer, Ben E. Dowell.; Strategy-Driven Talent Management : A Leadership Imperative Account: strayer.main.eds-live 768 Strategy-Driven Talent Management Table 22.1. Talent Management Areas That Need Further Research Strategic issues Key strategic links Organizational talent strategy and talent models Talent as a driver of business strategy Programs and processes Talent model for individuals Talent programs and practices Talent pools and differential investment Talent decisions Outcomes and cultural issues Talent measures and outcomes Organizational acceptance Talent expertise Talent management talent and human resource professionals are increasingly likely to see talent management as a core business process that has a major role to play in linking business strategy to business results. However, the links between these business elements are not yet well developed, and many of them are relatively weak (see Figure 22.1). A critical area for research is investigating these links and identifying the factors that strengthen or weaken the links. We probably have better insight into the link between a talent strategy and talent programs and processes than for the other links in Figure 22.1. In this area, some HR and talent professionals are experienced and knowledgeable. But linking these at the front and back end with business practices is a relatively new field. For example, which changes in talent can directly result in strategic gains for the company? Key research questions are: • What is the most effective talent strategy for achieving a particular business strategy? What key factors are most important to consider when choosing a talent strategy (such as talent availability, business conditions, business strategy time frame, or others)? EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use Critical Research Issues in Talent Management 769 Figure 22.1. Strength of Key Strategic Talent Management Links Business Results Weak Weak Moderate Weak Strong Measurement of Progress Strategy-Driven Talent Management Processes Talent Strategy Business Strategy Business Environment Strong • How can we design the most efficient and effective talent programs and processes that have the greatest likelihood of achieving a talent strategy? • How do we measure the impact of those talent programs and practices on achieving the talent strategy, and if they are ineffective, what diagnostic process should we use to identify and fix the underlying problem? • How can we clearly understand the link between the success of talent programs and processes and the achievement of business results, achievement of the business strategy, and organizational success? What processes and conditions contribute to a stronger or weaker impact? What other variables (such as product development and technology) also contribute to these outcomes, and how can we identify the independent contribution of talent? EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use 770 Strategy-Driven Talent Management Organizational Talent Strategy and Talent Models There has been some discussion in the HR profession regarding talent strategies, but frequently this gets reduced to focusing on specific talent programs and processes rather than choosing a broad approach to talent. There needs to be a greater understanding of which broad talent strategies are most effective for specific business conditions and strategies. For example, Leslie W. Joyce (see Chapter 3) presents a buy, build, borrow, or bind model of talent strategies and discusses the benefits of each. How can we measure the effectiveness of each strategy, and when should an organization switch talent strategies? Can we identify a talent ROI (return on investment) for each strategy (given specific objectives and business conditions)? What impact do limited financial resources or limited talent resources in a geographic location have on talent strategy choice? Many organizations have a broad cultural bias for selection or development approaches. What business conditions favor one approach over the other? What are the benefits and drawbacks of having a strong preference for one over the other, and how can we achieve the right balance? Implementing and measuring the impact of various talent strategies are also areas of interest. How do we operationalize specific talent strategies in the most efficient and effective way? Some companies have talent strategies or talent brands that are well known. Do these talent brand strategies actually provide some competitive advantage by attracting the desired talent, or do they just provide marketing publicity? Most of the evidence here is self-report survey data. How do we more objectively measure the outcomes of a broad talent strategy and determine if the strategy is successful? If the organization is not achieving its business goals, how do we know whether to change the talent strategy or just the specific programs? In thinking about broad talent management models (see Chapter 1 by Rob Silzer and Ben E. Dowell and Chapter 2 by Marcia J. Avedon and Gillian Scholes), can we confirm various stages in the development of an effective talent management system? What evidence is there for the effectiveness of different talent management models? What aspects of these models actually provide the most sustainable competitive advantage? EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use Critical Research Issues in Talent Management 771 Key research questions are: • What talent strategies are most effective, under what conditions, and for which business objectives and strategies? • How can a talent strategy easily be converted into specific programs and processes that are effective and efficient? • Is there a single general model of talent management across companies, or does it vary for different companies and business conditions? Talent as a Driver of Business Strategy Many organizations now see their internal talent as a competitive advantage that is critically important for delivering on existing business strategies. However, only a few see their internal talent as a major influence on driving or determining future business strategies. How can organizations evaluate current talent and build new business strategies around them? For example, Capital One Financial leveraged its existing internal fungible talent to pursue new businesses beyond the credit card industry. Human Resources is now being encouraged to step up to these opportunities and take a leadership role in shaping, rather than just responding to, business strategies. In this regard, Human Resources should be contributing to the company’s strategic direction as much as finance and product development by leveraging current talent to identify new strategic directions. Key research questions are: • How can we identify the strategic opportunities that existing internal talent provides for the organization? • What are the talent characteristics and business conditions that can be combined to create new strategic opportunities? • What role can human resources take to exert influence on future business strategies? Talent Model for Individuals There has been a lot of emphasis on developing and implementing talent programs and processes, but there needs to be a greater understanding of the role of individual differences in EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use 772 Strategy-Driven Talent Management program effectiveness. For example, what types of individuals (based on personality, ability, and motivational differences) benefit most from specific development interventions and learning opportunities? What are the person versus treatment versus situation interactions? Why do some individuals respond better in certain situations and not in others? How can we better match an individual to an effective learning experience? What are the core components and limits of talent fungibility (the ability to perform a variety of functions)? Can we outline a talent model for individuals based on individual differences that identify key matches to the work situations and talent programs? How can an individual’s talent best be sustained or leveraged? What competencies or individual differences are foundational elements for other more complex skills and abilities? Key research questions are: • Can we develop a model of individual talent based on what we know about individual differences? • How do individual differences influence the effectiveness of talent programs and processes (for example, does age affect learning ability in a development experience)? • What are the core components of fungibility in an individual, and can we develop and nurture those characteristics in people? Talent Programs and Practices Designing and implementing talent systems, programs, and practices in an organization raises questions about: • How to choose programs • How to link them to the underlying strategies • How to design programs to reflect the situation and business conditions • How to implement and manage a program so it remains consistent with the original objectives • How to integrate various talent programs and processes First, we need research that identifies which programs and practices are most effective for specific purposes and conditions. EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use Critical Research Issues in Talent Management 773 For example, when is starting a campus recruiting program or an apprentice program a good talent choice? How is the choice driven by the underlying business strategy? How simple or comprehensive does the talent approach need to be? When would a straightforward recruiting program be sufficient over an approach that includes recruiting, development, compensation, and retention components? When is it better to invest in a selection strategy over a development strategy? Programs and processes may need to reflect the organizational culture, the business climate, and often the local geographic culture. How can they be designed to reflect these without losing program effectiveness? Which program aspects can vary, and which are essential to include? What is the necessary