Employee relations as a strategic priority
Employee Relations in South Africa focuses primarily on the collective relationships between unions and employers. These relationships are largely fractious and conflict ridden. History has a large part to play in the development of these circumstances, but things aren’t changing. In fact, conflict in this area has almost become a way of life. Whilst there is always an expected element of conflict in the employment relationship, it seems to be a predominant theme instead of one part of the arrangement.
In its current context, perhaps Employee Relations should be called something else? Because right now it’s not about fostering relationships as the terminology suggests. In a strange sense it seems that dealing with differences through industrial action is easier than tough bargaining, which is difficult, but usually ends in a sustainable solution. Maybe parties choose the confrontational approach because it’s the simpler route, and they have neither the skill nor appetite to go the extra mile with each other?
It’s a shame that the man in the street thinks this is what "Employee Relations" is all about in South Africa
So what should we be doing? How important are employee relations as a strategic priority? How do we go about making the necessary changes, focusing on "THE RELATIONSHIP"?
Of late, a wave of inter-union rivalry affecting various mining operations has shown the real impact of Employee Relations on the success and sustainability of a business. In addition to this, the impact of the now-regular strike season on the trust and co-operation needed to deliver productivity, increase jobs and ensure a sustainable future, is under threat.
In a more general sense than issues concerning unions, much has been written about "disengaged employees", and the effects of this on the workplace. An article in the Cape Times 04/06/12, says that only 25% of the UK workforce and 31% of the US workforce are engaged at work. Figures for SA are not available but it would be reasonable to suggest that at least similar figures are probably applicable. Isn’t this scary?
Perhaps strategies that focus more on the relationship angle in its broadest sense are where we should start? Organisations need to understand the importance of Employee Relations in achieving business objectives. They need to position this and then work on the actions to achieve it.
It makes simple business sense to address employee relations as a strategic business priority...
It appears that employers looking to develop engaged employees - need to attend to three categories of work: The Workplace, The Leader, and The Employee, let’s call these three categories the "Boxes".
Whilst there is always a cost attached to implementing change and new approaches, it’s possible to attend to these boxes within the budget constraints of different types and sizes of organisations. This is simply just good business practice, and the cost need not be prohibitive. If the intent of the employer comes off a sound values base, the employees will focus on that instead of whether they are getting the Deluxe vs. the Lite version. If the initiatives deliver - and they will - enhancements and improvements pay for themselves through productivity and commitment gains.
Sarah Cook in her book The Essential Guide to Employee Engagement, points out that engagement has three aspects: Thinking (what employees think about their employer), Feeling (their emotional connection) and Doing (what they do and say in relation to their co-employees and customers), understanding these factors in the design of an effective employee relations strategy, and how to leverage each of these aspects, will go a long way in delivering improved employment relationships.
