company based in Manchester, United Kingdom. Hare is a well-known company for satisfactorily delivering packages, mail, and messages to the consumers for the longest service of 25 years. Its clients, leads, and job tasks come from their small organization companies which serve as the recipients of the service that Hare renders. Concerning Hare’s Delivery, it is composed of 450 employees consisting of 350 workers as delivery drivers, 50 personnel in logistics department, and the remaining 50 persons deployed in other support functions.
Moreover, it has to be put into account that Hare’s Delivery is currently having a conflict (Problem No. 1) in the workplace: 1) the increasing rate of job turnovers. Employees’ attrition accounts for 15 percent turnovers annually. Moreover, Hare is a democratic company in such a way that they allow a trade union to be formed. This only sole union that was recognized by Hare Delivery is the ABC Union. Almost 100 percent of the driver employees in Hare are members of this ABC trade union; however, the remaining 20 percent from this union are comprised of the employees in logistics department and other support functions.
Furthermore, this ABC union is lead by a representative of the employees named, Bill Smith. He is known to be a charismatic person who worked as a driver for Hare Delivery in a very long time now. In so doing, most of Bill’s co-workers trust and value him so much that they even suggest Bill to leave the courier company and rather work full time on ABC union. On the contrary, Bill just listened to the suggestions and comments upon leaving the company but Bill did not intend to leave the company for good. He never brought turning over into consideration and he managed to fight the rights of his co-workers instead.
As a representative of his co-employees in the ABC trade union, Bill is confident and proud for attaining such prestige and respect among his co-workers in Hares. Moreover, he was extremely delighted for the fact that most of the delivery drivers of Hare’s like him, joined the ABC union he led. In addition, another inevitable conflict (Problem No. 2) emerged between Hare’s management and employees which currently concerns petty issues like resistance of the latter in the policy proposals of the management.
In previous cases, the management seems to give in to whatever the ABC union has majority agreed upon, mainly because the management tries to avoid such aggressive conflict that they consider petty yet might induce some further legal action in the long run. However, this instance of privilege and power tripping would not be tolerated and assured by the management all the time especially now that Hare Delivery is going to have a new Managing Director selected to run the business of Hare’s.
The new Managing Director newly appointed for the position is the strict and authoritative Amanda Harvey. Upon hearing some past issues of resistance in the management proposals, Amanda got furious for some policies have not developed due to the union’s major disagreement and resistance to the projects. Amanda then, considered the ABC union as a “pain in the ass” in which she would want to manipulate if not eliminate if it would not give in to her major decisions for the company.
In the same manner, Amanda’s authoritative manner of leadership might as well clash and come in contact with Bill’s (as the ABC union’s representative) beliefs, views, and type of leadership shared among his co-workers. So in the following manner, the writer of this paper would like to advice Amanda on how to handle such conflicts in the workplace considering the legal rules and ethical standards of the United Kingdom’s constitution. Case No. 1 Case #1 Amanda reviewed Hare’s previous records of assets, liabilities, gross gains and loss to realize that courier or delivery business is not a very stable one for Hare’s account.
With loaded activities for the months ranging from November and December, Amanda noticed that Hare was at its peak during those months compared to the list of profit and activities during the months ranging from January to February. Moreover, Amanda, upon realizing the discrepancies between the 2 periods would like to adjust the working modes and working schedule of the employees. Thus, she decides to adjust the agreed contract employment which would add her specification that work should be reinforced at long hours during months of November to December where there is no need for filing of Overtime payment for the employees.
And relatively, work would be lesser hours during the period of January to February when there is not much work. Consequently, her proposal did not confirm any agreement for the ABC union members of Hare’s. Therefore, ABC union members refused to comply with Amanda Harvey’s demand. In such case, Amanda should act upon the matter with a legal basis for her actions, demands, and decisions for the employees in Hare’s Delivery. Answer: First of all, the UK law concerning the rights of employees regarding their working time is addressed in Employment Act 2002.
The act states that: there should be no working hours that shall exceed eight (8) hours a day or 40 hours per week and no working at night. However, both laws can consider some exceptions—especially if the worker agrees to the proposed adjustment of working schedule (Jefferson, 2005). Otherwise, it is the right of en employee to disagree from working long hours if it is not stated in the breach of contract signed during the recruitment and hiring process. Further, the current UK law discussing the working time states that working hours should not max 48 hours a week.
If it is not stated in the contract of employment, the employee may have the right to disagree from the proposal of an employer to work for shorter or longer hours from the average requirement to work 8 hours a day. Going back to the case of Amanda in Hare’s Delivery, as the managing director of the company, she demands that the employees shall work linger hours during January to February since the company is loaded with activities during the mentioned months. It is more considered illegal to demand longer working hours for the employees without providing extra overtime pay.
And since the ABC Union and the previous management have agreed to work on the average 8-hour period, it is unfair to change the agreed psychological and written contract between the employer and the employee (Hare’s management and ABC union members) (WR, 2009). In brief, Amanda should not make abrupt decision without getting conformation from her employees regarding the compensation and length of their hours of work. Thus, acting upon violating the agreed written and psychological breach of contract between the employer and the employee is punishable by the federal UK law.