and sufficient level of design complexity to be effective? Implementation issues are often ignored after the program developers have moved on to another project. How can programs and processes be implemented to best meet the original objectives? What periodic talent program reviews or updating are needed to make sure the program continues to meet those objectives over time? How can the program be designed to minimize the administrative resources that are needed but still maximize the outcomes? Talent management integration is often cited as something that is important to achieve. What are the core characteristics of integration across talent programs and processes? Can we measure the degree of integration? Can we demonstrate that greater integration actually leads to more effective outcomes? How do we go about integrating existing programs, and what efforts bring the greatest payoff? Often talent strategies discuss specific programs and outcomes but often seem to skip over discussing the specific characteristics of the talent involved. For example, a talent strategy might be to buy talent from the outside at above-market compensation rates, but how does this differentially apply to different talent groups? Some groups or individuals are likely to be more responsive to compensation inducements than others (for example, customer service representatives versus medical researchers). What are the key talent differences that make them more or less responsive to different programs and processes? How does a program need to adapt to the specific talent group? EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use 774 Strategy-Driven Talent Management Key research questions are: • How can we make the best choices on which talent programs and processes to use to achieve specific business and talent strategies? • How can programs be adapted to reflect local norms, situational factors, and business conditions without losing effectiveness? • How can programs be managed over time to remain consistent with the original program objectives? • How important is it to integrate talent programs and practices, and how can that be efficiently done? • How much do individual or group talent differences affect the effectiveness of a program? Talent Pools and Differential Investment Currently there is great interest in the use of talent pools, such as high-potential talent, to identify and develop strategic talent. But we have little research on the effectiveness of talent pools and how they are identified and nurtured. How do we know which talent groups in an organization are critical to achieving strategic objectives? Can we demonstrate that certain characteristics, such as hard-to-replace talent, actually matter? Perhaps “rare and hard to imitate” talent (Barney, 2001) is only a competitive advantage for a certain period of time before a competitor leapfrogs over that advantage to reframe the competition and capture a different type of talent. How long is specialized talent sustainable as a competitive advantage? High-potential talent pools (see Chapter 5 by Rob Silzer and Allan H. Church) are so popular that in some organizations they seem to be an unquestioned talent program with little underlying thought and few clear objectives. What are the key characteristics of someone who is high potential? Can these characteristics be developed to increase a person’s likelihood that he is seen as a high potential? How can we measure the outcomes and benefits of this program beyond just comparing promotional rates (a confounded variable)? How early in an individual’s career can you identify her as a high-potential individual? EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use Critical Research Issues in Talent Management 775 How can we evaluate the usefulness of differential investment in talent? We should define and be able to measure the talent return on investment for a specific investment in talent. How should we make decisions on where to invest? What impact does differential investment have on the talent who get the resources and the other employees who don’t? What is the impact on organizational outcomes? The composition of talent pools also needs further study. Typically organizations annually look for the best high-potential candidates for a specific talent pool but give little thought to what mix of talent or what number of individuals is needed. What combination of talent (potential level, performance mix, career stage) should be identified to have a sustainable talent pool over time? What organizational resources should be included in the differential investment in talent? Are some investments (for example, compensation level, development experiences, or career advancement) more effective with certain individuals or at different career stages or in certain geographies? How much investment is sufficient? When does a particular investment provide diminishing returns? What is the appropriate level of talent investment to maximize returns? Key research questions are: • How do we accurately identify the critical, strategic talent pools? • What are the core characteristics of being high potential, and how early can they be identified in individuals? Can these characteristics be developed? • Can we measure the talent return on investment of differential investments in talent pools? What level and what type of investment is the most efficient and effective? • What is the ideal mix of talent in a talent pool in order to have sustainable talent? Talent Decisions In the past, decisions regarding talent typically have been based on personal observations and experience. Often the most senior person in the room made the final call about an individual. However, EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use 776 Strategy-Driven Talent Management we know that this type of decision making often has great potential for errors (Dawes, 1988; Hastie & Dawes, 2001; Tichy & Bennis, 2007). How can we build a decision-making process regarding talent that is data based and effective? Do we need to construct a talent decision-making science, as Boudreau and Ramstad (2007) have suggested, or can we improve the talent decisions by introducing objective decision-making techniques (Dawes, 1988; Hastie & Dawes, 2001) into the process? How can we improve the quality of each decision and also improve the overall decision-making process in the organization? What are the most important decision-making characteristics to include (such as making decisions based on objective data, getting others involved in the decisions, or focusing on the avoidance of typical decision errors)? Key research questions are: • How can we improve the quality and effectiveness of talent decisions? • Can well-known decision-making techniques significantly improve these decisions? • How important is it to first improve the quality and rigor of the talent data? • How easily can managers and leaders learn and adopt these techniques? • What outcome measures can we use to provide feedback to decision makers on the quality and effectiveness of their decisions? Talent Measures and Outcomes Most organizations now stick to basic talent metrics, such as turnover and time to fill a position, if they measure talent outcomes at all. These measures are very broad and may not be directly relevant to the specific talent programs and processes. There is emerging interest in developing more useful and precise talent metrics (see Chapter 12 by John C. Scott, Steven G. Rogelberg, and Brent W. Mattson). But what are the right outcome measures for talent management systems, programs, and practices? How do we measure achievement of program objectives, talent strategies, and business strategies? Most current measures are either subjective or based on very general information. Can we develop more rigorous, relevant, EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use Critical Research Issues in Talent Management 777 and objective measures that also parcel out the influence of other related factors such as business and economic conditions? What are those other influential factors? How can we accommodate the dynamic nature of many talent programs and processes and still get a sound outcome measure? The organizational level of the measure is also important. What are the complexities and limitations of measuring talent management effectiveness against broad organizational performance? What is the best organizational level to establish these metrics: organization-wide, business unit, department, work group, or specific talent group? Are some organizational performance criterion measures, such as profit margin, inappropriate to use because of the complex set of variables that can have an impact on them? How rigorous do the measures need to be? What measurement standards, such as reliability and validity, should we insist on following in developing these measures? What type of data and data analysis capabilities are needed to provide high-quality, objective talent data? At what point does a focus on data analysis interfere with sound judgment? How important is it to have a solid underlying model of talent management to guide the interpretation of the outcome results? How can outcome measures be most useful in guiding future talent decisions? Key research questions are: • What are the most useful and precise talent measures? • Can we develop outcome measures that are objective and rigorous but still useful? • At what levels in the organization should we measure talent outcomes and over what period of time? • Should we rely on objective data-based outcome results or should they be interpreted using an underlying model of organizational talent as a guide? Organizational Acceptance Several chapters have noted the need for a cultural mindset for talent (see Chapter 1 by Rob Silzer and Ben E. Dowell ) or a talent stewardship (see Chapter 2 by Marcia J. Avedon and Gillian Scholes) in order to have a highly effective talent management EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use 778 Strategy-Driven Talent Management system. Also mentioned is the importance of installing talent management as a core business practice (see Chapters 1 and 2 as well as Chapter 9 by Ben E. Dowell). These assume an organizationwide acceptance of talent management. This raises some important issues. What are the organizational readiness factors for gaining this broad acceptance? Are some organizations more ready than others? How critical is CEO support for establishing talent management as both a cultural mindset and a core business practice? Is CEO support necessary and sufficient? How do you introduce, communicate, and embed these organizational values? How do you maintain them over time? Do they require constant support and communication? What are the early signs that organizational acceptance is declining? Once accepted, what actions does an organization need to take to maintain acceptance? What is the impact of changing the allocation of resources to talent management? Key research questions are: • What are the key characteristics of a cultural mindset in practice? • How can an organization introduce this concept, and are some organizations more ready than others than others to accept it? • What factors, such as CEO support, are needed to embed a talent mindset in an organization? • How can talent management get accepted as a core business practice? Is CEO endorsement and active support enough? • How do you measure the impact of having a talent mindset in the organization? Talent Management Talent Over the years, HR professionals working in the area of talent have moved from being specialists in specific talent areas, such as staffing or training and development, to broader roles in management development and leadership development. More recently they have broadened their roles even further by working in organizational development or as an HR consultant to a business unit. Now some of them are being asked to step up to an even broader role as a talent director (or maybe in the future to chief talent EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use Critical Research Issues in Talent Management 779 officer) for a business unit. This requires knowledge (and preferably experience) in the full range of talent programs and processes but also an understanding of talent and business strategies and business in general. They will need to be partners with the senior business executive much as a chief financial officer is today. These broader roles require talent professionals to have both a broader and a deeper background, which raises several questions that HR will need to address. How can an HR professional gain this breadth and depth? What individual characteristics (skills, abilities, motivations) are needed to operate effectively as a chief talent officer? Will they need to gain line management experience to fully understand the connection between business strategy, talent management, and business performance? Key research questions are: • How can we fully describe this broader and deeper talent management role? • What skills, abilities, and motivations are needed to be effective in this critical role? • How early in their careers can we identify individuals with potential for these roles? • Should organizations develop a program for high-potential talent officers similar to ones found in finance, to build this critical talent pool? Conclusion A large number of questions regarding the effectiveness of talent management still need to be addressed. The most important priority may be to study how talent management efforts can be more directly linked to business strategies and outcomes. It is challenging to do nonsurvey-based research on talent management in organizations. But we need to find new ways to study these complex issues. Readers are encouraged to review Chapter 12 on managing and measuring the talent management function for a better understanding of talent management metrics. In addition, relevant research issues have also been identified in most of the other chapters. EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use 780 Strategy-Driven Talent Management References Barney, J. B. (2001). Is the resource–based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 41–56. Boudreau, J. W., & Ramstad, P. M. (2007). Beyond HR: The new science of human capital. Boston: Harvard Business School. Dawes, R. M. (1988). Rational choice in an uncertain world. Orlando, FL: Harcourt. Gubman, E. L. (1998). The talent solution: Aligning strategy and people to achieve extraordinary results. New York: McGraw-Hill. Hastie, R., & Dawes, R. M. (2001). Rational choice in an uncertain world: The psychology of judgement and decision making. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lawler III, E. E. (2008). Talent: Making people your competitive advantage. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Lewis, R. E., & Heckman, R. J. (2006). Talent management: A critical review. Human Resource Management Review, 16, 139–154. Tichy, N. M., & Bennis, W. G. (2007). Judgment: How winning leaders make great calls. New York: Penguin. EBSCOhost - printed on 9/1/2021 2:15 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use Employee and Labor Relations HRM 534 Labor and Employment Arbitration Topics • Development of labor arbitration • Elements of a typical arbitration proceeding • Comparison of arbitration and judicial proceedings • The arbitrator’s decision • Current issues affecting arbitration Arbitration Types • Grievance labor arbitration • Employment arbitration • Differences – Union presence – Arbitrator selection – Decision-making framework Development of Labor Arbitration • • • • Early years Executive Order 9017 National War Labor Board Steelworker’s Trilogy – Common Law of the Shop Elements of a Typical Arbitration Proceeding • Arbitrator sources • Ad hoc versus permanent arbitrators • Arbitrator profile Elements of a Typical Arbitration Proceeding, continued • • • • Decision to arbitrate Prehearing activities The arbitration hearing Post-hearing brief Comparison of Arbitration and Judicial Proceedings • Differences • Evidence • Railway and airline industries The Arbitrator’s Decision • Classic approach • Narrative storytelling approach • Decision-making guidelines – Witness credibility – Ambiguous language The Arbitrator’s Decision, continued • Decision-making guidelines, continued – Parole evidence rule – Intent of the parties – Past practice – Previous arbitrator decisions PROPERTIES On passing, 'Finish' button: On failing, 'Finish' button: Allow user to leave quiz: User may view slides after quiz: User may attempt quiz: Goes to Next Slide Goes to Next Slide After user has completed quiz At any time Unlimited times Current Issues Affecting Arbitration • Legal Jurisdiction • Equal Employment Opportunity Commission • National Labor Relations Board • Misco Decision Current Issues Affecting Arbitration, continued • Arbitration effectiveness • Arbitrator capabilities and ethics • Procedural problems – Time delay – Cost Current Issues Affecting Arbitration, continued • Employment arbitration • Arbitral dilemmas • Arbitral deficiencies Current Issues Affecting Arbitration, continued • Public policy implications – Proceedings may favor employer – Employees have burden of proof – Extenuating circumstances may not be considered PROPERTIES On passing, 'Finish' button: On failing, 'Finish' button: Allow user to leave quiz: User may view slides after quiz: User may attempt quiz: Goes to Next Slide Goes to Next Slide At any time At any time Unlimited times Summary • Development of labor arbitration • Elements of a typical arbitration proceeding • Comparison of arbitration and judicial proceedings • The arbitrator’s decision • Current issues affecting arbitration Slide # HRM 534_W9_P2: Employee and Labor Relations: Labor and Employment Arbitration Slide Title Slide Narration Slide 1 Introduction Welcome to Employee and Labor Relations. In this lesson we will discuss labor and employment arbitration. Slide 2 Topics Next slide. The following topics will be covered in this lesson: Development of labor arbitration, Elements of a typical arbitration proceeding, Comparison of arbitration and judicial proceedings, The arbitrator's decision, and Current issues affecting arbitration. Slide 3 Arbitration Types Next slide. We will cover two different types of arbitration in this lesson. Grievance labor arbitration involves the dispute-resolution procedures from the last step in the grievance process. Employment arbitration is initiated by the employer to resolve statutory claims over issues including employment discrimination and the application of company personnel policies. There are several important differences between these types of arbitration. Grievance labor arbitration only occurs in the presence of a labor union and in accordance with the grievance process outlined in the collective bargaining agreement. Employment arbitration is dictated by an employer to resolve disputes in a nonunion environment, or in a union environment over issues not covered by the labor agreement. Grievance labor arbitrators are usually very experienced in resolving disputes between management and unions. Employment arbitrators may be selected expressly because they have little experience in labor issues. Grievance labor arbitration decisions are governed by the framework created by the collective bargaining agreement. Employment arbitration is governed by applicable laws and company policies. Next slide. Slide 4 Development of Labor Arbitration Labor arbitration has existed in the United States since the Civil War, but was rarely used until World War Two. The arbitrator's decision was not binding on either management or the union, and either party was free to ignore the decision if they did not agree with it. Most collective bargaining agreements in the second half of the nineteenth century and the earlier part of the twentieth century were vaguely worded and gave arbitrators very little guidance. As a result, arbitrators tried to help unions and management reached a consensus decision that both would agree to. President Franklin Roosevelt issued Executive Order Nine Zero One Seven