Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.

Hrm 603 major assign

  • Inicia sesión para ver los comentarios

Hrm 603 major assign

  1. 1. Name: CagiMerelitaID No.: 2011001230
  2. 2. Table of ContentsIntroduction ................................................................................................................1Key features and processes of ER/IR system of the three countries .........................4Structures and roles and relationship .........................................................................6Role of Trade Unions in each country .......................................................................7The role of the State in each country .........................................................................8The role of Employers Association............................................................................9Labour market philosophies .....................................................................................10Labour legislations or Laws .....................................................................................11Legal framework (collective or individual) .............................................................13Recent Trends/ Changes ..........................................................................................14Conclusion ...............................................................................................................15
  3. 3. IntroductionEmployment Relations can be defined as the study of the rules and rule – making processes thatregulate the employment relations (Bray, Waring, & Cooper, 2009). It was further noted by(Bray, Waring, & Cooper, 2009) that at the core of Employment relations, are different viewsabout the most effective way to manage the relationship between an organization and itsrepresentatives, the managers, and employees and their representatives. This is evident, as(Devereaux & Moore, 1995) defined employment relationship as the “set of all relations andsupporting institutions between employees and employers (Flanagan et al., 1989)”. This is allsummed up by(Sagoa, 2013) who noted that;Industrial relations is a multidisciplinary field thatstudies the employment relationship and it explores the relationship between employers andemployees, employers and trade unions, their relationship with the state and other stakeholders,with industrial relations being increasingly called employment relations because of theimportance or significance of non- industrial or employment relationships.Historically, the British system was heavily indebted in the Australian system. According to(Sagoa, 2013) , the British system of employment was a collective bargaining one which wasadversarial as supposed to consensual by nature, with the system encompassed a well -developed trade union movement which was primarily craft as opposed to industry based union.This system was significant in terms of the development of other employment relations systems,such as Australia. Since the 1960s, „tradition voluntarism‟ has been weakened by the increasinglegislative intervention of the state, particularly since the election of the Conservative Party in19701.It was further noted by (EIROnline, 2009) that; the system of industrial relations in the UnitedKingdom (UK) is traditionally characterized by voluntary relations between the social partners,with a minimal level of interference from the state. In the context of very early industrializationand a liberal political culture in which the state seldom intervened in the affairs of private actors,1Sagoa, I. (2013, January 4). Industrial or Employment Relations in the United States; Industrial or Employment Relations in Great Britain. HRM 603: Comparative Studies in Industrial or Employment Relations. Suva, Nasinu, Fiji: Fiji National University Nasinu Campus. 1CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  4. 4. trade unions gradually consolidated their membership and power base throughout the 19thcentury. Various legislative developments also allowed trade unions the right to organizeworkers and engage in industrial action. The economic context throughout this time was alsofavorable to the development of trade unionism. Owing to the pace of industrialization and theexistence of substantial colonial markets for UK industry, the 19th century and early 20thcentury were characterized by extensive economic growth. This economic climate facilitated thedevelopment of a system in which some of the fruits of economic development could bedesignated for collectively bargained wage increases. In terms of the role of the law, collectivebargaining was far more important than the influence of legal regulation. For employers andtrade unions, the role of statute law was to support and extend collective bargaining rather thanto comprehensively regulate the system. Notably, the law provided trade unions with a series of„immunities‟ from UK common law.Historically, Australia‟s employment relations system can be traced back to the period of theSecond World War when manpower shortages and the demands of the war effort required thesmooth assimilation of a large number of women into the workforce, many in very non –traditional roles (Cochrane, 1985)2. Politically, the Australian system is heavily indebted to theBritish system. According to (Shelton, 1995), “recent changes in the international economicstanding of Australia have created an „economic crisis‟ mentality, that is having a last impact onbusiness and politics in this country, as the government in the late 1980s, recognized theimportance of human resource management in its effort to restructure industry and promote amore productive business environment”.Economically,(Shelton, 1995) noted that, the international economy has changed in recent timesespecially since the 1980s; the Australian governments have changed their strategies on how thedomestic economy should respond to international developments. Australian economicdevelopment has always been strongly affected by its place in the international politicaleconomy.2Shelton, D. (1995). Human Resources in Australia. In L. F. Moore, & J. P. Devereaux, Human Resource Management on the Pacific Rim: Institutions, Practices, & Attitudes (pp. 31-35). New York: Walter de Gruyter. 2CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  5. 5. (Shelton, 1995) further noted that the “Australian economy during the nineteenth century, wasvery open to international force, however, their economy remains highly dependent on its miningand agriculture industries, despite these industries employing a mere 5% of the total workforce,and has generally experienced strong economic growth from the 1980s to 2007, with theexception of a sharp downturn in 1990 – 91”.When compared to the background of Australia, United States of America, human resourcemanagement according to (Devereaux & Moore, 1995), “is at the turn of this century appears tobe in a state of transition, whether viewed by human resource specialists or industrial relationstheorists”. This is supported by (Sagoa, 2013) , who noted thatthe persistence of economicpressure that first challenged American industry in the 1970s continues to reshape US industrialrelations, with an effort to maintain their competitiveness, US firms have developed panoply ofstrategies ranging from confrontation and labor control to collaboration and employeeempowerment. Furthermore, globalization of markets, rapid technological changes, shorterproduct – life cycles and shifts in consumer preferences have increased the pressures on USfirms.According to (Devereaux & Moore, 1995), the “modern employment relationship in the USbegan in the mid – 1800s with the advent of the mechanized factory, which required theavailability of more unskilled and skilled labor on a longer term, reliable basis (Chandler, 1962;Dobbin, 1992; Jacoby, 1985)”.(Schneider & Stepp, 2006)noted that “employee involvement was first promoted in the late1960s and 1970s as an antidote to growing disaffection with the industrial workplace”.Moreover, (Kaufman, 2006) added that, “…..after the field‟s early ideas were adopted as publicpolicy and workers secured some protections at work – through laws and unions-difficulties anddifferences emerged”.Therefore, this assignment will compare and contrasts the main features ofEmployment/Industrial relations between Great Britain, US and Australia, with usage ofexamples. 3CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  6. 6. Key features and processes of ER/IR system of the three countriesAccording to (Sagoa, 2013), the key features of the system in Britain are;the influence of theConservative Government since 1970 on the pattern of employment relations in Britain, theeffect which political climate has on Trade union density, the decline in collective bargainingand the change in the level at which the such bargaining is occurring, the extent to which HumanResource Management policies are being pursued by British Management, the view of authors/scholars with regards to the transformation of British employment relations and the influence ofEuropean Union and the effect of change in government on the future direction of employmentrelations.Furthermore, (Sagoa, 2013) noted that the key features in the United States Industrial Relationssystems. He noted that there is a “three- tier structure of industrial relations in the United Stateswhich are economy, sectoral, and company/establishment bargaining, and local unions deal withthe daily interaction with employers at the workplace”. However, (Sagoa, 2013) further notedthat “……there has been a change in the shared ideology among the three players (employers,trade union and government) since the 1980, with the employment having moved frommanufacturing jobs and other jobs that have traditionally been represented by unions to moreservice and high technology jobs, and employers have learned that using positive humanresource management practices. Finally, in the past several the governments has increasinglyprovided for the protection of workers‟ rights by passing a variety of legislative actions”.Moreover, the Australian key features of the system in Australia are, according to (Sagoa, 2013),the Australian employment relations have moved from centralized to decentralized regulation ofwork, from awards and collectively negotiated agreements to individual contracts ofemployment, from full-time, permanent and continuing jobs to contingent forms of work andfrom a pluralist system of employment relations to a unitarist approach in which collective formsof worker representation are diminished.Therefore, when comparing the key features of each of the countries, the similar key features, arethe significant legislative, structural changes, with declines in union density and power, increasein non – standard forms of employment. However, Great Britain and United States both have a 4CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  7. 