CMHR 522: Union Management Relations - Analyzing Alberta's New Law

This essay examines the implications of a new Alberta law allowing employees to opt-out of paying for union funds used for non-bargaining purposes. It contrasts the viewpoints of two analysts, one adhering to the neoclassical paradigm, which prioritizes efficiency and minimal government intervention, and the other following the orthodox pluralist paradigm, which emphasizes the balance between equity and efficiency, and supports collective bargaining. The neoclassical analyst is likely to view the law favorably as it reduces union power and promotes individual agreements, while the orthodox pluralist analyst would likely oppose it, arguing that it undermines the ability of unions to represent workers and maintain fair labor practices. The essay concludes that the law has both positive and negative aspects, offering benefits to employees while potentially weakening union support and representation. Desklib provides access to similar essays and solved assignments for students.

Running Head: Union Management Relations
UNION MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

2
Union Management Relations
Table of Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................3
Discussion..................................................................................................................................3
Comparing and contrasting viewpoints of two analysts who adhere to neoclassical and
orthodox paradigms................................................................................................................3
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................5
References..................................................................................................................................6

3
Union Management Relations
Introduction
This assignment is focusing on viewing and interpreting a new law by two analysts. Here, the
law is allowing employees to opt-out paying for union fund in case opposing purposes of
non-bargaining. Two paradigms such as neoclassical and orthodox pluralist paradigm are
being compared through the lens of two analysts who adhere to these paradigms.
Discussion
Comparing and contrasting viewpoints of two analysts who adhere to neoclassical and
orthodox paradigms
An analyst following neoclassical theory can view this law as detrimental for employers. This
is because more freedom and opportunities can be provided to employees through this law
that can impact on business performance. As stated by Wynarczyk et al. (2016) neoclassical
theory provides main focus in maximizing efficiency. Moreover, analysts following
neoclassical paradigm will not see this government involvement as a positive factor. This is
because their main concern is about maximizing performance efficiency and they believe that
efficiency of labor market can be increased if involvement of government gets lowered.
However, they will support this law because they do not support the concept of collective
bargaining and need less involvement of unions.
On another hand, analyst with Orthodox pluralist will view as well as interpret the new law
from a different perspective. According to Godard (2016), in spite of being concern about
maximizing the efficiency, they support maintaining balance between equity and efficiency.
This analyst will consider labor law, labor union, and collective bargaining. Due to this
reason, these analysts will not support proposed law by Alberta Government. As per the
viewpoint of these analysts, employees must take part in unions in order to obtained basic

4
Union Management Relations
facilities. In addition, these analysts will rely on collective bargaining for employees if they
face any issues at workplace. Provision of money to the fund of labor union will help unions
to represent labors in case of any difficult situation.
As proposed by Alberta government has also proposed new policies regarding leave and fair
representation. Analyst following neoclassical paradigm will not support this factor because
they think that there is no need for long-term employment standards or legislation. As
mentioned by Wynarczyk et al. (2016), neoclassical paradigm supports minimum
involvement of government regarding management of employees. Different acts regarding
employee benefits like minimum wages and leave policy can impact on performance of a
business. However, they will support the law that can protect workers from funding unions
forcibly. This is because they believed in strong relationship and agreement between
management and employees. In addition, involvement of unions and collective bargaining are
not supported by this group of analysts.
Orthodox paradigm will support benefits that have been planned to provide to labors through
the new law. This analyst will understand and support basic rights of employees. For
example, new leave policy in new law has included basic leaves that are required to maintain
balance between personal and professional lives of employees. Dobbins & Plows (2017) have
suggested that this aspect of this law will be supported by the analyst, who believes in
orthodox paradigm. However, the clause that is allowing employees in not paying to the
union fund will not get support of these analysts.
Neoclassical analysts are only concentrated on performance rather than maintaining balance
between employers and employees. Proper balance can be maintained by collective
bargaining of unions. They will support the opt-out of paying non-bargaining clause in the
law that can reduce power of unions. These analysts did not want any conflicts that can

5
Union Management Relations
impact on business performance of an organization. Hence, they will support the clause that
helps employees to opt out from funding unions.
According to the viewpoint of orthodox pluralist, unequal distribution of power between
employers and employees influence emergence of many difficulties. Due to imbalance in
power, employees fail to protect their rights individually. At that point, union is considered as
the institute that represents all employees. Unions develop fairness and help in maintaining
good relationship between employees and employers. Orthodox analyst will suggest
employees provide the fund to union for their betterment. In return, they will get support to
solve their workplace issues. In addition, this aspect will help employers as well, because it
will be able to improve employee performance. Productivity of organizations can be
improved if Unions take initiatives to solve workplace issues.
Conclusion
From the above discussion, it can be concluded that two analysts will explain their own point
of views as they hold different understanding about industrial relation. However, this new
law has both positive and negative aspects. In one hand, this law is supporting provision of
benefits to employees such as, leave policy, voting rights and other benefits. On another
hand, employees will not pay for fund of union and they will not get any support from the
union in case of facing any workplace difficulties.

6
Union Management Relations
References
Dobbins, T., & Plows, A. (2017). Labour market intermediaries: a corrective to the human
capital paradigm (mis) matching skills and jobs?. Journal of Education and Work,
30(6), 571-584. Retrieved from:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dobbins_Tony/publication/309888606_Labour_
market_intermediaries_a_corrective_to_the_human_capital_paradigm_mismatching_
skills_and_jobs/links/5ab3caff0f7e9b4897c79267/Labour-market-intermediaries-a-
corrective-to-the-human-capital-paradigm-mismatching-skills-and-jobs.pdf
Godard, J. (2016). The Nuts‐and‐Bolts of Publishing in the BJIR II: Evaluation Criteria.
British Journal of Industrial Relations, 54(3), 461-472. Retrieved on:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/bjir.12195
Wynarczyk, P., Watson, R., Storey, D. J., Short, H., & Keasey, K. (2016). Managerial labour
markets in small and medium-sized enterprises. UK: Routledge.