to hasten the resolution of labor disputes that might impact the war effort during World War Two. This Executive Order prohibited union strikes or management lockouts and created the National War Labor Board. The National War Labor Board consisted of twelve presidential appointees including four union representatives, four management representatives, and four representatives of the public. The National War Labor Board encouraged collective bargaining between management and unions, and helped resolve labor disputes over the terms of those agreements. Although the Board got involved in labor disputes when necessary, it encouraged management and unions to resolve their differences together even if this required mediation or arbitration. Arbitration was not legally binding on either party. The United States Supreme Court strengthened the role of a labor arbitrator with three decisions handed down in 1960. These decisions become known as the Steelworkers' Trilogy. One important point gave the arbitrator authority to determine the merits of a grievance and not the judicial system. The trilogy recognized that labor arbitrators have more expertise than most judges in interpreting the common law of the shop. The common law of the shop refers to the experiences and practices within a particular facility. Arbitrators have wide latitude in resolving labor disputes, and they have no obligation to explain their reasoning to the courts. Arbitrators were endorsed by the courts as the most qualified individuals to resolve grievances, as long as the arbitrator's decision is based on the language in the collective bargaining agreement. The Supreme Court still retains the authority to determine if the grievance should go to arbitration if one party claims that the collective bargaining agreement does not require arbitration on a particular subject. The court also ruled that responsibilities and obligations of the employer and the employees are not nullified by the expiration or termination of a labor agreement if the cause of the dispute arose while the labor agreement was in force. Slide 5 Elements of a Typical Arbitration Proceeding Next slide. When arbitration is necessary to resolve a labor dispute, arbitrators are typically chosen from one of three sources. The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service maintains a list of qualified arbitrators along with some biographical information about each individual. The Service notifies the arbitrator if he or she has been selected, and follows up to ensure that decisions are reached in a timely manner. The American Arbitration Association is a private nonprofit organization that provides lists of arbitrators in each region and supports the arbitration process with some administrative services. Arbitrators may also be chosen from lists maintained by one of the twenty-six state and local arbitration agencies. The largest of these agencies is the New York Employment Relations Board. The services offered by these agencies may vary widely. The Supreme Court believes that the best way to handle the arbitration process is through a method mutually agreed upon between the union and management. Ad hoc arbitrators are chosen on a case-by-case basis as the need arises, and are used in about seventy-four percent of all arbitration cases. Approximately five percent of collective bargaining agreements identify a permanent arbitrator to resolve all labor disputes while the collective bargaining contract is in force. Some labor agreements specify a fixed list of arbitrators, and the arbitrator for a particular dispute is selected from this list on a rotating basis. Permanent arbitrators are often able to resolve disputes more quickly, in part because they are usually more familiar with the intricacies of a particular situation. Ad hoc arbitrators are often more flexible when flexibility is important, and may be more knowledgeable on certain issues, even if they are less familiar with the parties involved. Arbitrators tend to be men older than fifty. They usually have a law degree or other graduate degree, and average more than fourteen years of arbitration experience. The background characteristics of a particular arbitrator might influence his or her decision on a case, and the backgrounds of potential arbitrators are usually of great importance to both sides when selecting an arbitrator. Research has indicated that most arbitrators base their decisions on the facts they have uncovered as part of the proceedings, and that they are not heavily influenced by their background characteristics. Slide 6 Elements of a Typical Arbitration Proceeding, continued Next slide. The union and management must weigh several factors when making the decision to arbitrate a particular dispute. These factors include the costs of arbitration in terms of both dollars and time, the likelihood of winning, the credibility of witnesses, and the strengths or weaknesses of their individual positions. The conflicting parties occasionally create a written brief for the arbitrator before the hearing. These written briefs provide background information on the conflict and give the arbitrator a good idea about the information that will be presented during the hearing. Prehearing stipulations are joint statements made by all conflicting parties agreeing to specified facts. Since both parties agree that these facts are correct, there is little need to spend much time on them during the arbitration hearing. The process of developing these prehearing stipulations occasionally helps the two sides to come to an agreement without going through with the arbitration hearing. The arbitration hearing itself is where representatives from union and management, or their legal representatives, present their sides to the arbitrator. The degree of legal formality at an arbitration hearing depends on the individual arbitrator and the nature of the representatives from each side. Hearings usually begin by introducing joint exhibits such as the collective bargaining agreement, any prehearing stipulations, and the written grievances and responses that have been prepared. As with formal legal proceedings, arbitration hearings typically contain opening statements, examination and cross-examination of witnesses, the introduction of evidence, and closing arguments. In some situations, both parties agree that a written transcript of the hearing should be prepared. A post-hearing brief is a written summation of the facts of the case, the applicable language in the collective bargaining agreement, arguments and counterarguments by each side, and the decision each side requests from the arbitrator. The use of post-hearing briefs has been increasing in recent years. The time it takes to prepare these briefs has extended the time necessary for the arbitrator to reach a decision. Slide 7 Comparison of Arbitration and Judicial Proceedings Next slide. There are several important ways that arbitration hearings are different from formal judicial proceedings. Witness testimony is not always taken under oath and transcripts are not always prepared. Arbitrators may subpoena witnesses, just as judges can, but arbitrators have less power to enforce a subpoena if the individual chooses not to attend the hearing. However, the absence of a subpoenaed witness may influence the arbitrator to rule in favor of the side that would have benefited by the testimony if it were provided. Courtroom judges are obligated to follow established legal principles. Arbitrators tend to rely on the common law of the shop when resolving disputes. Conflicting parties generally choose their arbitrator, while judges are assigned randomly by the court system. The decisions of an arbitrator are usually final, while most judicial decisions may be subject to appeal. Formal judicial proceedings usually have strict rules of evidence that apply to ensure the evidence is accurate and credible. Arbitrators are usually much more liberal regarding the types of evidence they will permit at a hearing. If the parties make settlement offers before the arbitration hearing, these settlement offers are not normally considered as evidence. The Railway Labor Act lays the groundwork for grievance arbitration in the railway and airline industries. This Act classifies disputes as either major or minor. Minor disputes involve differences in interpretation or application of the collective bargaining agreement. Major disputes involve conflicts that arise while a collective bargaining agreement is being negotiated. Only major disputes are legally permitted to serve as the basis for a labor strike. Slide 8 The Arbitrator's Decision Next slide. Arbitrators usually make their decisions within one or two months after the hearing is completed. These decisions are presented in writing to the conflicting parties. Some arbitrators write their decisions following the classic approach. The classic approach involves stating who the conflicting parties are, listing the issues, and stating the facts and pertinent provisions of the labor agreement. The arbitrator will summarize the positions of both sides, analyze the evidence, and explain the final decision. Other arbitrators used the narrative storytelling approach. This approach involves explaining all relevant events in chronological order. The conclusion to the narrative is the arbitrator's decision. Whichever approach is used, the final decision should demonstrate that the arbitrator fully understood all of the matters brought up in the hearing. This decision should also explain why the arbitrator arrived at the decision being described. Arbitrators usually try to draft their decisions to convince to both parties that all arguments were heard, that the decision-making process was fair and objective, and that the final decision makes sense. Most private-sector arbitration issues are final and binding, so the arbitrator's decision is very important to both parties. The decision is important both for the resolution of the particular case at hand as well as for the precedent that may be set, including the contribution to the common law