New South Wales (NSW) Train Workers Dispute Of January 2018 - Contextual Analysis

In this assessment, you will be continuing your detailed examination of the NSW train workers’ dispute of January 2018.

(i) Thinking of the major parties that were involved in this dispute, and reports in the public domain on the processes that were followed, what were the specific points of conflict that were evident? For each point of conflict that you identify,
explain the exact interrelationship among the parties and processes that was causing the conflict.

(ii) Using relevant theories that you have studied in this subject, locate the positions taken by each of the parties in these points of conflict and then recommend what adjustments could have been made by each party to prevent the dispute.

Moderated discussion of IR theory and practice

(iii) In this task, you will be responding to a curated set of ideas and perspectives of fellow students in the class, provided in Assessment 1. A selection of ideas and perspectives of students in the class will be provided to you soon after the return date for.

(iv) Select one idea or perspective and provide an evidence-based counterargument, using scholarly sources on IR theories, your own critical thinking and, if appropriate, your own experience.

Industrial relations refer to the interactions between parties under an employment relationship or agreement. It, therefore, governs the relationship between employees and employers within the workplace. The interactions are in the form of a bargain or a negotiation, and in most cases, they result in an industrial conflict or dispute (Cradden et al., 2018).  This paper will provide a report of the New South Wales (NSW) Train Workers Dispute of January 2018. The report will provide a contextual analysis of the industrial dispute by providing an understanding of the significant points of conflict, the parties involved in the battle and their relationships as well as the application of relevant theories in the knowledge of the dispute. The report will also respond to some of the curated ideas from different perspectives of fellow students.

The New South Wales Train Workers Industrial dispute occurred on 29th of January 2018 and was announced by the Rail Tram and Bus Union (RTBU). The disputing parties included the workers working on the train, the Sydney train and the NSW government. The dispute resulted after failed negotiations over pay as well as improved working conditions.   The union demands were seeking to achieve a 6% annual pay increase for its workers which the government could not offer as it had brought an offer of 2.5% pay rise annually. The rail workers were unhappy about the current enterprise agreement and therefore voted to take industrial action to negotiate a better pay as well as improved working conditions. According to the report of Mr. Classens, the union had attempted to negotiate an enterprise agreement for six months on behalf of 9000 workers, but their efforts failed since the NSW government and Train management refused to negotiate or bargain on pay as well as the basic conditions that impacted the employee’s safety. However, the industrial court on 9th of February made a decision that led to the suspension of the industrial action by arguing that the industrial action was threatened the welfare of part of the population. It was further alleged that the industrial action was also threatening to cause significant damage to an important of the Australian economy.

There were some unresolved disagreements with resulted in the industrial dispute. The first conflicting point was the refusal of the Sydney train and NSW train management refusal to negotiate a fair and reasonable enterprise. The Fair work act provides that both employees and employers should have an agreement on various terms in their engagement and the parties are supposed to be fair to each other. The refusal to enter into a negotiation with the NSW Train Management and the government with the employees contributed to employee’s decision to vote for industrial action. Six months was a long period for engagement, and therefore according to the argument of Mr. Classens, the union had done their best to bring the parties into a table to resolve these issues, but their efforts did not bear any fruits.

Points of Conflict in the Industrial Dispute

The second point of conflict was the lower pay the employees received which led to a demand for an increase of 6% pay rise. The employers were therefore poorly paid and had the perception that they are not justly rewarded for their input or the work they did. The union, thus, would represent the interest of the workers and negotiate a better pay rise for its employees. On the other hand, the government and the NSW train management could only offer 2.5% rise which was not even half of the demands of the employees through the union. The parties could not, therefore, come into an agreement or into a bargain to see that the best interests of the parties were met. Conflict, hence, arose as a result of failure to reach an agreement as well as a bargain on an appropriate pay rise. In this case, the parties would have come up with a proper pay rise that was more considerate for both parties. According to the NSW Workers union Secretary Mr. Morey, the employees should be compensated for the work they are doing appropriately and not subject them to unfair treatment. He, therefore, calls the government to consider the contributions of the employees and not just to save their returns from their hard work without appreciation.

The third point of conflict was on the working conditions of the workers which raised concern over their safety over the workplace. Employees need to feel secure and protected in their workplace and under the Australia labor act, every employee is entitled to work in a safe environment. Without the assurance of safer working conditions, it is challenging for the employees to deliver or offer their best services to the commuters and the NSW rail enterprise. When discussing the demands, the transport minister Mr. Andrew Constance was said to be arrogant and termed the requirements to be unreasonable and unrealistic and hence did not want to engage with the union. Therefore the parties were not in good terms to serve the interest of the workers a situation which led to worsening on the 24-hour industrial strike for the train workers. The workers, on the other hand, we're asking for fair working conditions something the NSW government was not willing to negotiate. In order to maintain a good relationship with one’s nurse, it is important to talk about sensitive subjects such as sex among others. Though one may feel uncomfortable they should realize that doctors and nurses are used to talking about such personal matters. Tom became comfortable while talking to the nurse about the sexual problem he was experiencing that arose from his condition.

