Value of Fox's Frames in Australian Employment Relations

This essay delves into the enduring relevance of Alan Fox's frames of reference – Unitarianism, Pluralism, and Radicalism – in understanding contemporary Australian employment relations. The author investigates whether these frameworks, proposed in 1966, remain valuable in the dynamic landscape of modern organizations. The essay begins by outlining Fox's theory, which posits that management's frames of reference shape their perceptions of employee relationships, influenced by ideologies serving self-reassurance, persuasion, and legitimacy. The essay then analyzes how these frames apply to the current Australian context, considering the decline of trade unions, the rise of corporate social responsibility, and the increasing diversity of the workforce. The author argues that while Fox's frames retain value, they must be adapted to account for contemporary challenges. The essay examines relevant literature, including performance appraisals and changing employee-employer relationships, and concludes that the frames of reference are still important but need to be optimized as per the dynamic organizational environment of today. The essay emphasizes the need for organizations to prioritize effective employee relations and adapt HR practices to the evolving landscape of Australian workplaces.

Running head: EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
The essay is focused towards developing effective and essential understanding of
employment relations. The essay utilizes the frame of reference for understanding employee
relationships proposed by Fox. The specific focus of the essay is towards finding whether the
frame of references that were proposed by Fox long ago still holds significance in consideration
of the employee relations that are required for organizations in the contemporary corporate
environments. The frames of reference that have been provided by Fox are based on pluralism
and unitarist views. According to Fox the managers have frames of references. These frames
actually act like the lenses through which one can view the employment relationships. It was
further proposed that ideologies in management serve mainly three purposes. These are self-
reassurance, persuasion and legitimacy. Employee relations (ER) are important as they help to
build organizational performance competencies. It is important to view ER in consideration of
the dynamic organizational environments that are present in the corporate world of today. There
are possibilities that the frames of references might not be sufficient enough to tackle all the ER
and productivity challenges that are faced by the contemporary enterprises. Organizations in the
contemporary corporate environments are required to be much more change focused. The essay
is systematic in the way it analyzes employee relations in view of the frames of references. The
relevant literatures have been consulted concerning the subject matter to derive deeper
understanding of employee relations and the influence of the frames of references. The
theoretical aspects have in effectively analyzed in consideration of the same.
The thesis statement that has been considered for the research is that the frames of
reference proposed by Fox are still valuable but need to be optimized as per the dynamic
organizational environment of today.
In 1966, Fox provided some important theoretical perspectives concerning the value of
employee relationships within the wider scope of industrial relationships. The focus is more on
the elements of pluralism and unitarism. According to the theory proposed by Fox, management
has some important frames of reference that cause distortions in perception of factual aspects in
employee situations. These frames were also considered to be based on certain unrealistic
assumptions. The various managerial ideologies were defined in the theory. The ideologies in
accordance of the same served three purposes. Self-reassurance, as in blaming the employees for
undertaking actions that are anti-management. Persuasion, as in believing that employees are

2EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
easier to manage if the organization has worthy objectives. Legitimacy, as in legitimizing the
management actions or sanctions believing that they are in the interest of all. The ideology of the
unitary perspective has been abandoned. This is on the basis of the idea being far removed from
the reality. There are two larger sub-divisions of the frame of reference theory. These are
Unitarianism or belief that the conflict is unnatural and also abnormal and Pluralism or the
perspective that conflicts are natural given the large number of stakeholders that are involved in
the organizational functions.
Hence, Unitarianism focuses on eliminating conflicts occurring within the workplace.
The reasons provided by the theory are mainly poor management, poor communications or the
influence of troublemakers. Pluralism focuses more on effective conflict resolutions rather than
permanent solutions. It assumes that there are multiple stakeholders involved in the
organizational processes. This makes it very normal for conflicts to emerge inevitably. Thus, the
focus should be on managing the conflicts accordingly. Conflict management becomes more
important for the pluralists. The two theories of Unitarianism and Pluralism have been used to
determine the value of employee management in any organization. However, the two theories
need to be reconsidered to develop even better ER management concerning the present
organizational scenarios. There is another important frame of reference that was added to the two
primary theories later on. This was the frame of Radicalism. It is a pro-worker frame of reference
that focuses on the fact that conflict is inevitable as the organizational heads are more focused
towards achieving their capitalistic outcomes. In accordance of the view organizations focus on
utilizing the potential of the workers to improve their profitability potential.
It has become important that the frames of reference are considered in light of their
significance concerning the present corporate environments depending on its historic role in the
corporate world. Concerning the same the present literatures on organizational management
become very important. According to DeNisi and Murphy (2017) performance appraisals are still
very much dependent on the frames of references of the management. It is evident in most
organizations in both the developed and the developing world. In this regards the historic
situations that led to the creation of the frames of reference by Fox need to be considered.
Around the time when the Frames of Reference Theory came into being, there were significant
issues being faced in the UK concerning employee relations. UK industrial sector at this time

3EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
became quite notorious for the industrial disputes that were taking place. There were regular
occurrences of walkouts and disputes by the employees that made matters worse between the
employers and the employees. This became a large scale problem for the government as a result
of which the new theory was proposed by Fox. The functional areas of HRM did not do much to
help employee relations at this time. In 1979, it was estimated that the total number of work
stoppages were 4583 leading to companies losing millions. The 1960s and 70s were a time of
great employee-employer conflicts and trade union strikes. Around the same time the
Conservative government that was led by Margaret Thatcher focused on policies that diminished
the powers of the trade unions. The trade union protests were deemed to be problematic for
democracy. At the same time Australia had Harold Holt as the Prime Minister. He was part of
the liberal party and made changes that were very similar to the British government’s labor laws
at the time. The focus of the government was more towards Unitarianism, much like that of the
UK government of the time. This made his government unpopular among the labor organizations
of Australia. It is important to consider that this period was not a good period in terms of
employee relations. However, the period also formed an important foundation for the
development of future ER processes and policies that would guide organizational cultures. The
1970s were times where the government tried to change some of the stances on industrial
relations. This is considering both the UK and Australia. In 1974, the prime minister of Australia
was Gough Whitlam (Knoch, McNamara & Elder, 2017). However, the issues in labor persisted
with events such as the rise of unemployment and tax increases. This led to continuation of the
worsening employee relations in Australia. For the employee relations to get better, the
Australian workers had to wait till the 1980s much like their counterparts in the UK. This was
one of the important issues that led to the formation of the Radicalism view. In accordance of the
same the relations of the labor with the capitalistic setup of the governments were formed.
Employee relations and the treatment of the company unions in the contemporary
organizations are changing. According to Kaufman (2016) the creation of no union employee
representation plans in various cases have created different notions of employee relations
presently. However, it is found that the trade union ban is not legitimate or effective in term of
either the four frames of reference or present employee relations. According to Darlington and
Marginson (2015) however, in the past half a century, there has been significant changes in
regards to collective employee relations. The most important change that can be noticed is the

4EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
shift from collective bargaining to a firm-by-firm consultation basis for employee relations. It is
important to also consider the fact that there has been a sharp decline in Trade Union
memberships. It was found that from around half the workforce of the organization the trade
union memberships only comprise of around a quarter of the workforces at the various areas. It
can be much importantly understood that the negotiation processes between the employees and
the employers have changed greatly. However, it would not be a wise decision to altogether
negate the value of the frames of reference in view of the current organizational scenarios. In the
views of Tapia, Ibsen and Kochan (2015) trade union have for a long time guided the frames of
references that were used across the various organizational environments. However, presently a
significant decline of trade unions have made it necessary to develop more modern notions of the
industrial relations. The new frames of references should hence consider much importantly, the
employee voice. There is a need to develop better and more effective employee relations keeping
in mind the new situations that govern the relationships between the employer and the
employees. Although the values associated with Unitarianism, Pluralism and Radicalism are still
applicable in the context of modern employee relations in Australia, their value is greatly
dependent on factors that are new. Trade unions are rapidly diminishing in their power and
membership especially in the context of Australian corporate environments (DeNisi & Murphy,
2017). It is important to understand that the organizations are focused towards improving their
employee relations. However, the Australian trade unions no longer have much influence on
either the decision making functions of the management or the employees.
It is important that the value of employee relations is still determined by the applications
of the frames of reference across the Australian organizations. As opined by Al‐Hadi et al.
(2019) more emphasis is now being provided by the organizations on CSR. The value of
Pluralism is being emphasized through better and more effective CSR policies. Thus, the
interplay of the needs of the organization and the needs of the employees are provided more
essential focus. The corporate social responsibility oriented values are being provided much
more importance in the context of the contemporary Australian organizations. It is important to
consider that the organizations are much more effective in terms of their employee relations
value. In the opinion of Cohen (2015) the past HR functions of the HR should be kept in mind
when developing the newer and more effective employee relationship value. The focus is on the
development of modern HR practices keeping in mind the frames of references that were

5EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
proposed by Fox in the 60s and the 70s. It is important to view the modern challenges in light of
pluralism in Australia. According to Bres, Raufflet and Boghossian (2018) pluralism in Australia
has become more important in view of the diverse workforces that modern Australian
organizations possess. Pluralism or the development of better tactics to deal with the larger
problems that are faced by Australian organization becomes important. More diverse workforces
call for more diverse situations in terms of conflicts. Conflicts emerge in the modern
organizations due to various reasons. This range between cultural issues and work related
problems that are faced by the larger number of employees. Hence, it becomes important that the
Frames of references are given more importance in view of the relatively newer situations that
are faced the Australian as well as the other organizations working in different parts of the world.
Organizations are increasingly facing more challenging situations in the global business
environments. Hence, it has become important that they give more importance to the
development of proper and more effective employee relationships. The need for better HR
practices should hence be addressed by the modern Australian organizations in view of
developing far more effective employee relations. It has become much necessary that employees
are well aware of their rights and duties. The value of Unitarianism is no longer of much value
within the Australian organizations. During the course of their historic development they have
understood that conflict at workplaces are inevitable often. There is hence a recent shift of the
organizational functions of Australia towards the creation of better and much more effective
employee relations.
The frames of reference that were proposed by Fox in the previous times need to be
considered in comparative view of the governmental regulations and industrial situations that
were present then and are present now. In the 1960s and the 70s, one of the major problems
concerning industrial relations in Australia were the over award payment wage inflation. The
formation of the Australian industrial relations commission (AIRC) was one of the most
important events of this time. It can be argued that the situations at the times were more complex
due to the lack of proper implementation of the more lenient employee relations plans that were
established before the period. The Australian government under Harold Holt as the Prime
Minister in the 60s and Gough Whitlam in the 70s was more inclined towards following the
model of UK (Knoch, McNamara & Elder, 2017). The focus was more towards establishing
rigorous control over the workings of the trade unions. This caused significant issues within the

6EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
workforces. It is important to understand that the value of productivity of the organizations were
deemed to be much higher than the need to establish stronger industrial relations. Industrial
relations were more controlled at this time than it is in the contemporary business environment of
Australia. Presently the Morrision government is more focused towards bringing essential
changes in regards to the industrial relations of the country. The present government is more
focused towards bringing about changes in favor of the employees of the country (Grattan,
2019). The current focus of the Morrison government is on three specific important things. These
are creation of jobs, put pressure on increasing wages to boost productivity and promote
economic growth. The policies such as the fair dismissal code, casual employment and policies
concerning several bargaining aspects are more focused towards the creation of strong bond
between the employees and the organizations. It is much important in view of the changing times
in which organizational growth becomes very much important. The industrial relations are now
more focused pluralism and development of more effective relationships with the employees. It
is important to value development as one of the most important factors that can guide
organizational development. The various companies that are working in the corporate sectors of
the country now need to give more importance to organizational CSR. In this light it has become
much important that the value of industrial relations with regards to the frame of reference
provided by Fox is re-interpreted. The fair work bill in this regards is an important regulation
that would add more value towards the development of better employee relationships. According
to Griffin, Bryant and Koerber (2015) it is important that corporate organizations more
essentially integrate the older theories of employee relationships in deciphering the modern
issues that organizations face in terms of employee concerns. In this case the existing ER
theories need to be interpreted in accordance of their significance in the contemporary corporate
world.
In modern Australian enterprises the shift is from both Unitarianism and radicalism
perspectives towards a more Pluralistic setup of employee relations and HR management.
Pluralism focuses more on effective conflict resolutions rather than permanent solutions. It
assumes that there are multiple stakeholders involved in the organizational processes. This
makes it very normal for conflicts to emerge inevitably. Thus, the focus should be on managing
the conflicts accordingly. Conflict management becomes more important for the pluralists.
Pluralism is an effective policy as it identifies conflict as an obvious issue given the fact that a

7EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
large number of stakeholders are engaged in the organizational processes. Unitarianism and
Radicalism are both on the extremes. The Unitarianism view is based on the fact that all
decisions that are made by the organization are for the good of all within a given organization.
The Radicalism view is in regards to the factor that employees are only being utilized by the
organizations for their benefits. It is important to note that both the theories have been unable to
address the actual problem. The government has in the past sided with the organization in view
of the significance of the economic development of the country. The employees however
demand rights that can provide them with essential motivation to work for the organization. The
employees have in the past looked for more methods to curb the functional attributes of the trade
unions. Changes that can be noticed in the Australian context is the shift from collective
bargaining to a firm-by-firm consultation basis for employee relations. It is important to also
consider the fact that there has been a sharp decline in Trade Union memberships. Presently, it
can be seen that from around half the workforces of the various organizations in the past, the
trade union memberships only comprise of around a quarter of the workforces at the various
areas. It can be much importantly understood that the negotiation processes between the
employees and the employers have changed greatly. However, it would not be a wise decision to
altogether negate the value of the frames of reference in view of the current organizational
scenarios.
The conclusion that can be derived from the above analysis is that the frames of
references are still important in the modern corporate scenarios of Australia. The frames of
references however need to be used in terms of their effective application in the context of
Australian corporate enterprises. Especially it was found that the theory of Pluralism still holds
true in regards to the employee relations that need to be considered in the present governments.
The Australian corporate organizations were found to be more inclined towards CSR in the
presently existing scenarios. It is hence important to understand that the frames of references
have not changed but the perspectives and areas of their applications have changed and need to
change in the future.

8EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
References
Al‐Hadi, A., Chatterjee, B., Yaftian, A., Taylor, G., & Monzur Hasan, M. (2019). Corporate
social responsibility performance, financial distress and firm life cycle: evidence from
Australia. Accounting & Finance, 59(2), 961-989.
Bres, L., Raufflet, E., & Boghossian, J. (2018). Pluralism in organizations: Learning from
unconventional forms of organizations. International Journal of Management
Reviews, 20(2), 364-386.
Cohen, D. J. (2015). HR past, present and future: A call for consistent practices and a focus on
competencies. Human Resource Management Review, 25(2), 205-215.
Darlington, R., & Marginson, P. (2015). The changing nature of collective employment
relations. Employee Relations.
DeNisi, A. S., & Murphy, K. R. (2017). Performance appraisal and performance management:
100 years of progress?. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 421.
Grattan, M. (2019). Morrison government solid on industrial relations reform. Retrieved 17
October 2019, from https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6397887/morrison-
government-solid-on-industrial-relations-reform/
Griffin, J. J., Bryant, A., & Koerber, C. P. (2015). Corporate responsibility and employee
relations: From external pressure to action. Group & Organization Management, 40(3),
378-404.
Industrial Relations Counselors, Inc. (1962). Behavioral science research in industrial relations.
New York.
Kaufman, B. E. (2016). Experience with company unions and their treatment under the Wagner
act: A four frames of reference analysis. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and
Society, 55(1), 3-39.
Knoch, U., McNamara, T., & Elder, C. (2017). Submission to the Australian Government
Department of Immigration and Border Protection on the discussion paper ‘Strengthening
the test for the Australian Citizenship’. University of Melbourne.

9EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
Tapia, M., Ibsen, C. L., & Kochan, T. A. (2015). Mapping the frontier of theory in industrial
relations: the contested role of worker representation. Socio-Economic Review, 13(1),
157-184.