of the shop. Arbitrators typically apply several guidelines when reaching their decisions. In most cases, the charging party has the burden of proof and must convince the arbitrator that their arguments are the correct ones. Assessing the credibility of witnesses is both difficult and important. The body language and behavior of a particular witness during the hearing can greatly influence the perceived credibility of that witness. Credibility can also be enhanced or destroyed if the testimony is inconsistent or appears to be selfserving. When the language in the collective bargaining agreement is clear arbitrators generally follow the language as it is written. When the contract language is not clear or ambiguous, the arbitrator has more latitude in reaching a decision and usually tries to determine the intent of the original contract negotiators. Arbitrators usually try to resolve ambiguity by considering the context of the entire labor agreement. Slide 9 The Arbitrator's Decision, continued Next slide. The parole evidence rule often influences which evidence arbitrators will permit in the hearing. This rule states that evidence should not try to change or contradict the written language within the labor agreement. Arbitrators often follow the guideline of the intent of the parties. This guideline leads arbitrators to evaluate what union and management labor negotiators had in mind when they negotiated the original labor agreement or engaged in actions that resulted in a grievance being filed. This intent can be proven in a number of ways. Intent can be proven through written proposals made during contract negotiations or other written notes that try to show the reasoning behind managerial decisions. Arbitrators, like judges, often prefer to make decisions that follow precedents that were set in the past. Arbitrators may apply precedents through the principle of past practice. The principle of past practice requires identifying identical situations that have occurred in the past in which a particular resolution was accepted by both parties. Managers are usually more concerned than union officials about these precedents because it is management that is typically involved in administering the labor agreement on a regular basis. Arbitrators will typically consider the results of previous arbitration hearings if those hearings covered similar situations. Next slide. Slide 10 Check Your Understanding Slide 11 Current Issues Affecting Arbitration There are a variety of legal or procedural issues that affect modern labor relations arbitration. The first issue is legal jurisdiction. Legal jurisdiction is the right of a particular entity to rule on a case involving a labor dispute. Although several Supreme Court decisions have strengthened the role of arbitrators in resolving labor disputes, there are some situations which may be more appropriately resolved by other entities. For example, a grievance alleging wrongful discharge may be properly heard by the National Labor Relations Board. A grievance involving illegal discrimination may be under the purview of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Determining exactly who should rule on the grievance can become complicated. It may be appropriate for a grievant to pursue a remedy via more than one of these processes simultaneously. The National Labor Relations Act gives the National Labor Relations Board authority to rule on any issue involving unfair labor practices. The fact that a collective bargaining agreement exists which addresses this specific issue does not prevent the National Labor Relations Board from getting involved in the case. The Misco decision was a Supreme Court ruling that restated the principle that clauses in collective bargaining agreements cannot be enforced in a court if they violate the law or other public policy. This decision also supported the wide decisionmaking authority given to arbitrators in the Steelworkers' Trilogy. Similarly, employers do not have to abide by arbitrator decisions that require them to violate the law. For example, an airline would not have to reinstate a terminated pilot if the airline discovered that the pilot's credentials were falsified. Slide 12 Current Issues Affecting Arbitration, continued Next slide. The judicial system believes that arbitration has been generally effective because it has reduced the backlog of court cases, and because it perceives that arbitrators make fair decisions more quickly than a court and for a much lower cost to both parties. However, it is difficult to objectively measure the effectiveness of arbitration because the outcome of the case had it went to court would never be certain. The fact that management and labor unions continue to agree to resolve disputes through arbitration can be considered substantial evidence that arbitration is effective and fair overall. Some observers have criticized the abilities or ethics of an arbitrator who continually seeks compromise solutions, instead of ruling for one party and against the other party. There is a perception that some arbitrators' decisions may be influenced by past support received from one of the parties. Some people also have a perception that favors done for the arbitrator in the past should influence the arbitrator to rule in their favor on future decisions. The National Academy of Arbitrators, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, the American Arbitration Association and the National Mediation Board have jointly developed a code of professional responsibilities for arbitrators. One important clause in this code states that arbitrators should voluntarily withdraw from a case if they don't believe they have the technical competence to rule on a case involving the issue in dispute. Another clause states that arbitrators should maintain the privacy of both parties unless both parties agree to release the information publicly. Arbitrators should also reveal any possible conflicts of interest when they are first appointed to hear the case. There is also some concern that arbitration decisions are binding and are not routinely subject to a possible appeal, as would be the case in a judicial decision. There are two primary procedural problems that may develop during the arbitration process. One issue is the amount of time it takes between the time a grievance is filed and when the arbitrator makes a decision, which averages about three hundred fifteen days. The other issue is the cost of the arbitration proceedings. The time delay associated with arbitration hearings can become a significant problem if the dispute involves the termination of an employee. The individual's future is uncertain until the case is resolved. The employer usually needs the position filled as soon as possible and may be liable for back pay to the discharged employee. There are several reasons for the extensive delay in concluding arbitration proceedings. A shortage of acceptable arbitrators combined with hesitancy to use an unknown arbitrator is one cause for the delay. The grievance process itself may take weeks or even months before it even gets to arbitration. Good arbitrators typically hear a large number of cases and there may be difficulty in choosing hearing dates convenient for all parties. Arbitration costs include the time spent in the hearing itself, travel time, time spent reviewing the case before and after the hearing, and other associated expenses. If either party hires an attorney to help it prepare its case, expenses will rise further. Having the arbitrator review records or hear witnesses that are not directly relevant to the proceedings also adds to the time and expense. Next slide. Slide 13 Current Issues Affecting Arbitration, continued Employment arbitration occurs when employers require employees to settle disputes using arbitration rather than pursuing a remedy in the court system. Employment arbitration may occur whether or not a labor union exists in that firm. One advantage of this policy is that it reduces the time and expense of resolving disputes. One disadvantage is that the arbitrators may not be completely impartial since they are hired by management. The Supreme Court has ruled that employment arbitration is legal and proper if it was agreed on in advance by management and the employees. One dilemma associated with mandatory employment arbitration is that it may be inconsistent with some federal laws, such as civil rights laws. Another dilemma may arise when the language in a labor contract overlaps with a law or statute. In the case of overlap, arbitrators should reach decisions that follow the appropriate law or statute. Arbitrators should decide cases based on the language and intent in the collective bargaining agreement if the dispute does not involve a specific law or statute. In addition to resolving disputes less expensively and more quickly than a judicial proceeding, arbitration proceedings are often more predictable than the decisions that a jury may return. Arbitration proceedings are usually held privately, and the privacy aspect is usually of great interest to employers. Research has indicated that the employment arbitration process may actually be more fair overall to employees. Most employee complaints rarely get to the courtroom, and almost half of the courtroom decisions favorable to employees are overturned on appeal. One challenge employees face in employment arbitration cases involving discipline or discharge is that the burden of proof falls on the employee to prove that the employer acted inappropriately. This burden of proof falls on the employer in traditional labor union-management arbitration. The legal system has identified some deficiencies with the arbitration process. Arbitrators may not possess the legal expertise necessary to understand complex cases. Arbitration hearings are not normally formal enough to ensure that both parties receive their full right to due process with respect to discovery of evidence, the examination of witnesses, and maintaining an official hearing record. Some arbitrators are not very effective at communicating