Significant Points of Conflict

While dealing with a sensitive topic, the nurse was direct and clear aiming at making the conversation less uncomfortable by trying to be diplomatic. As a result of these points of conflict and failure to enter into a bargain with the relevant parties, the strike continued to affect the economy of Australia and create increased challenges to the commuters. The longer the disputes took before negotiating a deal, the more the situation changed the economy as well as the welfare of a particular group of people in the country. Despite the decision by the industrial court to suspend the industrial action, the dispute continued as the union continued to emphasize on the need to reach bargain or negotiation that would see an improvement in the working conditions of the employees as well as an improved offer for a pay rise.

 The long-running industrial dispute, however, came to an end on 25th March 2018 after a deal was negotiated and agreed by the workers. Both the NSW Trains workers and the Sydney Trains voted for a 3% pay raise for the next three years which was central to the demands of the union. The Union, however, believed that the deal would help them improve the overall working conditions. The NSW trains workers voted for the deal by 52.8% on the ballot while the Sydney Trains employees voted for the new deal by 50.8%. Such small margins in support of the deal raised concerns of the levels of dissatisfaction as the majority of the employees could be said to be unhappy with the deal. The secretary of the workers union in Australia Mr. Classens argued that such a small margin in voting showed that the majority of the workers were not satisfied with the deal. The agreement was then taken to the Fair Work Commission for approval and implementation.

However, despite the success of the deal that saw to the end of the industrial dispute, the secretary of the union believed that the minister of transport Mr. Constance was very arrogant in his engagement with the union and his actions and words were not friendly to the employees. There is a need, therefore, to embark on another initiative of restoring good faith among the disputing parties.  The transport minister, however, welcomed the agreement of 3% pay rise and thanked the union and the workforce for the great support they have continued to give to them during that difficult and long-running industrial dispute moments.

Parties Involved

Many people have studied the concept of industrial relations but do not know how they play a critical role in understanding the motive of each party in a negotiation or bargain. In this case, four primary theories have been developed including the Marxists theory, the radical theory, unitary theory as well as the pluralist theory (Aronowitz, 2016). The radical theory perspective of personal relations at the workplace is that it is necessary but not ideal. The radicals are of the belief that the existence of such bodies as unions is to profit themselves at the expense of the workers. This was the case of the NSW government which enjoyed many profits collected from the train operations compared to the needs of their employees.

The unitary theory of industrial relations emphasizes the codependency of the employees as well as the employers. An organization is viewed as an integrated, collaborative as well as friendly organization. This implies that industrial relations should be integrative and undertaken through collaborative efforts (Clegg, Kornberger & Pitsis, 2015). The unitarist do not support the idea of having unions as they believe that they serve to distract employees from their commitment. Marxist theory of industrial relations argues that the modern corporate world still facing increased capitalism which contributes to the exploitation of workers at the expense of increased profits been enjoyed by the corporation. They argue that institutions would instead be governed and controlled by the state. However, the most relevant theory of industrial relations and especially in understanding the NSW Workers industrial dispute is the pluralist theory (Kelly, 2018). The approach emphasizes most on the role the company management team, the trade unions and champions the value of the collective bargain. The theory recognizes all the companies operating under their management as well as under the control of trade unions. The approach is built upon the belief that the primary function of the administration is to coordinate, communicate and persuade rather than to exercise control and demand.

Based on the pluralist theory of industrial relations, the workers union plays a critical role in improving the working conditions of the employees by representing their views and concerns to the relevant bodies (Kaufman & Gall, 2015). The union, therefore, served a critical role of reinforcing the value of collective bargain that saw to the negation of a deal of 3% which was more favorable for the parties involved. It is essential for employees to be under the umbrella of a union as it provides them with an opportunity of been represented as a whole without necessarily having to go through difficult times at work just because no one was ready to serve you.

Application of Theories in Understanding the Dispute

During the conflicting points represented under the industrial dispute, different parties took different positions during the negotiation. For instance, the government was unwilling to provide a different offer other than 2.5% of a pay rise. According to them, the demands raised by the union and workers for a pay rise of 6% were unreasonable. Because of taking such a strict position the government, as well as the NSW trains management, could not welcome any negotiation for over six months until the industrial action was voted for by the employees (Ackers, 2014). In this I believe, based on the argument of the pluralist theory which supports collaborative and collective bargain, both parties would have sought to have made their demands a little bit more favorable to each other. This would have given them an opportunity to enter into a negotiation by been open to changes. The union’s demands to continue with their 24 hours strike unless the 6% demand was achieved would have also been done through consultations before coming up with such a claim. This would have helped them realize the issues facing the government and probably the fact that collective bargain would still work (Kaufman, 2018). The position taken by the employees about fair working conditions as an improvement of the existing agreement was a bit strict as it comprised an evaluation of the current working conditions. Adjustments would have been made by the workers union by clearly defining the areas which need to be evaluated since all the requirements could not have been accomplished at the same time.  Such a decision would allow the other parties to think of the best were to achieve and integrate this idea to the primary or practical works.

After the proposed industrial action was suspended by the Fair Work Commission, both parties adopted a pluralist approach where the role of unions advances the interests of employees but accepts the responsibility to compromise, while management is to achieve organizational goals in a way that reconciles conflicting interests.  Conflict is seen as a resolvable outcome of the employment relationship (Bray et al., 2018). There was good, fair bargaining with the first offer of 2.75% rejected, but the counter offers of 3% were accepted.  Had the parties continued with the opposing unitarist v radicalism approaches, the possibility of the resolution was slim.

According to the Pluralists theory, unions play a critical role in advancing the interest of their workers or employees. It was, therefore, appropriate that the parties resolved to adopt the approach since the negotiations took longer than expected and worsened the situations we were trying to solve. During the talks by the union with the government and the management of the NSW trains, the parties had to compromise on their demands to achieve the best fair decision (England, 2017). In this case, the government and the management of the NSW had to compromise their desire to maintain the pay rise by 2.5% by settling at 3% which was voted by the employees. When a conflict arises, and a third party is involved in solving the dispute, his or her role is to help the parties reach the point of agreement. In this case, there was a fair bargain that saw the pay rise increase to 2.5%. The industrial dispute would still be a problem which would have affected Australian economies.

Conclusion

A collective bargain approach was very effective in this case where both parties had to agree on different offers that would see the growth of employee’s welfare. The dispute would still be a significant challenge for the transport minister in the country and therefore adopting this approach may get them well to the next winners (Kaufman, 2018). In my opinion, however, the government is always adamant to meet employees demands, based on the votes made by the workers which the results had little margin could have been used as a driving force to get a better deal. If the union had set a minimum requirement pay rise rate, then the government would strive to meet the requirements of the union (Strauss & Whitfield, 2018). The collective bargain could be even better to 4% which would be more favorable to employees. From my experience working with a particular accounting consultancy company, we experienced workers strike who was also complaining about the low pay as well as unfavorable working condition. The company adopted radicalize model which supported the idea of industrial relations but were not ideal. In conclusion, therefore, the successful negotiation and bargain that saw to the end of the industrial action was a result of the adoption of the pluralist theory through collective agreement and is ready to give up on huge demands.

References:

Ackers, P. (2014). Rethinking the employment relationship: a neo-pluralist critique of British industrial relations orthodoxy. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(18), 2608-2625.

Aronowitz, S. (2016). The crisis in historical materialism: Class, politics and culture in Marxist theory. Springer.

Clegg, S. R., Kornberger, M., & Pitsis, T. (2015). Managing and organizations: An introduction to theory and practice. Sage.

Cradden, C., Cradden, C., Abbott, K., Ackers, P., Ackers, P., Alston, P., ... & Schon, D. A. (2018). The ‘Industrial Relations System’Concept as a Basis for Theory in Industrial Relations. In A New Theory of Industrial Relations: People, Markets and Organizations after Neoliberalism (Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. ix-xii). Hoboken: Pap/Psc., Sage Publications Ltd.

England, P. (2017). Comparable worth: Theories and evidence. Routledge.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-12/sydney-commuters-get-an-apology-for-train-delays/9248594 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-10/sydney-trains-issued-with-please-explain-over-network-meltdown/9316860 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-15/sydney-train-commuters-prepare-for-more-train-disruptions/9328612 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-16/sydney-and-nsw-trains-workers-to-go-on-strike/9333756 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-18/train-strike-in-nsw-to-go-ahead/9339648 

https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/html/pdf/2018fwc519.pdf 

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/no-other-choice-nsw-train-workers-to-strike-for-24-hours-over-pay-dispute-20180116-h0j6g8.html 

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/sydney-rail-workers-vote-to-take-industrial-action-over-pay-dispute-20180112-h0h6bm.html 

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jan/25/sydney-train-strike-stopped-fair-work-blocks-union-action  

Kaufman, B. E. (2018). Rethinking Industrial Relations, or at least the British radical frame. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 39(4), 577-598.

Kaufman, B., & Gall, G. (2015). Advancing industrial relations theory: an analytical synthesis of British-American and pluralist-radical ideas. Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations, 70(3), 407-431.

Kelly, J. (2018). Rethinking Industrial Relations revisited. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 0143831X18777612.

NSW Train workers to strike after Sydney Trains fails to resolve pay dispute, (2018), https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-24/nsw-rail-workers-agree-to-pay-deal/9583618

Strauss, G., & Whitfield, K. (Eds.). (2018). Researching the World of Work: Strategies and Methods in Studying Industrial Relations. Cornell University Press.

Tapia, M., Ibsen, C. L., & Kochan, T. A. (2015). Mapping the frontier of theory in industrial relations: the contested role of worker representation. Socio-Economic Review, 13(1), 157-184.