Industrial relations ideologies

1224 Words5 Pages
Introduction A frame of reference is not a philosophical concept. It refers to one’s worldview and the evaluation or judgement of one’s observations. One’s frame of reference coincides with one’s behaviour and the consequences thereof. Therefore, a frame of reference is fixed but one needs to be sensitive and accept individual differences in frames of reference. This paper aims to address the frame of reference of Pick ‘n Pay’s chairman and joint managing director, Mr Raymond Ackerman. The arguments presented in this paper are my own with a theoretical basis from the work of Bluen (1987). My interpretation of Mr Ackerman’s frame of reference will be presented in relation to the organisation, conflict, collective bargaining and trade…show more content…
This reiterates the notion of balance of power. Collective bargaining The ability for positions to reach a consensus is reached through collective bargaining. Bluen (1987) infers that the pluralist frame of reference does not seek to remove conflict but to manage it. Mr Ackerman acknowledged the existence of conflict and tried to manage it by sending his negotiating team to resolve the conflict and end the strike. Mr Ackerman has a pluralist view because he believes the issue should have been resolved during negotiations. He even went as far as awarding greater bargaining flexibility to the negotiating team. The mere fact that Mr Ackerman was so determined to resolve the conflict though means of collective bargaining should eliminate the likelihood of a unitary frame of reference. Collective bargaining, an equitable balance of power, and essentially the aim to compromise confirm that Mr Ackerman holds a pluralist view on industrial relations. Mr Ackerman fought to reach a consensus for personal and economic reasons. The breakthrough to reach a consensus was achieved after he delivered his speech. He appealed to the opposing union members by focusing on personal matters. This led to the agreement of a negotiation. Mr Ackerman considered going up on his agreement and the union considered going down on theirs. No suppression or unilateral decision-making occurred. In
Get Access