the reasons behind the decisions they make. Slide 14 Current Issues Affecting Arbitration, continued Next slide. Research into the decisions released by employment arbitrators has raised several public policy issues. One issue is that the employment arbitration proceedings generally favor the employer and not the employee. Employment arbitrators typically have a background in management and they are usually hired by management. Employees inexperienced in the arbitration process have the burden of proof, which is often difficult even if they hire a lawyer to represent them. Employment arbitrators are less likely than a jury to consider extenuating or mitigating circumstances such as a long history with the employer and a good work record. Employers have the burden of proof in a typical labor arbitration process. This follows the general legal principle that an employee is innocent unless the employer can prove the employee is guilty. Labor arbitrators are chosen and paid for by both sides so they are less likely to be biased in favor of the employer. Labor arbitrators are more likely than employment arbitrators to look for middle ground and reach a compromise decision. Should disputes reach a jury trial, juries are usually more likely to consider mitigating and extenuating circumstances than arbitrators, and therefore tend to reach decisions more favorable to the employee than employment arbitrators. Next slide. Slide 15 Check Your Understanding Slide 16 Summary We have reached the end of this lesson. Let’s take a look at what we’ve covered. We started our discussion by defining grievance labor arbitration and employment arbitration, and explaining the differences between them. Next, we discussed the development of labor arbitration over the last one hundred fifty years, and reviewed some of the legal basis for the arbitration process. Our focus then moved to the elements of a typical arbitration proceeding. This included identifying how arbitrators are chosen, the differences between ad hoc and permanent arbitrators, and the profile of the typical arbitrator. We reviewed how management and unions decide to arbitrate, the activities that occur on both sides before the arbitration hearing, and major aspects of the arbitration hearing itself. Next, we discussed the differences between arbitration and a judicial proceeding. These included procedural differences and significant differences in the rules of evidence. We briefly mentioned how arbitration is handled differently in the railroad and airline industries. We moved on to a discussion about the arbitrator's decision. We reviewed the classic approach and the narrative storytelling approach to writing a decision, and the guidelines arbitrators follow when reaching their decisions. Our last focus was on several current issues affecting arbitration. These issues included the determination of legal jurisdiction and the roles of federal agencies such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the National Labor Relations Board. We also mentioned how Supreme Court decisions have strengthened the role of the arbitrator. Next, we discussed some of the questions that have arisen about the effectiveness of arbitration, some of the criticisms of arbitrator capabilities and ethics, and several procedural problems that are related to the arbitration process. Next, we discussed how employment arbitration differs from grievance labor arbitration, dilemmas faced by arbitrators, and some deficiencies in the arbitration process. We ended the lesson by discussing some public policy implications of arbitration. This completes this lesson. Employee and Labor Relations HRM 534 Contract Administration Topics • Grievances: definition, sources, and significance • Steps in the grievance procedure • Grievance resolution: relationships and flexibility • Power relationships • The union’s duty of fair representation Grievances: Definition, Sources, and Significance • Definition • Written grievances - advantages • Grievance approaches – Therapeutic – Legalistic Grievances: Definition, Sources, and Significance, Continued • Grievance filer profile • Settling point influence • First-line supervisors Reasons to File a Grievance • • • • • • Protest contractual violation Draw attention to problems Feeling of importance Getting something for nothing Grievance significance Grievance processing preparation Steps in the Grievance Procedure • Step 1: Discuss with supervisor – File written grievance – Goal: resolve as early as possible • Step 2: – Union grievance committee – Management labor relations representative • Step 3: – Involve more senior officials Steps in the Grievance Procedure, continued • Step 4: Alternative dispute resolution – Grievance mediation – Mediation approaches • Transformation (collaborative) mediation • Evaluative mediation Steps in the Grievance Procedure, continued • • • • • • Open door policies Nonunion mediation Ombudsperson Peer review systems Employment arbitration Early neutral evaluation PROPERTIES On passing, 'Finish' button: On failing, 'Finish' button: Allow user to leave quiz: User may view slides after quiz: User may attempt quiz: Goes to Next Slide Goes to Next Slide At any time At any time Unlimited times Grievance Resolution: Relationships and Flexibility • Codified relationships – Importance – Challenges • Supervisory authority Power Relationships • Exist when different people or entities in a relationship have different degrees of power • Conflict in power relationships • Empathetic relationships • Flexible considerations The Union’s Duty of Fair Representation • Legal duty • Fair representation challenges • Supreme Court rulings PROPERTIES On passing, 'Finish' button: On failing, 'Finish' button: Allow user to leave quiz: User may view slides after quiz: User may attempt quiz: Goes to Next Slide Goes to Next Slide At any time At any time Unlimited times Summary • Grievances: definition, sources, and significance • Steps in the grievance procedure • Grievance resolution: relationships and flexibility • Power relationships • The union’s duty of fair representation HRM 534_W9_P1: Employee and Labor Relations: Contract Administration Slide # Slide Title Slide Narration Slide 1 Introduction Welcome to Employee and Labor Relations. In this lesson we will discuss contract administration. Slide 2 Topics Next slide. The following topics will be covered in this lesson: The definition, sources and significance of grievances, Steps in the grievance procedure, Resolving grievances through relationships and flexibility, Power relationships, and The union's duty of fair representation. Slide 3 Grievances: Definition, Sources and Significance Next slide. Labor negotiations may get all of the media attention and public interest, but actually administering the contract once it has been signed takes much more time and effort on the part of both management and the union leadership. Administering the contract requires applying and interpreting all of the clauses in the labor agreement. Once leaders on both sides are into the nitty-gritty of applying and interpreting the contract, they often discover that it was not quite as clear as it appeared to be when it was originally signed. When managers and employees have different understandings about some of the labor contract’s provisions, one party may file a grievance against the other. A grievance is an employee's or employer's alleged violation of the labor agreement that is submitted to the grievance procedure for resolution by representatives of the union and the employer. Handling grievances usually takes up the majority of the time and effort involved in administering a labor agreement. Grievances should be expressed in writing if they cannot be resolved at a very low level in the organization. There are several advantages of expressing grievances in writing. One advantage is that it helps to maintain a written record of the problems that arise and their solutions. These precedents can help guide future actions in similar situations. A second advantage is that a written grievance can help reduce the emotion felt by the party initiating the grievance. Face-to-face confrontations can become very heated and emotional, and some individuals may find it difficult to remain calm and rational. A third advantage is that a written grievance can help ensure that the grievance procedure focuses on the original issue without expanding into drawn-out philosophical discussions. A fourth advantage from the management perspective is that some employees may be apprehensive about signing a written grievance. This apprehension may be due to a fear of retaliation when it comes time for performance reviews and promotion decisions. A fifth advantage is that the requirement to submit grievances in writing probably reduces the total number of grievances that get filed. There are two basic approaches to defining a grievance. The therapeutic approach depends on the employee's allegation that he or she actually has a grievance. This can be thought of as venting a complaint, and it may or may not involve actually initiating the grievance procedure. The legalistic approach is followed when an employee insists that the labor agreement has been violated in some way. Slide 4 Grievances: Definition, Sources and Significance, continued Next slide. Researchers have studied the characteristics of employees who file grievances. Grievance filers tend to be younger and more active in the union than the average employee. They tend to be less satisfied with their jobs and their supervisors, and surprisingly less satisfied with their unions. In the years leading up to the filing of a grievance, grievance filers tend to have higher performance evaluations, better attendance records, and higher promotion rates than non-filing coworkers. However, after these individuals have filed a grievance, their performance evaluations and promotion rates tend to drop significantly. Not surprisingly, their turnover rates tend to increase. There is not yet enough data to generalize conclusions, but there does appear to be some form of retaliatory