Analysis Of Industrial Relations Crisis And The Role Of Actors: A Case Study

Overview of the Crisis at Arc Shoes

Question:

Write about the Crisis of Industrial Relations for Manufacturers.

The report consists of the analysis of the issues related to the industrial relations. The issue is related to the problems related to the labors and the reaction of the management towards the problem. The workplace where the crisis has occurred is the arc shoes in Egypt who are global manufacturers of shoes in Egypt. It is one of the leading manufacturers in Egypt. The industrial relations include the issues related to the disputes between the manager and the labors. The arc shoes have faced such problem very often. The problem was highlighted after a long time. The major aim of the report is to focus on the issue and briefly describe the issues and analyze the role of both the actors that is the labors and the manager of the company who took no initiative initially to solve the problem. Based on the analysis of the issue the reaction of the actors on the context of the pluralist theory has been included broadly in the report. The report concludes with the analysis of such theory.

The problem in this shoe manufacturing company has been a continuous process. The common forms of protest have been strikes and it has remained a perennial problem. The issue has been the outcome of an incident. On January 5^th, 1992, one of the labors named George was assaulted by the executive manger in a meeting. He was charged for an unethical reason without any proof. He was suspended for the same reason and later was debarred from yearly bonus and was suspended for few days from work (Light, Margot and Arthur John Richard Groom). This resulted in the deduction of his salary as well. He was not even given a notice of this. This infused anger in many labors of the company. They landed in protest against this. This created a negative impression against the company. This led the labors to end up in strikes and protests. The management was initially not ready to listen to the workers. They did not show any reaction to the protest of the workers. The union of the labors decided not to work anymore in the company. Steve Martha the executive manager was passive to the situation. He was not ready to listen to the labors. He was neutral to their demands. They landed up in strikes and rallies in front of the gate of the factory. The managing director of the company, Mr. Nejm Abdul El Amir Rasol took notice of the situation and he intervened into the matter much later. He considered this industrial crisis to be solved and he took initiative to pay attention to the needs of the demands of the workers. The further problem that arises immediately was the take over the company. The arc shoe manufacturers collaborated with the other shoe manufacturers of Egypt. The labors were not given the ultimatum of the same and they were all of a sudden asked to find another job (Jørgensen, Knud Erik). They were not given any other placement and morally it was not justified. The labors landed up in strikes and they opposed to work. This continued till few months. The stakeholders of the company looked onto the matter and they resolved the situation. In case of the first situation the managing director solved the situation by conducting a personal meeting of the labor with the executive manager and an apology was asked to the labor for the verbal abuse that he faced. The pluralist theory has been applied here where the perspective of the labors and the unions have been focused on (Smith, et al).

Role of the Actors Involved

The main players in this issue are the labors and the managing bodies against whom the situation has taken place. The initial crisis has taken place because of the executive manger who verbally abused the factory worker (Jackson, Robert and Georg Sørensen). While the company was taken over by other shoe manufacturing company it was the people in the managing committee and the factory workers who were the main players. The managing director has played a major role in this by intervening and solving the problem Therefore he is another player in this situation. Al the players had a major role to play in this. All the players had their own perspectives and own point of view (Ferguson, Yale).

The players are also known as actors in this situation. The actors have a major role to play in these situations. The situations are equivalent to crisis here. The most highlighted actors here are the labor who was abused and the executive who abused him. The situation is in favor of the labor. The crisis can be termed as the crisis in terms of industrial relations. The crisis has occurred in case of the industrial relations. The labor represented the entire workers of the factory as this same incident could happen to the labors in the future. Another reason behind this was the same class that the workers belonged in. The executive manager had the power to manage and take the initial decision regarding the factory. This is the reason the labor was dominated and he was penalized (Dunne, et al). The labor however was restored his job back with complete honor. Apart from this it was same in the case of shutting down of the factory and the takeover of the same by other company. The shareholders made the decision without giving prior notice to the workers. The labors were the biggest sufferers in this case. The important actors in this case were the shareholders and the workers. The ultimate sufferers of the situation were the labors and the reason of their sufferings was the stakeholders of the company. However the actors that are to be highlighted are the labor that was unethically treated and the manger that was the reason behind it. This crisis was more unethical and a more important issue than the other issues (Dunne, et al).

