2001EHR Management Employee Relations

Question: Describe about the issues of the negotiation meeting of Jupiters Limited. Answer: Queensland, Australia 3rd June 2011 - The major issue, which has been identified in the negotiation meeting arrangement for the rise of wages as well as payroll, is a higher amount of lack of faith between two parties i.e. Jupiters Casino as well as Union flyers. It has been noted from the current scenario that Jupiterss limited applied for bargaining order against the breach of s229. The company has stood on the statement that the best offer for the company is 1.5% a year. Ingrid Asbury, the commissioner of Fair Work Australia Commissioner rejected the appeal stating that United Voice has done right by criticizing the stand of Jupiters limited. In addition to that, it has been also illustrated that the Jupiters Limited will be similarly accused of misrepresentation if the Unions flyers are proved as the party of misinterpretation by any chance. However, Jupiters Casino limited effectively contradicted that the Unions has no place to present false information in front of public. The idea of wage increase negation is entitle to have lots of criticism. However, both of the parties are responsible for providing accurate ideas in the meeting. In the present context, the Jupiters Casino has blamed the Union flyers for breaching s229 for presenting false information to the employees. Before the negotiation meeting at October 26 the company stated that, they will not hinder from the stand of 1.5% increase of both wage as well as payroll for the employees. However, the Union did not send any representative, as they were not expecting any compromise from the companys end. In this situation, the company initiated 1.5% rise of wage and payroll increase according to the respective negotiation meeting. On the other hand, the Union demanded 1.8% wage increase in the first year following by 3% total increase in the wage structure, which er ected a critical standoff. The main theme of the submitted report was the role of the bargaining agents in the relationship management between the employers and the employees. The company has stated that the employers are not able to understand the problems faced by each of the employees. They are not able to communicate with the 1600 employees individually to understand their requirements and support them regarding the well-beings of them. Therefore, the bargaining agent of the trade union group has a vital role in the employee-employer relationship. At present, the bargaining agents are the responsible person for negotiating with the employers regarding the needs of the employees. They talk with the group of the employees as well as the employers and ensure that the employees will get the benefits from the employer organization. The report was presented to the presented to the commissioner, but was not accepted. The commissioner rejected the term bargaining agent. He suggested that rather than using the term bargaining agents, they should use bargaining representative. According to the opinion of the commissioner, a person i.e., the bargaining representative cannot understand all the well-beings of the employees. After the rejection of the submitted report, it was decided that the employees would be asked for the endorsement of the industrial actions. The actions were wearing the badges and four-hour stopgaps, which were already mentioned in the uniform policy of the company. Reference List: Fossum, J. A. (2014).Labor relations. Mcgraw Hill Higher Educat. Grimshaw, D., Bosch, G., Rubery, J. (2014). Minimum wages and collective bargaining: What types of pay bargaining can foster positive pay equity outcomes?. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 52(3), 470-498. Herrman, A. R., Allen, M. (2014). HARDLINE VERSUS SOFTLINE BARGAINING STRATEGIES. Managing Interpersonal Conflict: Advances Through Meta-Analysis, 213. Rubin, J. Z., Brown, B. R. (2013). The social psychology of bargaining and negotiation. Elsevier. Snyder, G. H., Diesing, P. (2015).Conflict among nations: Bargaining, decision making, and system structure in international crises. Princeton University Press. Van Gyes, G., Schulten, T. (Eds.). (2015). Wage bargaining under the new European Economic Governance: Alternative strategies for inclusive growth. ETUI. Visser, J. (2013). Wage Bargaining Institutionsfrom crisis to crisis (No. 488). Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission. Williamson, S., ODonnell, M., Roles, C. (2016). Bargaining over Australian public service cuts: Do forcing strategies work?. The Economic and Labour Relations Review, 27(1), 46-63.