HRM523: Analyzing NSW Train Workers' Dispute with IR Theories

This presentation provides an analysis of the New South Wales (NSW) train workers’ dispute of January 2018, focusing on the refusal of the NSW Train management and Sydney Trains to negotiate a fair enterprise agreement. The presentation summarizes the parties involved, causes of the dispute including demands for a 6% pay rise and improved working conditions, the processes undertaken such as strikes and voting on industrial actions, and the outcomes, including a 24-hour work stoppage. The analysis relates the dispute to Utilitarian, Unitarist, and Pluralist theories, highlighting the conflict between management and workers seeking improved conditions. It concludes that the dispute arose from the failure to negotiate a reasonable agreement, with workers ultimately striking to demand better pay and working conditions.

NSW train workers’ dispute of
January 2018
Causes- The workers
demanded for a 6% pay
rise and some improved
working conditions such as
day offs and rostering
Outcomes- Workers
stopped their work at
12.01am of January 28
until midnight and voted
in favour of the actions of
taking some protected
industrial actions
Parties involved- rail
employees, workers,
NSW government, NSW
train management
Processes- Strike and
voting in industrial
actions
What do you mean by Causes?
Causes refers to the thing that
gives rise to a particular action,
condition or phenomenon.
What are outcomes?
Outcomes refers to the way a
particular thing turns out gradually
What do you mean by parties?
Parties are the group of individuals
that attempt to form or to make
participation in a particular event or
something. .
What do you mean by Processes?
Processes refers to the series of
actions and the steps that are taken
for achieving a specific end. .
What is dispute?
Dispute refers to the disagreement or
argument in between the people or
the groups.
Dispute- Refusal of the
NSW Train management
and Sydney Trains to
negotiate a reasonable and
fair enterprise agreement
References:
Osborne, S. (2018). Right to strike'very nearly dead'. Newsmonth, 38(3), 4.
Gandjour, A. (2017). Comment on:“Can the EVIDEM framework tackle issues raised by evaluating treatments for rare diseases: analysis of issues and policies, and context-specific adaptation”. PharmacoEconomics, 35(5), 603-604.

Discussion of NSW
dispute with two
relevant theories
■Refusal of the NSW
Train management and
Sydney Trains to
negotiate a reasonable
and fair enterprise
agreement
■Workers stopped their
work at 12.01am of
January 28 until
midnight
■The trains were
stopped for 24 hours.

Discussion of NSW
dispute….. continue…
■The workers
demanded for a 6%
pay rise and some
improved working
conditions such as day
offs and rostering
■The strike came after
when the workers
voted in favour of the
actions of taking some
protected industrial
actions (Osborne,
2018)

Relation of NSW dispute with
Utilitarian theory and
Pluralist theory
■Unitarism theory
■Pluralist theory

Conclusion
 The NSW dispute was because
of the refusal of the train
management of New South
Wales and the Sydney Trains for
negotiating a fair and reasonable
enterprise agreement
 the rail employees at the NSW
stopped their work for 24 hours
 demanding for 6% pay hike and
improvements in their daily
working conditions as a part of
their work such as rostering and
claiming day offs
 The Unitarism and the pluralist
theory are incompatible but they
are well-relevant to this dispute
as because here there majority of
the people were seeking for
happiness which are quite fair.

References:
• Gandjour, A. (2017). Comment on:“Can the
EVIDEM framework tackle issues raised by
evaluating treatments for rare diseases:
analysis of issues and policies, and context-
specific
adaptation”. PharmacoEconomics, 35(5),
603-604.
• Osborne, S. (2018). Right to strike'very
nearly dead'. Newsmonth, 38(3), 4.

Thank You