Labor relations systems and organizational practices

European Practices: Labor Relations

The demolition of the Berlin Wall, and the implementation of the democratic reforms through out the Eastern Europe was responsible for the revolutionary changes in the region, and changes were accompanies by certain amendments in the trade relations among the European countries, and it was observed that the trade barriers between the European countries were removed, and the countries were associated with each other in different trade and economic agreements. Such development in trade and economic sector with the European region was responsible for the reforms in the labor relations. The detailed inspection of the European labor relation classify it into two major theoretical models, that is based on the descriptive evaluation and review of the conditions responsible for the development of the labor movement within the national and regional community, which is characterized by the continental studies. The American approach also termed as Anglo-Saxon approach is based on theoretical and comparative reviews and research. During the industrial revolution, three models of unionism and three different models of labor relations evolved in Europe. The Marxist Union supported the labor relation model approved by the German federation; the model is based on the preventive measures and actions practiced by the organization and parliament towards the collection of the contracts at industrial level. The German approach is based on the influence of the Socialist parties and unions on the parliament of the particular country; the influence is mounted for the introduction and implementation of required and expected regulations and legislations. Secondly, the anarchistic unionism is the derivative of the French model of labor relations; the model is widely acceptable and practiced in Spain and Italy, beside France. The French model is based on the practices related to protest and calls for strike; the organization factor has been ignored. In France, the labor enjoys stain relations with the employers, therefore the union has no other choice but to 'address the state in the face of unwilling employers; those unions expressed no interest in piecemeal reform' (Slomp, 1990). It is observed that French model encouraged the exploitation and vindication of the legislative issues, and such opportunity is then taken to launch protest and strikes against the employers and the federation. The British model is based on 'identifiable type of labor relations prior to World War' (Slomp, 1990), in the case of the labors which were confined to British Isles, the union played a limited and restricted role, and avoided representation of the workers through their platform, the unions did not even practiced a role of 'an organizers, which further mobilizes its workers for political purposes' (Slomp, 1990), and have truly restrict the domain of their services and activities. The British model is therefore based on the system which has eschewed 'political activity and bargaining collectively' with the federation and the employers. Such unions provided the employers with the provisions for the management of the labor conditions during the recruitment process. After World War I, the Soviets evolved their own labor relations model, in which the employees were motivated and encouraged by the unions to work hard for increasing the production activities, the union introduced and promoted industrial discipline which was responsible for the unprecedented rise in the production activities. The unions played a crucial role and responsibility of the 'transmission belt' as per the guide lines of the Communist Party, the purpose of the exercise was to ensure 'a loyal and willing following' (Richard, 1991). After the formation of Yugoslavia at the end of World War II, another theoretical model of labor relations evolved which was based on the concept of self-management. As per the model, the 'unions function much less as a transmission belt for the party than in the Soviet model' (Richard, 1991). The model made the union experience severe stress, although the production activities were on rise, however the government emerged as a more autonomous body. It was believed that, model was based on the principle according to which the labor relations were influenced and controlled by the party, in this case there was enough opportunity for the union and the employees, for example, the party and the union enjoyed the authority of the works councils at enterprise level due to such combination (Suzuki, 1996).

American Model: Labor Relations