The labor refused and he protested against the situation. The executive manger who was accused reacted in a neutral manner towards the situation. The labor made hard efforts to prove himself innocent as he was wrongly charged and was accused in front of all the entire factory workers. Moreover he was charged for something that he has not done. The entire labor union went against the authorities (Booth, Ken and Toni Erskine). The reaction of the labor was expressed through protest and strikes. The reaction of the manager was passive. He was not ready to listen to the needs of the labors. He showed an adamant behavior towards the labors. The reaction of labors was violent and it ultimately was able to bring about a change in the decision of the management. The executive manager had to finally to apologize to the union members. This was the final reaction of the manager (Battaly, Heather).

Reactions and Actions of the Actors

While analyzing the behaviors of the actors the theory of pluralists can be put forward. The pluralist theory includes that the organizations comprises of individuals who form distinct sectional groups which has own area of interests, objectives and leadership. This theory can be applied when there are conflict between the management and the employees which results from the industrial and organizational factors (Ludwig, David). This comprises of not only the industrial disputes and strikes but also the entire range of whole range of opposing and divergent behaviors between the owners of the industry and the mangers on one side and the working people and their organization and union on the other side. The theory can be applied in this crisis (Ackers, Peter). The crisis occurred between the mangers and the worker unions. It has laid over-emphasis on the interest alone. It overlooked the relevance of the values and the cultures. The workers in this case show a common interest but they do not share the same value. The pluralists’ theory is therefore applicable in this case. The interests and the values play an important role in uniting the groups and also in dividing them. However from the analysis of the situation this can be stated that it is not necessary for the identity of the group to be deep rooted on any particular common group interest as some particular common value a significant role in such construction (Acharya, Amitav).

Conclusion

Therefore from the above analysis and the study of the issue it can be stated that the industrial relations are an important segment of any industrial sectors. The theories help to regulate these relations. The crisis needs to be tackled in effective manners. The above analysis contains the details of such crisis and the same and the role of the actors in such situations. It is advisable to maintain the industrial relations in a resolved manner. All the actors are dependent on each other in the industrial sector.

References

Acharya, Amitav. Constructing a security community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the problem of regional order. Routledge, 2014.

Ackers, Peter. “Rethinking the employment relationship: a neo-pluralist critique of British industrial relations orthodoxy.” The International Journal of Human Resource Management 25.18 (2014): 2608-2625.

Battaly, Heather. “A Pluralist Theory of Virtue.” Current Controversies in Virtue Theory. Routledge (2015): 7-21.

Booth, Ken, and Toni Erskine, eds. International relations theory today. John Wiley & Sons, 2016.

Dunne, Tim, Lene Hansen, and Colin Wight. “The end of International Relations theory?.” European Journal of International Relations 19.3 (2013): 405-425.

Dunne, Tim, Milja Kurki, and Steve Smith, eds. International Relations Theories. Oxford University Press, 2013.

Ferguson, Yale H. “Diversity in IR theory: Pluralism as an opportunity for understanding global politics.” International Studies Perspectives 16.1 (2015): 3-12. Wallace, Helen, Mark A. Pollack, and Alasdair R. Young, eds. Policy-making in the European Union. Oxford University Press, USA, 2015.

Jackson, Robert, and Georg Sørensen. Introduction to international relations: theories and approaches. Oxford university press, 2015.

Jørgensen, Knud Erik. International relations theory: A new introduction. Springer, 2017.

Light, Margot, and Arthur John Richard Groom, eds. International relations: A handbook of current theory. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2016.

Ludwig, David. A Pluralist theory of the mind. Vol. 2. Dordrecht: Springer, 2015.

Smith, Steve, Amelia Hadfield, and Tim Dunne, eds. Foreign policy: theories, actors, cases. Oxford University Press, 2016.