Employee Relations November 2005 - CIPD

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PDS – Employee Relations EXAMINER'S REPORT November 2005 Section B Question 1 (The role of the G overnment in employee relations) The answers to this question were disappointing. They did not demonstrate understanding of the main role of the Government in employee relations – an economic manager, a law-maker and a peace-keeper. Most only made reference to its law-making role and confined their answer to telling the examiners the content of particular acts of parliament. Most answers demonstrated even less knowledge and understanding of how these roles influence the behaviour of the ‘players’ in the game, for example, in terms of the processes they use to arrive at mutually acceptable agreements, and how they influence the outcome of the game, such as the content of substantive agreements. Question 2 (Negotiating framework agreements) This was one of the best answered questions. Most answers rightly pointed out that their chief executive would become a player in the social dialogue law-making process of the EU. They then correctly explained this process. Better candidates pointed out that, as a member of the UNICE negotiating committee, they would be involved in drawing up the employer’s bargaining agenda on the issue to be subject to a framework agreement, and would be involved in negotiations that would be unwieldy and slow moving. Question 3 (Disciplinary matters) In answering this question few candidates drew on published research and organisational policy and practice, as required by the question. Too many answers were unfocused in that the candidate wrote in general about discipline. They did not address the centre theme of the question, namely that knowing the law surrounding the management of disciplinary matters is inadequate for effective management of disciplinary matters. They also did not show that they understood it is the key function of the personnel/HR department to train line managers to handle discipline effectively within an organisational context and culture, and that this is difficult for a lawyer to do. Question 4 (Employers’ Associations) In answering this question, the majority of answers demonstrated a good knowledge and understanding of the role and function of Employers’ Associations – representation, lobbying services, advice on employment law and good employment practice and, in some sectors, the negotiation of collective agreements. The main problem was that candidates did not go on to explain how all these functions can add value to an organisation. In reality, most only answered part of the question. In addition, not one candidate, as requested by the question, drew on evidence from research to justify the case they would put to their chief executive in explaining how Employers’ Associations can add value.
PDS – Employee Relations EXAMINER'S REPORT November 2005 Question 5 (Employee relations strategy) This question centred on the appropriate employee relations polices consistent with a strategy of continuous improvement and examiners were expecting candidates to explain the appropriate polices – communications, appropriate employee voice mechanisms, the need for continuous training and retraining. The answers to this question can only be described as poor. They did not (a) draw on appropriate evidence to support their advice, as required by the question, (b) explain the term continuous improvement in the quality of product/service provided and (c) explain the employee relations practices associated with continuous improvement. Question 6 (Management style) Again the majority of answers were poor. Few candidates explained the purpose of an employee relations strategy, nor briefly outlined the content of such a strategy. The question centred on relating employee relations strategy to the values and preferences of organisation’s dominant decision-makers. In concentrating on this central issue, it was expected that candidates would make use of the Purcell and Sisson’s five typical management styles – authoritarian, paternalistic, consultative, constitutional and opportunist. Most candidates did not do this and many made no reference to the management styles outlined by Purcell and Sisson. Question 7 (Listening skills) The answers to this question were poor. Instead of concentrating on the central issue of the question (namely listening skills as an information-gathering technique) most answers centred on general points about managing employee grievances. Few answers contained an explanation as to what listening skills involve and the central point of the question was missed in most answers. Good listening skills enable managers to obtain information upon which they can make a number of decisions, for example, is the employee grievance well founded or does it have no basis? If the former is the case, then the manager will establish objectives as to how the grievance might be best resolved while protecting management’s interests and plan the appropriate strategy and tactics to achieve these objectives. Question 8 (Redundancy) This was the best answered question. Candidates did not fall into the trap of writing all they know about managing redundancy. Most candidates, as expected by the examiners, explained that management would have to engage in meaningful consultation with the workforce. Many candidates also said that they would consider whether, depending on employee turnover rates and so on, natural wastage will achieve the objective of reducing the payroll numbers. The main reasons why high marks were not awarded for this question was that not a single candidate justified the details (content) of their plan by drawing, as instructed by the question, on contemporary research.
Page 1 and 2: Chartered Institute of Personnel an
Page 3 and 4: EMPLOYEE RELATIONS November 2005 SE
Page 5 and 6: PDS - Employee Relations EXAMINER'S
Page 7 and 8: PDS - Employee Relations EXAMINER'S
Page 9: PDS - Employee Relations EXAMINER'S

Employee Relations November 2005 - CIPD

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?