7. centralised system of industrial relations, whereas Australia, is trying to move away from acentralised system to a decentralised system.According to (Sagoa, 2013), the voluntary system characterized by the British industrial relationssystem for most of the 20th century, at its heart was a policy of relative legal abstention, withprimacy to – and support for –regulation through collective bargaining, as the regulation ofemployment relationship by means of collective bargaining between employers and unions(including multi – employer level) was far more important than legal regulation through Acts ofParliament, where statutory law intervened, it did so to support and extend the collectivebargaining and to plug gaps, its coverage and protection.However, the coverage of collective bargaining in Great Britain has shrunk, as unionmembership and density, particularly in the private sector (Sagoa, 2013). This was furthersupported by(EIROnline, 2009) who noted that, “collective bargaining has become far moredecentralised since the 1970s and 1980s”. But when compared to Australia, according to(Shelton, 1995), “The view of union movement is that Australian Workplace Agreement(AWAs), are an attempt to undermine the collective bargaining power of trade unions in thenegotiation of pay and conditions of their members”. Whereas, in the United States, according to(Sagoa, 2013), collective bargaining effectively sets and regulates the broad, middle tier of thewage distribution and employment conditions.Therefore, it can further be said that collective bargaining is used by all the three countries as ameans to settle disputes in workplaces, and the outcome of the negotiations both are benefited bythe employers and its workers. 5CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  8. 8. Structures and roles and relationshipThe structure of employment has changed radically in recent years (Sagoa, 2013). This statementis true as over the years, the countries, Australia, Great Britain and United States developedeconomically, with the increase in supply and demand for labor. According to (Sagoa, 2013)Australia‟s structure of employment changed radically, that is, there is a decline in full – timepermanent employment, with the expansion of various forms of non – standard employment(such as casual work, temporary jobs, outsourcing and use of agencies and other labor marketintermediaries). (Moriguchi, 2000)noted that, in the U.S. employment system, explicit andelaborate employment contracts in large manufacturingfirms were reinforced by the well-developed legal enforcement mechanism providedby the state; at the same time, as more firms inthe economy relied on explicit contracts, the state‟s return from providing a legal system toenforce such contracts became higher.(Huebsch, 2013)added that in the United States of America; the history of the labor-managementrelationship started in the mid-1860s with the Industrial Revolution. Mass migration of workersfrom rural to urban areas led to a surplus of labor, and tough competition between factories. Ingeneral, few laws existed to protect workers, and employers focused on cutting costs rather thanthe care of their personnel. Companies often fired workers for taking part in union activities. Thefirst national union, the Knights of Labor, dominatedlabor-management relations by organizingpolitical actions and conducting arbitration with companies on behalf of workers. 6CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  9. 9. Role of Trade Unions in each countryThe role of trade unions has changed significantly over the past thirty years (Wright, 2011).Trade unions have a number of functions, some of which have been more prominent than othersat different periods in history, but, over the course of time trade unions have developed fiveprincipal functions (Ewing, 2004). (Ewing, 2004)further noted that “the five developed principalfunctions are a service function; a representation function; a regulatory function; a governmentfunction; and a public administration function”. According to (WikiAnswers, 2013), there arenine main functions of a trade union which are;collective bargaining with the management tosettle terms and conditions of employment, advise the management on personnel policies andpractices, taking up the individual and collective grievances of the workers with themanagement, work for achieving better say of workers in the management of affairs of theenterprise which influence the lives of the workers directly, organising demonstrations, strikes,etc, to press demands of workers, education of workers and their children, welfare andrecreational activities of their members, representing of workers in various national andinternational forums, and securing legislative protection for workers from the government.The main service a union provides for its members is negotiation and representation. Accordingto (Margetts, 1998), most „collective bargaining‟ takes place quietly and agreements are quicklyreached by the union and the employer. The establishment of conciliation and arbitration systemsencouraged the rapid growth of Australian unions and, to a lesser extent, employerassociation(Sagoa, 2013). According to (Shelton, 1995), in Australia, unions may acquire thestatus of a legal entity (known as collective bargaining) over wages, working hours and otherterms and conditions of employment. In Great Britain, it has been noted by (EIROnline, 2009),“……trade unions in different companies and sectors often share information with oneanother…” 7CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  10. 10. The role of the State in each countryAccording to (Devereaux & Moore, 1995), the role of the state has become more important thanthe labour may having to lose power to management. Overall, the role of the state is to establishlaws such as Safety regulations and to also provide financial aid to businesses, that contribute tothe economy of a country, in order to keep the economy afloat(Rollinson, n.d.).Until the 1950s there was probably no other industrialised country in the world where the Statewas less interventionist in terms of its employment relations laws than Britain (Rollinson, n.d.).However, the pace of State intervention has accelerated significantly since the end of the SecondWorld War, first during the 1960s and 1970s and then again in the 1980s; further interventionsby the State during the new millennium have altered the employment relations landscape inBritain even more(Rollinson, n.d.). As a result, it is now probably fair to say that individualemployment laws, rather than voluntary collective bargaining agreements, regulate workingconditions in Britain (Ewing, 2003), which has had a huge impact on the behaviour of managers,trade unions and employees(Rollinson, n.d.).Overall, it can be summarised as, according to (Sagoa, 2013), the key roles of the state in theindustrial relations or employment relations context are; provision of institutional frameworkwhere the general aim of the state is to provide for the bilateral relationship between theworker/trade unions and employers/their representatives, provision for collective bargainingwhere the state provides the general alternative mechanism for settling general termsemployment by non-political means, limiting or avoiding industrial conflicts where in alldeveloped nations, the state tries to avoid or limit collective industrial conflicts, andinterpretation of conflict of right and interest where clear distinction is and collective conflict ofinterest which are solved peacefully between the parties. 8CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  11. 11. The role of Employers Association(Sagoa, 2013)noted that for the role of employer‟s association are to provide advice, support andtraining to members on industrial relations, and a wide range of employment or work relatedmatters.An employers association could also be described as (EIROnline, 2009) noted, as acounterpart to a trade union in that it organises employers and represents them in collectivebargaining, offers them specialist advice and services and represents them before certain bodiessuch as the Employment Appeals Tribunal of the Labour Court.For Australia, most employers Association were vocally supportive of Work Choices legislation,with some bodies even funding pro- Work media advertisement(Sagoa, 2013). Whereas in GreatBritain, the role of the employers‟ association according to (EIROnline, 2009), is for thepurposes of negotiation with trade unions or to provide affiliated employers with industrialrelations advice and assistance.Therefore, overall, the employers‟ association roles in each country are slightly similar, as theynegotiate industry –wide, multi-employer collective agreements with trade unions (EIROnline,2009). 9CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  12. 12. Labour market philosophiesAccording to (Bray, Waring, & Cooper, 2009); the public policy relevance of employmentrelations in Australia is long – running and unidentifiable – the controversy over the introductionand operation of the 2005 WorkChoices legislation is only the most recent example ofemployment relation contributing a defining issue on which governments and oppositions differand on which governments rise and fall.Unemployment rate are one of the factors that contribute to the rise and fall of the government.According to (Fontes & Fedec, 2013),unemployment Rate in the United States decreased to 7.60percent in March of 2013 from 7.70 percent in February of 2013 as reported by the Bureau ofLabor Statistics. Historically, from 1948 until 2013, the United States Unemployment Rateaveraged 5.81 Percent reaching an all-time high of 10.80 Percent in November of 1982 and arecord low of 2.50 Percent in May of 1953. In the United States, the unemployment ratemeasures the number of people actively looking for a job as a percentage of the labour force.When compared to United States, Australia had the unemployment rate which remainedunchanged at 5.4 percent and had been on the upward trend since reaching 4.9 percent in June of2012 (Fontes & Fedec, 2013), whereas as also added by (Fontes & Fedec, 2013), Great Britainhad the unemployment rate that is at 7.8 percent up from a year low of 7.7 percent. Therefore,Great Britain and United states had approximately the same percent of 7.7 percentunemployment rate.America had the polarization of the business community and organized labour over the basicprovisions of American labour law has accompanied and contributed to the decline in trade unionmembership. 10CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  13. 13. Labour legislations or LawsStudying notes written by (Sagoa, 2013), it is evident that in the country Australia has afederation where it is a system of government with a central federal government and six regionalgovernments, where the role of the state is to only making laws in relation to industrial relations.However, in 2005, the Howard Liberal government, according to (Sagoa, 2013), amendmentsmade to the Work Relations Act 1996 were to remove the state control of industrial relations.According to (Sagoa, 2013), a period of Conservative Government from the year1979 to 1997under Mrs. Thatcher and then Mr. Major saw a radical break with voluntarist tradition of Britishindustrial relations, but the post 1997 Labour government had taken a different approach to thatof its predecessors regarding the role of legislation in regulating employment relations. However,the voluntary system characterized by British industrial relations for most of the 20th century,where at the heart of the policy of relative legal abstention was the regulation through collectivebargaining. Furthermore, in the post 1997 legislative agenda, according to (Sagoa, 2013), theNational Minimum Wages (NMW) was introduced in April 1999 and legislation which regulateswork time and leave from 1998 with, legislation on Trade Union recognition procedure beingeffective from the year 2000.According to (WikiAnswers, 2013), United States labor law is the body of law that mediates therights and duties of workers, employers and labor unions in the United States of America.Federal laws, such as the Fair Labor Standards Act, the National Labor Relations Act and theOccupational Safety and Health Act set the standards that govern workers rights to organize inthe private sector, and override most state and local laws. Usually more limited rights foremployees of the federal government, but not state or local governments, where workers derivetheir rights from state law(WikiAnswers, 2013).The pattern is even more mixed in the area ofwages and working conditions. Federal law establishes minimum wages and overtime rights formost workers in the private and public sectors; state and local laws may provide more expansiverights. Similarly, federal law provides minimum workplace safety standards, but allows the statesto take over those responsibilities and to provide more stringent standards. 11CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  14. 14. Finally, both federal and state laws protect workers from employment discrimination. In mostareas these two bodies of law overlap; as an example, federal law permits states to enact theirown statutes barring discrimination on the basis of race, gender, religion, national origin and age,so long as the state law does not provide less protections than federal law would. Federal law, onthe other hand, preempts most state statutes that would bar employers from discriminatingagainst employees to prevent them from obtaining pensions or other benefits or retaliatingagainst them for asserting those rights(WikiAnswers, 2013). 12CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  15. 15. Legal framework (collective or individual)For Great Britain, since the employment tribunal was set up in the year 1964, individual statutoryemployment rights were enforceable via Employment Tribunal, however, there is no provisionfor class action against one employer (Sagoa, 2013). However, since 1979, there has been nothorough exploration of how employment disputes might be best dealt with, but the systemfavors individuals to enforce their rights where focus is advocated less on providing individualredress for breaches of rights, more about providing the kind of workplace where breaches is lesslikely to occur(Sagoa, 2013).However, Australia hadchanges that were introduced in 1993 by the Keating Labor governmentin the form of the Industrial Relations Reform Act 1993, allowed federal non-union collectiveagreements to be certified for the first time with incorporated a limited right to protectedindustrial action during a designated bargaining period(Sagoa, 2013).America has a collective framework of industrial relations(EIROnline, 2009), where the federaland state laws provide legislations to govern labor relations (WikiAnswers, 2013). 13CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  16. 16. Recent Trends/ ChangesThe most critical changes revolve around the role of the government actions in the workplace(Devereaux & Moore, 1995). For the country United States some major changes faced are,according to (Devereaux & Moore, 1995), “managers revolve around the characteristics ofworkers, with more women joining the workforce, as well as minorities, causing adjustments inthe traditional expectations”. In addition, (Devereaux & Moore, 1995), further noted that due tothe demographic changes in the profile of workers is the lack of workers with requisite skills andproductivity, compared to workers in industrialized countries. Moreover, in United States therole of the government was to establish rules for an orderly process in which workers wouldduly: elect individuals to represent them in a collective negotiation with employers, over wages,hours, and working conditions, finally, the extensive degree of experimentation with employeeparticipation, work organization, and human resource practices in both union and non unionsetting has further tested traditional patterns, but these conflicts and experiments have occurredprimarily in the private sector, with government sitting on the sidelines as a seeminglyuninterested observer (Sagoa, 2013). However, according to (Sagoa, 2013), during Clinton‟sadministration, the labour market and workplace policies were put back on the national agendaFor the Australian employment relations system, (Sagoa, 2013) noted that some changes are;previously the regulation of work and employment are that a long tradition of centralizedregulation of wages and conditions through awards and agreements in the Australia IndustrialRelations