,LRM4801 Assignment 2 (COMPLETE ANSWERS)
Semester 1 2025 - DUE 7 July 2025; 100% TRUSTED
Complete, trusted solutions and explanations.
Ubuntu AutoTech South Africa (UASA)
Question 1: Labour relations perspective
1.1 Critically compare how UASA’s current labour relations approach, as described
in the scenario, would be interpreted through a pluralist and a radical frame of
reference. In your response, reflect on how each perspective would shape the
understanding of conflict, perspective on trade union involvement, goals and
values of employers and employees, and strikes. (10)
Comparative Analysis through Pluralist and Radical Perspectives
From a pluralist perspective, the employment relationship at UASA is seen as
inherently characterised by differing interests between management and
employees. This viewpoint accepts that conflict is natural and often arises due to
legitimate differences in goals, such as productivity versus job security. Trade
unions, within this frame, play an essential and institutionalised role in
representing worker interests and engaging in collective bargaining. However,
UASA’s current approach undermines this by favouring consultative engagement
over formal bargaining processes. Although multiple trade unions are recognised,
their influence is limited, and decision-making on key issues such as restructuring
and training is management-led. From the pluralist view, this exclusion erodes the
balance of power and undermines mechanisms that are designed to manage
workplace conflict fairly. The increase in disputes referred to the CCMA is
interpreted as a consequence of UASA neglecting genuine negotiation and
sidelining pluralist labour structures like the Bargaining Council.
In contrast, a radical perspective interprets UASA’s approach as a reflection of
deeper systemic inequalities rooted in capitalist exploitation. Conflict is not just
about differing interests but about the fundamental clash between labour and
capital, where employers prioritise profit maximisation, often through strategies
like automation and cost-cutting. From this viewpoint, UASA’s automation and
digital transformation project is a mechanism for reducing labour dependency and
weakening worker bargaining power. The use of slogans like “One Team, One
, Future” is viewed critically as ideological tools designed to suppress worker
consciousness and obscure class divisions. Trade unions are seen as being
deliberately marginalised through symbolic forums with no real decision-making
power, and employee resistance is managed rather than meaningfully addressed.
The radical lens emphasises that the company’s unilateral decision-making and
lack of negotiated training pathways reflect structural control over labour, which
leads to alienation, resistance, and inevitable conflict manifesting in legal disputes
and growing mistrust.
Or
Pluralist Perspective:
From a pluralist view, the workplace is seen as composed of different interest
groups—mainly management and trade unions—each with its own legitimate
interests and objectives. Conflict is seen as inherent and natural in industrial
relations due to these differing interests.
Conflict: A pluralist lens would interpret UASA’s growing workplace
tension as a predictable result of insufficient inclusion of union voices in
decision-making. The limited role of trade unions in shaping transformation
and restructuring is viewed as a cause of conflict that could have been
mitigated through collective bargaining structures.
Trade Union Involvement: Pluralists view trade unions as essential actors
for balancing power and protecting worker interests. UASA’s
marginalisation of union input—particularly in skills development and
redeployment—would be seen as problematic and indicative of poor
pluralist practice.
Employer vs Employee Goals: A pluralist approach accepts that employers
and employees have different priorities. While UASA’s management seeks
productivity and cost efficiency, employees are concerned about job security
and equitable access to new opportunities. Pluralists would advocate for
negotiated compromises.
Strikes: Industrial action, in this view, is a legitimate method for employees
to assert their interests. Rising CCMA referrals and dissatisfaction suggest
that employees are increasingly resorting to external mechanisms due to a
lack of internal pluralist mechanisms like effective bargaining structures.
Radical Perspective:
Semester 1 2025 - DUE 7 July 2025; 100% TRUSTED
Complete, trusted solutions and explanations.
Ubuntu AutoTech South Africa (UASA)
Question 1: Labour relations perspective
1.1 Critically compare how UASA’s current labour relations approach, as described
in the scenario, would be interpreted through a pluralist and a radical frame of
reference. In your response, reflect on how each perspective would shape the
understanding of conflict, perspective on trade union involvement, goals and
values of employers and employees, and strikes. (10)
Comparative Analysis through Pluralist and Radical Perspectives
From a pluralist perspective, the employment relationship at UASA is seen as
inherently characterised by differing interests between management and
employees. This viewpoint accepts that conflict is natural and often arises due to
legitimate differences in goals, such as productivity versus job security. Trade
unions, within this frame, play an essential and institutionalised role in
representing worker interests and engaging in collective bargaining. However,
UASA’s current approach undermines this by favouring consultative engagement
over formal bargaining processes. Although multiple trade unions are recognised,
their influence is limited, and decision-making on key issues such as restructuring
and training is management-led. From the pluralist view, this exclusion erodes the
balance of power and undermines mechanisms that are designed to manage
workplace conflict fairly. The increase in disputes referred to the CCMA is
interpreted as a consequence of UASA neglecting genuine negotiation and
sidelining pluralist labour structures like the Bargaining Council.
In contrast, a radical perspective interprets UASA’s approach as a reflection of
deeper systemic inequalities rooted in capitalist exploitation. Conflict is not just
about differing interests but about the fundamental clash between labour and
capital, where employers prioritise profit maximisation, often through strategies
like automation and cost-cutting. From this viewpoint, UASA’s automation and
digital transformation project is a mechanism for reducing labour dependency and
weakening worker bargaining power. The use of slogans like “One Team, One
, Future” is viewed critically as ideological tools designed to suppress worker
consciousness and obscure class divisions. Trade unions are seen as being
deliberately marginalised through symbolic forums with no real decision-making
power, and employee resistance is managed rather than meaningfully addressed.
The radical lens emphasises that the company’s unilateral decision-making and
lack of negotiated training pathways reflect structural control over labour, which
leads to alienation, resistance, and inevitable conflict manifesting in legal disputes
and growing mistrust.
Or
Pluralist Perspective:
From a pluralist view, the workplace is seen as composed of different interest
groups—mainly management and trade unions—each with its own legitimate
interests and objectives. Conflict is seen as inherent and natural in industrial
relations due to these differing interests.
Conflict: A pluralist lens would interpret UASA’s growing workplace
tension as a predictable result of insufficient inclusion of union voices in
decision-making. The limited role of trade unions in shaping transformation
and restructuring is viewed as a cause of conflict that could have been
mitigated through collective bargaining structures.
Trade Union Involvement: Pluralists view trade unions as essential actors
for balancing power and protecting worker interests. UASA’s
marginalisation of union input—particularly in skills development and
redeployment—would be seen as problematic and indicative of poor
pluralist practice.
Employer vs Employee Goals: A pluralist approach accepts that employers
and employees have different priorities. While UASA’s management seeks
productivity and cost efficiency, employees are concerned about job security
and equitable access to new opportunities. Pluralists would advocate for
negotiated compromises.
Strikes: Industrial action, in this view, is a legitimate method for employees
to assert their interests. Rising CCMA referrals and dissatisfaction suggest
that employees are increasingly resorting to external mechanisms due to a
lack of internal pluralist mechanisms like effective bargaining structures.
Radical Perspective:
