As you have stated, the grievance procedure was laid out as a way of resolving internal disputes in the workplace. The grievance procedure is part of the bargaining agreement where all employee-employer concerns are addressed. I also agree with you that the grievance procedure is important in addressing the rights of employees and the relations between the employer and employee. In resolving disputes, it is important to understand that not all grievances are legitimate. It is for this reason that not all grievances are subject for a proper grievance procedure. The grievance procedure, nevertheless, provides a good method of resolving employment disputes.
The relationship between the employer and the employee is often affected by disagreements, especially in the interpretation of the contract terms. The grievance process is one of the major ways through which such disagreements can be resolved. It is part of the collective bargaining process, as you have stated in your post, and continues to evolve and improve. Through the grievance procedure, peace between the parties in dispute is maintained and disputes are resolved without the need for the use of economic force. It, therefore, ensures that the employee and the employer work together to achieve their respective goals.
Hello Milton (Collapse Sub-discussion),
I agree with you that the grievance procedure has multiple steps so as to provide an opportunity to address all the grievances that may occur at different levels in the workplace. The grievance procedure provides a good method of dispute resolution in the workplace.
Hello Justin (Collapse Sub-discussion),
Union-management cooperation is important in ensuring that operations run smoothly in the workplace and that disputes are minimized. When conflicts arise between management and unions, it becomes very difficult to maintain cooperation between them – it is adversarial in nature, as you have stated. I believe that it is possible to maintain cooperation between unions and management with a change in the culture of unions and the attitude of management towards unions and employees represented by labor unions. Management and unions find it difficult to maintain cooperation as a result of the bad blood that exists between them. It would take a lot of effort to maintain such cooperation.
I agree with you that unions and management find it difficult and challenging to maintain cooperation between them as a result of having different objectives when bargaining or reaching an agreement. Cooperation between unions and management can only be fostered by the willingness of unions to adopt a bargaining approach and the willingness of the management to share information with the union. As you have explained, it is only through respecting the other party’s concerns, listening, and acknowledging the needs of the other party that union-management cooperation programs can be maintained. It is very important that both parties respect each other and treat each other fairly.
The cooperation between unions and management is difficult to maintain since these parties are on opposite sides in the bargaining process. as such, each party usually has different priorities and goals when bargaining, creating an adversarial relationship between them. As you have stated, the outcome of negotiations between unions and management may be improved by fostering cooperation between them. In union-management cooperation, the parties work together to achieve their goals. It is true that globalization has brought about new challenges for management and unions, making the negotiation process difficult and cooperation difficult to maintain. However, if both parties aim to achieve a healthy, committed, and engaged workplace that is free from political bias, I believe that cooperation can be maintained. You have raised very good suggestions in your post.