Introduction
Employment relations in many of the EU states are increasingly affected by the developments associated with the EU. For instance, UK has established statutory consultation rights for the British workers for the first time in history. The U.S. can also decide to establish such statutory bodies to enhance its labor relations. Evidently, the U.S. labor unions, businesses, and governments can learn a lot about industrial relations practices in other countries such as United Kingdom, France, Germany, China, and South. Labor unions provide a credible example of how Human Resource Management can be established and embraced in an environment that is less friendly. The U.S. deals with the issues of its employees internally. It regards government regulations, which are weak when considered critically (Wails, Bamber & Lansbury, 2011). As such, most employees are denied their rights even as they struggle through unions. Through technological ratification, enhanced communication, amplified economic competition ( Bamber, Lansbury and Wailes, 2011) and partaking of internationally accepted labour standards; the U.S. is in a inimitable position to enact change at home.
United Kingdom
U.K. has credible trade Unions; however, their labor-management relations have been volatile. The U.S. labor unions, businesses, and governments can learn a lot about industrial relations practices in the UK. Even though strategies and processes adopted by the U.S. show some similarities to UK, there are also differences. This occurs due to differences in culture and labor regulations governing employment in numerous industries. For instance, the culture in the United States is characterized by self-centeredness and meritocracy. Therefore, employees working in the U.S. should be given proper support as it happens in UK (Porritt, 2005). As compared to the U.S and UK, the number of employees in the labor unions is far much low. Much of this is contributed by the fact that most of workers are from the indigenous minorities and economic immigrants, usually from Eastern Europe and Asia (Wails, Bamber & Lansbury, 2011). The labour unions in the UK have the right to organize and to select their own leadership. The U.S. can adopt such trends to enhance its labor relations system.
France
The French labour union movements constitute pluralism and fragmentation in that there are several layers of representation. For instance, there are 5 National Union confederations in France, which ensure that labour interests are protected. They also regulate the functioning of the confederated organizations affiliated to them. The U.S. can also learn from these provisions. The U.S. companies have opted to employ young people. Even though individuals who applied for work at the corporations included all kinds of people, the company believed that younger employees were more suited (Wails, Bamber & Lansbury, 2011). Their view was that younger employees could certainly adopt the values of the company better as compared to older employees. The Public Sector Unions in France cover over 5 million public sector workforces and influence the Private Sector Unions for pay purposes. This is not relevant in the U.S. but the country can learn from it.
Germany
Issues affecting workers including daily working hours and breaks, pay system, and holiday provisions are provided by the German law for all employers employing more than 5 workers (Wails, Bamber & Lansbury, 2011). The U.S. can adopt this provision successfully. In all these countries, labor unions in all industries are submissive. This implies that (in most cases) employees should work exemplarily so as to avoid risking their jobs by being inquisitive about how they are managed. In other cases, they become submissive since they lack earlier experience and therefore do not know anything. Or they just not like involving themselves in critiquing their management since they will soon leave for another job. The U.S. can actually learn and adopt these trends into their labor relations systems (Porritt, 2005). In addition, they are only given an office space and small amount of money for carrying out their operations. In spite of the union’s acknowledgement, there has never been any agreement on the terms of employment and work conditions. The U.S. can truly learn and adopt these trends into their labor relations systems.
Korea
Korea has established unions with substantial autonomy in their management and collective bargaining. This occurs at the firm level (Wails, Bamber & Lansbury, 2011). Employment relations relate to the size of the company. In most cases, labor unions are aware that no any fruitful negotiation will ever be reached in signing the contract. The influence of the union towards this will decrease leaving it weak and unsatisfactory (Christensen, 1993). Actually, even the partial victories of the union in Korea are only achieved by the involvement of the institutions of the state. Definitely, the labor regulations enacted in the Korea are so feeble that there have never been any conflicts experienced. The concerned unions are controlled by robust social traditions of democracy. The U.S. can actually learn and adopt these trends into their labor relations systems. Labor unions are aware that no any profitable negotiation will ever be reached in signing the contract (Wails, Bamber & Lansbury, 2011). The pressure of the union towards this will decrease leaving it weak and unsatisfactory. The repression of industrial relations in Korea was neither socially stable nor economically productive.
China
China has the biggest workforce in the world. It has many labour unions; however, it is the least like the U.S. The country has the least desired industrial/labor relations model. There are numerous lessons that the labor unions and other business sectors in the U.S. can learn from this comparison. It is important o establish and embrace workable international human resource provisions in U.S. as it happens in China (Porritt, 2005). It is crucial to comprehend various aspects of HR regulations that might affect the performance of employees in various contexts. Even though, most corporations can learn human resource management from China (Wails, Bamber & Lansbury, 2011). They do not uphold the standards of international labor union provisions (Sims, 2002). The U.S. can actually learn and adopt these trends into their labor relations systems. In reality, even the partial victories of the union in China and other countries are only achieved.
Conclusion
The U.S. labor unions, businesses, and governments can learn a lot about industrial relations practices in other countries such as United Kingdom, France, Germany, China, and South. As indicated before, employment relations in many of the EU states are increasingly affected by the developments associated with the EU. For instance, UK has established statutory consultation rights for the British workers for the first time in history. The U.S. can also decide to establish such statutory bodies to enhance its labor relations. The U.S. deals with the issues of its employees internally. It regards government regulations, which are weak when considered critically. As such, most employees are denied their rights even as they struggle through unions. Nevertheless, the greatest lesson learnt is that corporations in the all countries should treat their employees with dignity. The U.S. can truly learn and adopt these trends into their labor relations systems.
References
Porritt, J. (2005). Capitalism: As if the world matters. London: Earthscan.
Shaffer, H. (1999). American capitalism and the changing role of government. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Wails, N., Bamber, G. & Lansbury, R. (2011). International and comparative employment relations: Globalisation and the developed market economies 5th Ed. London: SAGE Publications.