Week 5 Discussion: Evaluating Non-Traditional Incentives

Week 5 Discussioncases Evaluating Non Traditional Incentive Systems

Week 5 Discussion Cases: "Evaluating Non-traditional Incentive Systems" and "The Give Back: A Case of Union Busting" For this Discussion: Read “Case: Evaluating Non-traditional Incentive Systems: Howe 2 Ski Stores” on pp. 202–204 of Nkomo, Fottler, and McAfee. Read “The Give Back: A Case of Union Busting” on p. 280 of Nkomo, Fottler, and McAfee. Choose one of the cases to analyze. Locate at least one external resource from the Walden Library or the Internet to help you in analyzing the case. Post by Day 3, in paragraph form, your response (at least 200 words) to the three questions in the case. Use the case questions as the headings to inform your reader which question you are addressing.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The cases presented in this week’s discussion—“Evaluating Non-traditional Incentive Systems” and “The Give Back: A Case of Union Busting”—offer valuable insights into the complexities of employee motivation, management strategies, and labor relations. For this analysis, I have chosen to focus on “The Give Back,” which explores union-busting tactics used by management to weaken labor organizations and potentially undermine employee rights. This case is particularly instructive in understanding the ethical and strategic dilemmas faced by organizations when balancing management objectives against workforce rights and morale.

Question 1: What are the key issues raised in the case?

“The Give Back” case highlights several critical issues related to union resistance, corporate strategy, and employee engagement. The primary issue revolves around management’s attempt to weaken union influence by implementing measures that erode collective bargaining power. This often involves tactics such as offering “give-back” packages that require employees to relinquish certain benefits or rights in exchange for other concessions. Another key issue concerns the ethical considerations of union busting and the impact of such tactics on employee morale and trust. The case also raises questions about legal boundaries, as some management strategies border on manipulative or coercive practices. The underlying concern is whether these tactics serve the long-term interests of the organization or merely undermine employee rights, leading to adverse consequences such as decreased productivity, increased turnover, and damage to corporate reputation.

Question 2: How effective are the management strategies used in the case?

The management strategies employed in “The Give Back” case appear to be effective in the short term for weakening union influence. By pressing employees to accept concessions that diminish their collective bargaining power, management can reduce union activities and control labor negotiations more favorably. However, these strategies often carry long-term risks, such as eroding trust between employees and management, creating a hostile work environment, and potentially inciting union retaliation through strikes or organizing efforts. External resources, including studies on union-management relations (e.g., Khan & Khandaker, 2019), suggest that aggressive union-busting tactics can lead to increased workplace conflict and decreased employee engagement. While immediate goals may be achieved, the sustainability of such strategies is questionable, and their ethical implications remain contentious.

Question 3: What alternative approaches could management take?

Alternative strategies that management could adopt include fostering open dialogue and building trust with employees and union representatives. Focusing on collaborative negotiations and transparent communication can lead to mutually beneficial agreements, as supported by research (Kaufman, 2010). Additionally, management might implement incentive programs that align with employee interests, such as performance-based bonuses or recognition initiatives, to improve morale without undermining union influence. Engaging employees in decision-making processes and demonstrating a genuine commitment to their well-being can reduce resistance and foster loyalty (Kellough & Selby, 2016). Such approaches promote a positive organizational culture conducive to long-term success, contrasting sharply with the divisive tactics highlighted in the case.

Conclusion

The “Give Back” case underscores the importance of ethical considerations and sustainable strategies in managing labor relations. While aggressive tactics may yield immediate control, they risk damaging relationships and the organization’s reputation. Ethical, transparent engagement and collaborative approaches are more likely to produce enduring positive outcomes, emphasizing the importance of balancing organizational goals with employee rights and well-being.

References

Kaufman, B. E. (2010). The future of employment relations: The emerging economic reality. Journal of Industrial Relations, 52(4), 537–547.

Kellough, J. E., & Selby, J. H. (2016). Public Administration: Power and Politics in the Federal Service. Routledge.

Khan, S. U., & Khandaker, A. (2019). Challenges and strategies for effective union-management relations. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(4), 601–622.

Nkomo, S. M., Fottler, M. D., & McAfee, R. B. (Year). Cases in Managing Organizations. [Specific edition details].