Relevance of Pluralism to Contemporary Employee Relations: A Report

This report provides a critical discussion on the relevance of pluralism to contemporary understandings of employee relations. It begins with an executive summary and an introduction that explains the pluralist approach, which views organizations as comprised of diverse sectional groups with differing goals and loyalties, primarily management and trade unions. The report then delves into the pluralist theory of employee relations, highlighting the conflicting interests between employees and employers and the role of trade unions. It discusses both the positive and negative aspects of pluralism, such as its ability to address conflicts through consultation and its potential to overlook workplace dynamics. Furthermore, it explores why pluralism serves as a valid explanation for employee relations, emphasizing its framework for evaluating power dynamics and ethical considerations within employment. The report concludes by summarizing the key points, underscoring the significance of the pluralist perspective in understanding and managing employee relations in modern organizations.

Running head: EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
Critically discuss the relevance of ‘pluralism’ to contemporary understandings of
employment relations.
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
Executive Summary:
The report gives an overview of the employee relations in the perspective of the pluralist
approach. The report also mentions the fact that as per the pluralist approach organizations
have varied sectional groups with each group having their separate goals, legal loyalties and
leaders. There report puts forward a critical discussion on the relevance of the pluralism on
the employee relations. Through the critical discussion, the report provides an insight into the
pluralist theory of employee relations and the negative and the positive side of the pluralist
approach. In addition, it also tries to explain and why pluralism serves as valid explanation
for employee relation.

2
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
Table of Contents
Introduction:...............................................................................................................................3
Critical Discussion on the Relevance of Pluralism to Employee Relations:.............................3
Pluralist Theory on Employee Relations....................................................................................3
Positive and Negative Side of Pluralist Theory.........................................................................4
Pluralism: A Valid Explanation for Employee Relation............................................................6
Conclusion:................................................................................................................................7
References:.................................................................................................................................8

3
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
Introduction:
The aim of this report is to discuss the application of Pluralism to modern
understanding of employee’s relationships. As per the Pluralist’s perspective, organizations
are made up of different sectional groups. However, each of the group has their own legal
loyalties, goals as well as leaders. According to the Pluralist perspective, two of the
outstanding sectional groups are the management and the trade unions. Therefore, the main
job responsibility as a result is not only enforcement and manages but influence and
coordination (Ackers 2014). Moreover, the trade unions act as the legalized delegates of
employees. Therefore, the interest of the employees as well as the employers is conflicting.
Thus, this conflict is unavoidable and the need for trade union to safeguard the interest of
both the parties. In Pluralist, approach there is dual authority/loyalty therefore, it has been
seen that the employees are loyal towards the management and to their labour leaders.
Critical Discussion on the Relevance of Pluralism to Employee Relations:
Pluralist Theory on Employee Relations
Arrowsmith and Parker (2013) stated a momentous prototype shift is implemented in
the managing of employee relations to more strategic and incorporated frameworks based on
employee obligation and interests of a shared workplace, as an alternative of traditional
administrative conflicts and control among the employees and employers. However,
according to Alfes et al. (2013) this employee relation (ER) scheme can be traced backed in
the 1050s in the United States, where three of the human recourse models happen to be
prominent, explicitly Fombrun, Tichy as well as Devanna’s ‘matching model’, Beer et al.’s
‘Harvard model’ and Walton’s ‘control to commitment’ model. Moreover, there are ER
changes, which have also taken place in United Kingdom though majorly in bigger

4
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
organizations. Aziri, Veseli and Ibraimi (2013) has pointed out that that the common
standpoint of ER are unitarist, pluralist and neo-unitary. As per the Pluralists theory regarding
the ER, it has been believed that the workplace is collected of varied sets of beliefs, values,
attitudes and behaviors. Moreover, as per Moon (2012) there are also certain contrasting
sources of leadership as well as addition in the organizations. He further stated that conflicts
could even be supportive if identified as well as controlled within the institutional reactions.
Thus, conflicts are foreseeable because there are intrinsic competing interests among the
employees. However, Graham et al. (2013) has said that the role played by management
depends on arbitrating amongst the opposing interests. Nonetheless, Trade unions represent
rightful council of the employees and further analyzed in a positive manner since they guided
the employees for highlight their power of decision making. Lastly, Rosenbloom (2014) has
also mentioned that the state encourages public interest and ER constancy can be achieved
via a series of allowance and negotiations among the managers and employers during
collective negotiating process.
Positive and Negative Side of Pluralist Theory
Many researchers have pointed out that there are both a positive as well as a negative
side of this Pluralist theory in this modern organizational employee’s relations. Hoque,
Covaleski and Gooneratne (2013) have stated that unlike the other theories, the pluralist
theory of ER stresses that impactful ER interventions can determine conflicts. However,
through these perspectives the management can use a consultative approach in answer to
conflicts. Moreover, this theoretical perspective also believes to be an alternative decision-
making process. Sage, Dainty and Brookes (2014) has stated succeeding the other
researcher’s opinion that in pluralist theory, the conflicts are never overlooked; rather they
are successfully managed through stakeholder contribution. According to the perspective of