behavior occurring against those who file grievances which encourage these individuals to leave their employers. This is a disadvantage for the employers because they appear to be losing some of their better performing employees. The point at which grievances are settled also matters. Employees whose grievances are settled in the first step of the grievance procedure tend to have higher performance evaluations and promotion rates compared to employees whose grievances were resolved later in the process. Research also indicates that supervisors who have had grievances filed by their subordinates tend to have lower performance ratings and lower promotion rates than other supervisors in the same organization who have not had any grievances filed against them. Not surprisingly, supervisors who have had more grievances filed tend to be poorly performing supervisors, and they tend not to last very long in the organization. Slide 5 Reasons to File a Grievance Next slide. There are a number of common reasons why employees might file a grievance. The first reason is to protest a contractual violation. Labor negotiators are primarily concerned with coming to agreement on major issues, and are not normally as worried about the specific wording of every clause. This would be true especially in cases where there have been few serious disagreements between the management and the union. The result is that contract clauses may leave too much room for ambiguity or interpretation. When supervisors and employees have different interpretations of contract clauses, conflict will develop that may result in grievances being filed. Grievances may be filed to draw attention to a problem within the work environment. The problem may be related to safety concerns, obsolete equipment, or some other aspect of the work environment that employees are unhappy with. Unions may encourage a number of members to file grievances over the same issue to set the stage for a negotiating point in a future round of contract negotiations. Grievances may be filed to make the employee and the union feel important. Employees who are union officials may file grievances to demonstrate their union support in the hope it will help them to earn higher leadership positions in the union. Some employees may file a grievance in an effort to get something for nothing. It may take little effort to file a grievance, and the employee may benefit if the grievance happens to be upheld. For example, an employee who wants overtime pay without working the extra shift may hide from the boss who is looking to offer that employee the overtime work. When the overtime must be given to another employee, the original employee may file a grievance claiming that an administrative error was made and that the original employee is required to be paid the overtime in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement. Employee dissatisfaction can have major effects in the workplace whether or not a union represents the employees. If the firm is not currently unionized, dissatisfaction may lead to a successful union organizing campaign. No collective bargaining contract could possibly hope to address every possible situation that might develop in the workplace. Conflict may develop if employees perceive that managers are acting unfairly on issues that are not specifically addressed by the labor contract. Union leaders will often support their members in grievances related to these issues as a show of support for the member more than because they believe the managers acted improperly. When a grievance is filed, representatives for management and the union should thoroughly prepare for the grievance process. The first preparation step should include gathering evidence relating to the situation. Evidence may include statements from witnesses, appropriate administrative records, and photographs of certain areas of the workplace. The evidence should be reviewed to determine which facts are actually supported by the evidence. Part of this review should include determining the reliability, credibility and accuracy of each piece of evidence. Once the facts have been verified, grievance hearing participants should prepare their own arguments and try to create challenges for the anticipated arguments of the other side. Slide 6 Steps in the Grievance Procedure Next slide. The grievance procedure that will be in effect is almost always specified in detail in a collective bargaining agreement. There may be a wide variety in the actual procedural steps from one organization to the next. The first step in the grievance process is for the employee to discuss the issue with the first-line supervisor. The union steward may or may not be present for this initial discussion. If the issue is not resolved, a written grievance will be filed either by the employee or by the union steward acting on the employee's behalf. The supervisor will then respond to the grievance in writing. The purpose of the initial discussion between the grievant and the supervisor is to resolve the situation informally and as quickly as possible, which is usually better for both sides than a protracted grievance process. If the grievance was not resolved in the first step, the second step is usually to hold a hearing with the union grievance committee, management's labor relations representative, and the individuals involved in step one. They will attempt to resolve the grievance by considering the precedents that have been set throughout the facility. The union grievance committee and the labor relations representative may be able to come to a compromise agreement that will be satisfactory to everyone concerned. If the grievance has not been resolved in the second step, the third step will bring in appropriate senior officials from both the management and the union. If the union is part of a national or international labor union organization, the national or international organization may send a representative. Resolving grievances at this level often affects operations throughout the facility, and it will be important to collect as much information and input as possible before making a decision. Ideally, the senior officials that have been brought into the grievance process at this level should not be personally involved with the original grievance and may be able to assess the situation more objectively. Slide 7 Steps in the Grievance Procedure, continued Next slide. If the grievance is not resolved in step three, the fourth step may require the grievance to go to either mediation or arbitration, depending on what has been negotiated in the collective bargaining agreement. Mediation is usually used before arbitration. Grievance mediation is a formal step in the grievance procedure designed to resolve grievances without the use of arbitration. The mediator is able to view all sides of the grievance objectively and encourage the conflicting parties to come to a compromise solution to resolve the impasse. Having these solutions suggested by a mediator may allow conflicting parties to save face since they did not have to accept a proposal made by the other party. Mediation is usually much faster and less expensive than arbitration, which is why it is the preferred alternate dispute resolution method. Mediators may choose one of several approaches. Transformation mediation, or collaborative mediation, occurs when the mediator tries to get the parties to fully understand their own position as well as the position of the other party. By helping the conflicting parties understand the perspective of the other parties, it is often easier for both parties to accept a compromise solution. Mediators who use the evaluative mediation approach concentrate on showing the respective strengths and weaknesses of each party's position, rather than trying to help craft a particular solution. Mediators who use the directive mediation approach or results-oriented mediation approach try to develop compromise solutions that the mediator feels both parties will accept and then try to get the conflicting parties to accept them. If mediation is not successful, the dispute will then usually proceed to arbitration. The arbitrator will consider both sides and then dictate a solution to the grievance. Slide 8 Steps in the Grievance Procedure, continued Next slide. There are other forms of alternative dispute resolution which are more likely to exist in non-union organizations. An open door policy allows workers to discuss any complaints with their immediate supervisors. If the worker is not satisfied with the response of the immediate supervisor, the worker may appeal to a more senior manager. One disadvantage of an open door policy is that employees may be reluctant to take advantage of the policy due to a fear of retaliation. Some nonunion organizations have a process in place to mediate disputes even though there is no collective bargaining agreement to require mediation. Some organizations create an ombudsperson program. One employee is appointed to serve as the ombudsperson. The ombudsperson consults with employees who have grievances and advocates on their behalf to management. The ombudsperson must depend on management to solve the problem, so the effectiveness of this program can vary widely. A peer review system involves appointing a committee containing both workers and managers. The workers usually outnumber the managers on these committees. Employee complaints are heard by this committee, and the committee makes a final and binding decision. Some employers mandate an employment arbitration program to send disputes to an independent arbitrator. Since these arbitrators are paid for by the employer, there is some question about how independent and objective they actually are. An early neutral evaluation is a process in which a neutral third party is chosen jointly by the employee and the employer. This individual conducts an informal hearing at which the parties present their evidence and arguments. The neutral evaluator tries to help both sides see the strengths and weaknesses of their arguments, and offers a nonbinding