A Struggle For Employees Inside The Working Environment

WORK – it have to do with both its quantity and its quality and are not limited to the travails of any one group. Those problems include the low wages in most sectors of the economy; the unemployment, underemployment, and precarious employment suffered by many workers; and the overwork that often characterizes even the most privileged forms of employment after all, even the best job is a problem when it monopolizes so much of life.

that are relevant to the practice of management. They describe two contrasting models of workforce

Working in today’s society has changed in the last few decades. The economy and technology are the main reasons for this change. The type of job and environment where one works has also changed. The fact that many people work from home via the internet has drastically changed the workforce and the environment surrounding it. With this change have come new demands, expectations, and opportunities for employers. Everyone deals with these demands differently, affecting the employee’s quality of life and job satisfaction. Though the job and office types and locations have changed over the years the need for job satisfaction has not. In today’s economy the job is not as stable as it used to be. One must be prepared for changes in the future.

As the American workplace has adapted its structure and culture to outside forces, the adaptations (such as location of jobs, changes in needed job skills, and organizational restructuring) have had an impact on employees and their families. Describe the way these adaptations have affected workers and families and analyze the responses of workers and families.

The theme of overemployment is a current problem in the United States. Americans are overworked. Workload has increased and society has experienced a loss of leisure. Overemployment and overworked can be defined as negative effects that occur when individuals are required to work more hours than they want to work. “Personal perceptions of workload are critical, as individuals have diverse reactions to the number of hours worked depending on their needs, lifestyle, expectations, and experiences. Individuals have different tolerances for demands and stress. While many, including professionals

Tokumitsu confirms that employees can resist being controlled by companies because “doing what you love” (DWYL) goes directly against corporations (2). By “DWYL” it promotes employees to break away from the company and to do something that makes them happy. Although Tokumitsu says how great it is to “DWYL” she claims that there is a negative side that is destructive to others by saying “DWYL distracts us from the working conditions of others while validating our own choices and relieving us from obligations to all who labor, whether or not they love it” (2). This means that people who “DWYL” become only concerned with themselves being happy and do not care about the other workers who have terrible jobs. The mantra “DWYL” opposes both Hochschild’s and Davies’ views on what takes place within the workplace. Davies and Hochschild claim that employees have either accepted the “emotional labor” placed on them or simply will not show up to work. Neither Hochschild nor Davies have ever discussed whether employees are able to truly “enjoy” working unless management gives workers certain incentives. As a result Tokumitsus shares the views of Hochschild and Davies about how corporations are effecting employees’ emotions but has

There are many situations in life, especially if you are an office worker, that make us wonder why we bother to show up to work every day. Ultimately bills must get paid and families need to survive, but who is really the beneficiary of the fruits of our hard work? Marxist critics will argue that the big executives of these corporations and their shareholders are the ones obtaining all the benefits, while the working class must suffer the daily grind of life. Daniel Orozco’s “Orientation” illustrate a portrait of what office employees must endure and the rules they must abide in order to satisfy the requirements of those flown down from the upper echelons of the corporate world.

Furthermore, although it is apparent that positive outcomes can occur due to employees experiencing certain benefits such as rewards from performance and skill based pay it is also essential to identify the elements such as work intensification. Ramsay et al (2000) suggests that although the intensification of workload for an employee may indeed increase organisational output, it can also have “negative consequences for employees in terms of effort and stress”. The result could lead to higher turnover rates due to unhappy employees who feel their psychological contract has been breached. This aspect of work intensification is important as high turnovers can lead to greater costs for an organization.

The United States workforce is viewed by many as a beautiful system. Foreigners see happy workers eagerly performing their duties, waiting for a generous paycheck to bring back to their middle-class family. In reality, this perfect picture is rarely demonstrated with employees in America. Professionals and managers may have a luxurious work experience, but most white- and blue-collar workers deal with many issues from their employers. These issues create problems that affect the individual workers.

According to the Annual Report (DHS, 2015), the number of non-ongoing employees has increased from 10.9% in 2015 to 13.6% in 2016, and as at 30 June 2016, 33.7% of staff worked part-time due to the DHS policy supporting employees in balancing work and personal commitments. Although this flexibility has proven to be an effective way to better meet the needs of its employees and to suit its business needs, these employees may also have less opportunity to develop their knowledge and skills. More importantly, owing to the nature of the terms of employment and the nature of the tasks assigned (less central ones), these groups of employees are less likely to identify strongly with the organization, resulting in the increasing attrition rates, which

The Mind at Work, The Human Condition, and Shop Class as Soulcraft all shed a different light on the ways humans interact with work (Rose, 2004; Arendt, 1958; Crawford, 2009). However, these books share dissatisfaction with the modern workplace and find it to be harmful to society and its workers. In The Mind at Work, Rose highlights the significance of the structure of the workplace by stating that “in the restaurant or salon, the factory or office, or with tools out in the field—the conditions [of which you work] may limit, at times, profoundly, the various satisfactions the work can offer” (2004, p. 197). Teamwork and scientific management are current, common conditions that each book associates with worker dissatisfaction; some go further

Employment relation is one of the vital and critical parts of HRM. For making an effective and healthy relationship between employers and employees, it is important to understand the perception of employment relations along with its importance in an organisation (Wang & Chen, 2005). Thus, if an organisation fails to understand its significance of employment relations and unable to manager employer and employee relationship efficiently, this might lead to impact on the organisation power and will deter its strength and profitability. According to Singh (2011), employee relations is basically a study of regulations, agreements and rules through which employees are accomplished with collective and individual group, importance imposed to individual

During times of harsh macroeconomic conditions, it can be extraordinarily challenging to maintain high levels of morale. One way to describe the challenges is that there are massive amounts of uncertainty on all levels. Employees especially often may have job uncertainty that contribute to job-related stress. In such situations employees might become so stressed that it makes it difficult for them to perform their job duties especially when job security is one of the issues that they are concerned

The relationship between employers and employees has long been the subject of widespread study and debate within the business world. This employment relationship can be defined as a complex system in which social, economic and political factors combine with an employee who exchanges mental and manual labour for rewards allocated by the employer (Encarta Encyclopaedia Deluxe. 2004). Industrial relations and human resource management advocates have traditionally held different views on the subject of organisational conflict. Many authors have argued that organisational conflict is inevitable in most work settings and that the employment relationship is essentially a trade-off ground (Alexander and Lewer, 1998; Deery, Plowman, Walsh and Brown

In contrast with the past workplace challenges and organizational behavior, there is a necessity to understand ourselves and others. Sometimes the stress and prestige can cause an adverse impact on one’s position in the workplace. The ability to deal with our emotions while working effectually with others and at the same time, performing the organization’s expectations are in high demand. Since the employees are an asset, and the organization is expecting a return on their investment, understanding how emotions work and how it impacts one’s capacity is indispensable in accomplishing organizational goals. In the workplace, people often have to work with each other. So the handling of relationships and interacting with others becomes the key to the success of the organization. Managers need to have a combination of skills and abilities such as the strength of will, awareness of self, empathy for others and sensitivity toward others internally and externally. Before one can handle others emotions he/she must first learn to lead themselves. So the question become, how is this done? Coleman’s theory suggest that this can be done through emotional intelligence which is the ability to create, build and maintain viable relationships (Coleman, 1998, p. 14). No one wants to follow the leadership of a person who cannot manage his/her emotions. Let’s look together at three business CEO’s personal backgrounds and use of emotional intelligence. The top chief emotions officers in the U.S.