The decline of the British tyre industry - Newcastle University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The SWP progressed to the third stage of the plan devised by J Walter Thompson. The management and trade union officials supported ‘efficiency dialogues’ but saw it of limited use because of ‘the lack of understanding and knowledge of the participants’. 86 A solution put forward in May 1981 was an Employee Involvement Programme aimed at changing the attitudes of managers, supervisors and shop stewards. Dunlop agreed to participate in this experiment. In July 1981, it was agreed that the Office should hold informal meetings with the management and unions to implement this programme. The trade union representatives raised two matters of concern. First, they objected to the programme being funded by the government and, second, they were opposed to the companies being directly responsible for the training of both shop stewards and managers. 87 The first problem was tackled by the NEDO funding the programme. The second objection was overcome by the engagement of Professor George Bain, a leading industrial relations researcher at Warwick University, to undertake a feasibility study at Dunlop. Professor Bain was asked to investigate how communication/participation was working at Dunlop; the effect that it had on developing ‘efficiency dialogues’; to identify those issues which required joint discussion and determination, and to identify the information and training needs of employees to further the development of the participative process. 88 From December 1981 to January 1982, he held meetings with senior group and divisional management, and shop stewards from all the unions represented in the plant (rubber workers, staff and craft). The initial meetings were held separately, but eventually joint meetings were held with the rubber workers and staff and, finally with them and senior management. After two initial meetings, the craft workers declined to take any further part in the project. This was because flexibility had been introduced into the craft areas and was not universally supported by these workers. They did not believe that the communications programme offered any benefits.
Professor Bain found that Dunlop had implemented many of the general proposals outlined in ‘efficiency dialogues’, including greater labour flexibility, improved quality control, more efficient use of plant and machinery, reduced manning levels and lower costs. Dunlop had devised its own involvement policy using action learning, briefing and involvement groups to encourage greater employee commitment to business objectives, and to improve overall effectiveness. 89 However, Bain reported that the unions were ‘dissatisfied with the company’s involvement policy’, 90 because it emphasised ‘communication rather than consultation’, or to quote one shop steward ‘management decides and we listen’. 91 The stewards stated that they required more finance information: group and divisional profit levels, the budgeting process and the extent to which divisions were financially autonomous; the level and determination of transfer pricing; the contribution that foreign licensing agreements made to profits; short and long-term investment plans at home and abroad; and the viability of production at Fort Dunlop. In the marketing area, the stewards wanted information on pricing strategy; sourcing policy regarding captive imports; and Dunlop’s strategy for selling the extra production resulting from the increased efficiency. 92 The provision of this information was necessary to gain workforce support for the proposed changes. There is, however, no evidence that the trade unions had a strategy for acquiring and effectively using this information. Bain informed the SWP that his team would engage in ‘strategic mediation’ to create a favourable climate which would allow the management and unions to reach an accommodation. Strategic dialogues would begin at group level and then be extended to divisional level. The experiment was planned to run from March to December 1982, and if successful, would be extended to other divisions. The programme was put to the SWP in February 1982 for approval, whereupon it was savaged by the AUEW representative who declared that it was not the SWP’s business ‘to intrude on matters of job demarcation, plant maintenance, etc’. 93 The chairman, John Cousins, felt that he had no alternative but to resign. The SWP suspended its operations,
Page 1 and 2: Discussion Papers in Management and
Page 3 and 4: According to McKay and Grant the im
Page 5 and 6: institutional constraints that impa
Page 7 and 8: weight of throughput per man hour)
Page 9 and 10: The SWP proposed a two-pronged atta
Page 11 and 12: productivity (productivity index) f
Page 13: None of the voluntary targets were
Page 17 and 18: structure, but it soon became morib
Page 19 and 20: prepared to discuss common problems
Page 21 and 22: Bhaskar, Krish. The Future of the U
Page 23 and 24: 1983. NEDO. Industrial Strategy. Re
Page 25 and 26: 10 Grant, “Government,” 101. 11
Page 27 and 28: 61 Ibid, 7. 62 Ibid, 8. 63 NEDO, Th
Page 29 and 30: 119 Wilks, Industrial Policy, 268.

The decline of the British tyre industry - Newcastle University

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?