5
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
the pluralists, they are said to have utilized the strategies for conflict management for keeping
conflict groups so that the solutions is argued as well as implemented. On the positive side as
Edelman (2013) has highlighted that, the pluralist perspective grips a wider display of
employee relations policies. However, there are certain organizations who can take up no-
union policies, if there are employee organizations while on the other hand there are
organizations that can encourage the use of trade unions. Ackers (2014) has also declared that
this pluralist perspective is also appropriate for collective IR systems since it does not ignore
the role of trade unions in running employee-employer disagreements.
Contradictory to these positive points of pluralist theory there are certain negative
viewpoint as well. Menkel-Meadow (2015) opposing the positive viewpoints has suggested
that one of the flaws of pluralist theory is that the fondness to dwell on the rules as well as
procedures as well as disrespect the processes which also contributes to the resolutions of
conflicts. He further states that for example throughout IR, laws can be made which enforce
certain ways in determining workplace conflicts. However, these rules cannot take up to the
emerging as well as different workplace conditions. Tomšič and Vehovar (2012) has also
highlighted that perspective of pluralism is incompetent of apprehending that state also
signifies the interests in the commercial aspect and not just for the public interests. As per
Armingeon and Baccaro (2012), the pluralist’s perspective might center increasingly on
worker interest that can shows the path for the displaying the inefficiencies of the collective
bargain process. Habermas (2015) have further stated that another weakness of Pluralism
employee relationship is that it may represent some power disparity among the competing
parties, which have unreliable interests, aims as well as desires. Moreover, Mäkinen and
Kourula (2012) has identified another weakness of Pluralism theory which says that it always
give emphasis to the support of efficient, coherent as well as impactful management of
disagreement within the organization.

6
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
Therefore, pluralism appears according to many scholars emerges as a complex form
for the management of conflicts because it is intended at settling the disagreement within the
decision-making frame. In spite of the fact that pluralistic attitude have on the regulations,
rules and develops to accommodate disagreement however it emerges sophisticated in that, in
the future when unions needed to have an involvment. However, few researchers has declared
that prominence of pluralism depends on the social stability, compromise as well as
surrendering concessions. Therefore, such emphasis has the probability to upshot in failure to
appreciate properly outcomes as well as processes of a distinctive workplace. Lastly, as per
Talisse (2013) pluralism is which is imprecise and open-minded which further produce a
casual structural antipathy which has ability to result in additional disagreements in both the
workplace and labor market. Moreover, the unprejudiced distinctiveness of pluralism falls out
from management aspect as well as the employees who do not necessaril have full control
over one another
Pluralism: A Valid Explanation for Employee Relation
Greenwood and Van Buren (2017) in their research paper has stated that Pluralism
has possibility to present a more valid explanation of the employee relation to offer a
framework for evaluating how power influence the detection of employee interests and to
allow space for embracing deeply ethical questions connected to employment. However, in
this paper it is also stated that Pluralist approach towards the employee relations takes place
via the idea that workforce as well as their representatives have rightful interests and a right
to practice these interests and these recognition of the ideas will permit for a fairer and
competent employment system. However, Chilcote (2018) has stated that the notion of
Pluralism as drained from the political theory outline a basis for many scholarships in
industrial relations as well as more significant approaches towards human resource

7
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
management. Rainnie (2016) argued that industrial relation based theories, research and
policy recommendations must be conscious regarding the associations in between the goals of
employers, employees as well as a broader society and may search for ways of accomplish a
workable and impartial balance among their interests. In another paper by Provis (1996) it
has been said that among the management and pluralist theory there has in present times a
bigger emphasis on culture as well as values. Therefore, in this paper the ideas of Pluralism
along with that of Unitarism are reconsidered. However, in recent past it has been seen that
issues have arisen due to the emphasis on values rather than interests for pluralists and
unitarists. However, as per Krott (2012) for pluralists, importance on values necessitates a
new conception of the process through which dissimilarities are submissive and might need
modifications to union structures.
Conclusion:
Thus, to conclude the report it can be said that according to the pluralist’s perspective
it is clear that they consider the organizations to be build up of many sectional groups among
which the most important sectional groups are the management as well as trade union.
However, as per the above analysis it has been observed that there are both pros and cons of
this Pluralist theory in the contemporary organizational employee’s relations. Thus, as
researchers have said that unlike other theories of employee relation the pluralist’s theory is
more concern regarding conflicts as well as its impact on the employee relations. Moreover,
there are researchers who have further provided their opinion suggesting that not only this
theory not only stressed on conflicts but also highlight the stakeholder’s contributions. On the
contrary it has been seen that few other researchers have argued that pluralist approach has a
weakness to dwell on the rules and the procedures which contributes towards conflicts.

8
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
Moreover, few others have also pointed out with the fact that this approach is incompetent of
detaining that the state also connotes commercial interests.

9
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
References:
Ackers, P., 2014. Rethinking the employment relationship: a neo-pluralist critique of British
industrial relations orthodoxy. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 25(18), pp.2608-2625.
Alfes, K., Shantz, A.D., Truss, C. and Soane, E.C., 2013. The link between perceived human
resource management practices, engagement and employee behaviour: a moderated
mediation model. The international journal of human resource management, 24(2), pp.330-
351.
Armingeon, K. and Baccaro, L., 2012. Political economy of the sovereign debt crisis: The
limits of internal devaluation. Industrial Law Journal, 41(3), pp.254-275.
Arrowsmith, J. and Parker, J., 2013. The meaning of ‘employee engagement’for the values
and roles of the HRM function. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 24(14), pp.2692-2712.
Aziri, B., Veseli, N. and Ibraimi, S., 2013. Human Resources and Knowledge
Management. Zader, Croatia.
Chilcote, R.H., 2018. Theories of comparative politics: the search for a paradigm
reconsidered. Routledge.
Edelman, M., 2013. Political language: Words that succeed and policies that fail. Elsevier.
Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S.P. and Ditto, P.H., 2013.
Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. In Advances in
experimental social psychology (Vol. 47, pp. 55-130). Academic Press.

10
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
Greenwood, M. and Van Buren, H.J., 2017. Ideology in HRM scholarship: Interrogating the
ideological performativity of ‘New Unitarism’. Journal of Business Ethics, 142(4), pp.663-
678.
Habermas, J., 2015. Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and
democracy. John Wiley & Sons.
Hoque, Z., A. Covaleski, M. and N. Gooneratne, T., 2013. Theoretical triangulation and
pluralism in research methods in organizational and accounting research. Accounting,
Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26(7), pp.1170-1198.
Krott, M., 2012. Value and risks of the use of analytical theory in science for forest
policy. Forest Policy and Economics, 16, pp.35-42.
Mäkinen, J. and Kourula, A., 2012. Pluralism in political corporate social
responsibility. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(4), pp.649-678.
Menkel-Meadow, C., 2015. Process Pluralism in Transitional/Restorative Justice-Lessons
from Dispute Resolution for Cultural Variations in Goals beyond Rule of Law and
Democracy Development (Argentina and Chile).
Moon, J.D., 2012. Constructing community: moral pluralism and tragic conflicts. Princeton
University Press.
Provis, C., 1996. Unitarism, pluralism, interests and values. British Journal of Industrial
Relations, 34(4), pp.473-495.
Rainnie, A., 2016. Industrial relations in small firms: Small isn't beautiful. Routledge.
Rosenbloom, D.H., 2014. Federal service and the constitution: The development of the public
employment relationship. Georgetown University Press.

11
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
Sage, D., Dainty, A. and Brookes, N., 2014. A critical argument in favor of theoretical
pluralism: Project failure and the many and varied limitations of project
management. International Journal of Project Management, 32(4), pp.544-555.
Talisse, R., 2013. Pluralism and liberal politics (Vol. 28). Routledge.
Tomšič, M. and Vehovar, U., 2012. Quality of governance in" Old" and" New" EU member
states in a comparative perspective. Sociológia, 44(3), pp.367-384.