opinion on what the resolution should be. One disadvantage to this procedure is that both parties may choose not to reveal their real positions in order to protect themselves in case the dispute ends up in court. Next slide. Slide 9 Check Your Understanding Slide 10 Grievance Resolution: Relationships and Flexibility Codified relationships stress the rights and privileges of union stewards and first-line supervisors that are established through the collective bargaining agreement and various union and management publications. First-line supervisors and union stewards are urged to treat each other as equals during the grievance resolution process. The supervisor and the steward, and indeed the entire organization, benefit when grievances can be resolved between supervisors and stewards. All union officials should be careful to follow the grievance resolution process established in the collective bargaining agreement. Even if lower-level managers and supervisors do not have authority to resolve the grievance, they should still be included in the process. Some first-line supervisors find it difficult to treat union stewards as organizational equals during the grievance process. It can be challenging to treat the steward as an equal some of the time when the steward is a direct report of the supervisor the majority of the time. First-line supervisors should have the authority to resolve many grievances at the first step of the grievance process. Rapid resolution is usually in everybody's interest, and resolution at this low level can avoid setting plant-wide precedents that might be unfavorable to management. Slide 11 Power Relationships Next slide. A power relationship exists when different people or entities in a relationship have different degrees of power. Conflict can develop in a power relationship when supervisors and union shop stewards have different goals or interests. These conflicts may develop despite good intentions on both sides. For example, supervisors might want to talk frequently to employees to identify and solve problems as quickly as possible. On the other hand, union stewards usually want to discuss problems with employees before they are brought up to the supervisor. Union stewards tend to be long-serving, experienced employees, while many first-line supervisors have little supervisory experience and even less experience dealing with labor unions and collective bargaining agreements. This may allow the union steward to intimidate supervisor intentionally or unintentionally. An experienced supervisor could also try to intimidate the steward by assigning the steward undesirable work assignments and limiting the time that the steward has to perform union-related duties. Empathetic relationships develop between individuals when each person is aware of, understands, and respects the other's situation. Companies almost always function more effectively when the union and management are able to work together cooperatively and professionally. Individuals who understand this reality are often able to develop empathetic relationships with their counterparts on the other side of the bargaining table. In theory, each grievance should be considered individually on its own merits. In practice, the union and management must consider their stances on each grievance with respect to the overall labor contract and the overall relationship with the other party. Many grievances involve different interpretations of labor agreement clauses that are often ambiguous in the first place. It is often in the best interests of both sides to compromise in order to maintain overall harmony, even if the grievant is not happy with the resolution. It may be easier to resolve disputes through mediation or arbitration, but this may set precedents that one side or the other, or perhaps both sides, may not wish to be set. Arbitration is often costly in terms of both dollars and hours, and usually both unions and management would prefer to avoid it whenever possible. The desire to avoid arbitration is so strong that management and union leaders often create a third and one half step in the grievance procedure. This step is not usually included in the labor agreement. After the third step in the grievance process, but before the fourth step of mediation or arbitration, union leaders and management may get together to discuss a number of cases scheduled to be mediated or arbitrated. In these sessions, management and union representatives are sometimes more willing to wheel and deal and compromise on a number of issues than they would be on any of the issues individually. The union typically gets a more favorable compromise on some of the issues, and management gets a more favorable compromise on other issues. Both sides typically agree that grievances resolved in this manner will not be used to set precedents for future grievances. Some critics of this step believe that it interferes with the union's obligation of fair representation. Slide 12 The Union's Duty of Fair Representation Next slide. The union has a legal duty to fairly represent all bargaining unit employees when negotiating or administrating labor contracts, whether or not individual employees are members of the union. This can create challenging issues. Individuals must be willing to give up some freedoms in order for the union to be able to represent them. At the same time, individuals' rights to dissent from union activities also require protection. Employees also need protection from corrupt or negligent union representatives. Fair representation issues may fall under the jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board or the federal district courts, which tends to muddy the waters if the two entities disagree on a particular point. Many union decisions benefit some bargaining unit members while hurting others. This reality makes it difficult for unions to fairly represent all bargaining unit members all of the time, especially when issues related to a particular grievance may conflict with overall union goals and policies. Issues involving seniority are at the center of fair representation disputes. The Supreme Court has ruled that the union will satisfy its fair representation obligation if it considers the interests of all members, takes its ultimate position honestly in good faith, and without hostility or arbitrary discrimination. The Supreme Court has also ruled that union officials should be given wide latitude in the performance of their duties to act in the best interests of the bargaining unit overall. Next slide. Slide 13 Check Your Understanding Slide 14 Summary We have reached the end of this lesson. Let’s take a look at what we’ve covered. We started our discussion by examining grievances. We defined what a grievance is and why it is beneficial for both the union and management for grievances to be presented in a written form. We briefly discussed the therapeutic and legalistic approaches employees may follow when filing a grievance. Next, we talked about the typical characteristics of an employee who files a grievance. We explained how the point in the grievance procedure where the grievance is resolved may have a large influence on the employee and the supervisor involved. We moved on to several common reasons why employees may file a grievance. This included a review of the significance of the grievance process, and the steps both the union and management should take as they prepare for the grievance process. This led to a review of the four steps in the grievance procedure, as well as several ways to use alternate dispute resolution techniques to resolve grievances. Next, we discussed grievance resolution. Here, we talked about the importance of codifying relationships in the workplace and the challenges that they can create. We also discussed the benefits of allowing low-level supervisors enough authority to resolve grievances in the first step in the grievance procedure. We moved on to a discussion of power relationships and empathetic relationships. We then covered why it can be necessary to be flexible when resolving grievances to ensure the long-term interests of both the union and management are considered. We closed with a discussion of the union's duty of fair representation and the influence that the Supreme Court has had on fair representation issues. This completes this lesson.
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Please view explanation and answer below.

Talent Management Topics
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Employee Motivation
Employee Learning and Development
Competency and skill testing
Recruiting and talent staffing
Equity-based compensation

Rationale
When managing the employee workforce, it is essential to develop a strategic, well
thought out plan to attract, retain, and develop the skills of employees. I selected the above
mentioned topics because ideally an organization cannot manage employee talents without
focusing on ways to motivate them. On the same note, an organization must have proper plans in
place to foster employee learning and development as a way to manage employee talents. While
developing employee talents it is critical to create competency in terms of skill testing and this is
where the topic competency and skill testing comes in. On the same note, an organization must
have plans in place for recruiting skilled employees in the context of talent staffing. To help
motivate them, it is also essential to adopt equity-based compensation that focuses on fairness in
compensation practices.
Resources
Rastgoo, P. (2016). The relationship of talent management and organizational development with
job motivation of employees. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae
Brunensis, 64(2), 653-662.
Damarasri, B. N., & Ahman, E. (2020). Talent management and work motivation to improve
performance of employees. Dinasti International Journal of Education Management and Social
Science, 1(4), 490-498.
Hughes, J. C., & Rog, E. ...


Anonymous
Great study resource, helped me a lot.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags