Talk:Industrial relations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Business and economics Portal This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject.
B	rated as B-Class on the assessment scale
Mid	rated as Mid-importance on the assessment scale

	This article is part of WikiProject Organized Labour, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Organized Labour. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	Organized Labour Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
	If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments.

[edit] IR perspectives

I just added a section on IR perspective theories (unitary and pluralistic). I am currently studying this subject and had a lot of reading about it.I'll be happy if people had a look at it and contributed as well. I added my reference to the References list. --Pinnecco 11:39, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

You left out the Marxist perspective. I'll try and find time to do something on this. - Dave Smith 11:57, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

You are absolutely right! I wanted to focus on the main IR perspectives, because Marxism is (quoting) "no a theory of IR per se, but a method of social enquiry into power relationships", which considers class conflict as a catalytic source of change. It views trade unions as a "method of accommodating the contradictions inherent in capitalism". Marxists look to a political revolution, dictated by the proletariat.

There is also the Systems Perspective which was modeled by John Dunlop (Industrial Relations Systems, 1958) which I barely understand so I am not the right one to write about it. --Pinnecco 13:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Pinnecco. You will see that I have added a section on the Marxist perspective and amended the introduction accordingly. Once you start looking at the process of workplace relations, which is a commonly held definition of IR, then the Marxist view has to come into play. Dunlop's system approach is not so much a perspective (which would take a view of IR from a particular standpoint) but is an attempt to "provide tools of analysis to interpret and gain understanding of the widest possible range of industrial relations facts and practices" (See your source, pages vi and ix). He suggests four interrelated elements: actors, contexts, ideology and rules. Out of interest, where did you get your quote about the Marxist position from? - Dave Smith 13:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dave Smith. I am not very sure that I understood you when you said "See your source, pages vi and ix". You mean the book (Mullins,. 2005) which I used as refference? If so, pages vi and ix are not relevant :). The quoting I did on marxism is a PPT print-out by my lecturer on HRM.

Good work on the Marxism section. Concerning Marxim's perception of conflict, I understand that it is innevitable due to the struggle of classes, and a revolution (often by force) is necessary.

As for Dunlop's view, do you think is worth mentioning it after the three perspectives, emphasising what you quoted? "Dunlop's system approach is not so much a perspective (which would take a view of IR from a particular standpoint) but is an attempt to "provide tools of analysis to interpret and gain understanding of the widest possible range of industrial relations facts and practices" (See your source, pages vi and ix). He suggests four interrelated elements: actors, contexts, ideology and rules" --Pinnecco 13:56, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I thought you had quoted Industrial Relations Systems, 1958 by John Dunlop and so the pages I referred to are from that text. Not sure what PPT is.

PPT = Power point file (a PowerPoint presentation)

Ah ... OK - Dave Smith 01:19, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The Marxist view is that conflict in society is what brings about change (not necessarily violently but conflict recognises a confrontation between two classes - so it may be a general strike or a more traditional revolution such as in Cuba).

If you are going to make use of Dunlop, then you would need to add in a lot of other thinking such as: the input-output model, social action, control of the labour process, HRM and social partnerships. So it is really a whole new section dealing with the nature of IR. - Dave Smith 14:31, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I had an HR exam today and we were told to study this subject. In order to consolidate my views and everything I was readying, I thought about contributing to this article. :) Think I did alright... In sense I wrote what I wrote here, but I have chosen my words better when contributing to this article (don't we always?) --Pinnecco 21:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Inevitably, writing an article will help you learn. You did OK here. - Dave Smith 01:19, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Industrial Relations Rally'

The note below the picture has to be of a trade union rally. I've never heard of an industrial relations rally' before! I'll change it if no one objects. - Dave Smith 12:50, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I've changed this - Dave Smith 14:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Good day sir, i don't really understand industrial relations very well, can u please explain, where they work, can they establish on their own.

I'm afraid I don't understand what you are asking. Can you ask your question a different way? - Dave Smith 00:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)