Commission, at both the industry and national level. However, over the past decades,the reduction in the scope of the Commission‟s jurisdiction to conciliate and arbitrate awardmatters with encouragement of individualized agreements between workers and employers at theenterprise level. Added to this changes is that, previously, predominantly permanent, full-timeforms of employment with hours regulated by awards and collective agreements, however, overthe past decades, almost half of the workforce now employed in jobs which are casual, part-timeand/or fixed contract.When compared to Australia and United States, for Great Britain, (Sagoa, 2013), highlighted thatsome of its changes are, the retreat from collective bargaining, voice, high involvement ofHuman Resource Management (HRM), contingent pay, upheaval in the public sector and legalregulation. 14CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  17. 17. ConclusionThe purpose of this assignment was to explore the origins of the distinctive employment systemsthat emerged in the U.S. Australia and Great Britain, and to develop a theory which providesaconsistent explanation for the institutional developments for both countries since thebeginningof this century. The main findings and interpretations provided by the comparativehistorical analysis can be summarized as follows.At the beginning of the twentieth century, in spite of the underlying differences between thethree countries‟ cultural traditions, political regimes, and the stages of industrialization,employmentrelations in large American, Australian and Great Britain manufacturing firms weresimilar in the followingaspects. Employment contracts were simple, short-term, andindividualized, and “employmentat-will” was a prevailing principle in both societies. There werehighly competitive labor marketsin which wages were determined by general skills andexperience. Production workers, skilledor unskilled, frequently moved among factories seekinghigher wages and better working conditions, implicit, long-term employment contracts andcompany-wide unions under a new legal framework,with some important modifications. Inparticular, blue-collar workers achieved a highereconomic and social status within firms duringthe process of democratization(Wright, 2011). 15CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  18. 18. ReferencesBray, Waring, & Cooper. (2009). Employment Relations: Theory and practice (1st ed.). McGraw - Hill Australia Pty Ltd.Devereaux, J. P., & Moore, L. F. (1995). Human Resource Management in the United States. In J. P. Devereaux, & L. F. Moore, Human Resource Management on the Pacific Rim: Institutions, Practices, and Attitudes (pp. 319-340). New York: Walter de Gruyter.EIROnline. (2009, October 26). United Kingdom: Industrial relations profile. Retrieved April 3, 2013, from Eurofound: http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/country/united.kingdom_2.htmEwing, K. D. (2004). The Function of Trade Unions. Industrial Law Journal, 34(1), 1 -22.Fontes, N., & Fedec, A. (2013). United States Unemployment Rate. Retrieved April 16, 2013, from Trading Economics: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united- states/unemployment-rateHuebsch, R. (2013). The Evolution of the Labor-Management Relationship. Retrieved April 4, 2013, from Small Business Chron.com: http://smallbusiness.chron.com/evolution- labormanagement-relationship-36056.htmlKaufman, B. E. (2006). The Global Evolution of Industrial Relations: Events, Ideas, and the IIRA (Vol. 59). Cornell University ILR School.Margetts, S. (1998). Trade Unions. Retrieved April 2, 2013, from revisionguru: http://www.revisionguru.co.uk/business/unions.htmMoriguchi, C. (2000, October). The Evolution of Employment Relations in U.S. And Japanese Manufacturing Firms, 1900 -1960: A Comparative Historical And Instituional Analysis. Cambridge.Powers, J. (2013). The Role of the Trade Union Representatives. United States of America.Rollinson, D. (n.d.). Chapter 6: The role of the state in employment relations. McGraw Hill.Sagoa, I. (2013, January 4). Industrial or Employment Relations in the United States; Industrial or Employment Relations in Great Britain. HRM 603: Comparative Studies in Industrial or Employment Relations. Suva, Nasinu, Fiji: Fiji National University Nasinu Campus. 16CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013
  19. 19. Sagoa, I. (2013, February 6). Industrial Employment Relations in Australia. HRM 603: Comparative Studies in Industrial Relations and Employment Relations. Suva, Nasinu, Fiji: Fiji National University Nasinu Campus.Sagoa, I. (2013, January 23). Introduction: An overview of Industrial or Employment relation in global context. HRM 603: Comparative Studies in Industrial or Employment Relations. Suva, Nasinu, Fiji: Fiji National University Nasinu Campus.Schneider, T. J., & Stepp, J. P. (2006). The Evolution of U.S. Labor - Management Relations. Restructuring Associates Inc.Shelton, D. (1995). Human Resources in Australia. In L. F. Moore, & J. P. Devereaux, Human Resource Management on the Pacific Rim: Institutions, Practices, & Attitudes (pp. 31- 35). New York: Walter de Gruyter.WikiAnswers. (2013). What are the functions of a trade union. Retrieved April 2, 2013, from WikiAnswers: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_functions_of_a_trade_unionWright, C. F. (2011, September). What role for trade unions in future workplace relations. University of Cambridge. 17CagiMerelita2011001230HRM 603Tri 1, 2013

×