Exam (elaborations)

LRM2601 Assignment 6 (ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED

2 purchases

Course
Labour Relations Management: Macro (LRM2601)

Institution
University Of South Africa (Unisa)

Book
South African Employment Relations

Well-structured LRM2601 Assignment 6 (ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED. (DETAILED ANSWERS - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED!)..... Read the case study and then answer the questions that follow. A TOUGH SITUATION AT GOLDEN WHEELS TRANSPORT SERVICES Sipho is a young, ambitious man pursuing...

[Show more]

Preview 3 out of 17 pages

View example

Uploaded on November 4, 2024
Number of pages 17
Written in 2024/2025
Type Exam (elaborations)
Contains Questions & answers

lrm2601

Edge Member since 1 year 6724 documents sold

380

169

111

LRM2601
Assignment 6 Semester 2 2024
Unique Number:
Due Date: 6 November 2024

QUESTION 1

1.1 Example of Perceived Distributive Injustice: The specific example of distributive
injustice in the case is that employees’ overtime earnings, which constitute a significant
part of their income, have been cut, while senior managers, including Mr. Mkhize, continue
to receive annual bonuses despite the company’s financial challenges.

The equity criterion evaluates fairness based on the proportional relationship between
individuals' contributions and their rewards. Employees feel this decision is unfair because
they work extended hours and rely on overtime to make ends meet, yet they are denied
DISCLAIMERthis &essential
TERMS OF USE while senior managers receive bonuses. This discrepancy in rewards
income
1. Educational Aid: These study notes are designed to serve as educational aids and should not be considered as a
undermines
substitute the perceived
for individual fairness
research, critical of theordistribution
thinking, professionalofguidance.
income Students
within the
arecompany,
encouraged asto
conduct theirmost
those own extensive
dependentresearch and consult
on overtime with their
earnings instructors or
are penalized, academic
whereas advisors for specific
higher-ranking staff
assignment requirements.
2. Personal Responsibility:
continue to receiveWhile every effort
additional has been made to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the
benefits.
information provided in these study notes, the seller cannot guarantee the completeness or correctness of all
the content. It is the responsibility of the buyer to verify the accuracy of the information and use their own
judgment when applying it to their assignments.
3. Academic Integrity: It is crucial for students to uphold academic integrity and adhere to their institution's
policies and guidelines regarding plagiarism, citation, and referencing. These study notes should be used as a
tool for learning and inspiration, but any direct reproduction of the content without proper acknowledgment and
citation may constitute academic misconduct.
4. Limited Liability: The seller of these study notes shall not be held liable for any direct or indirect damages,
losses, or consequences arising from the use of the notes. This includes, but is not limited to, poor grades,
academic penalties, or any other negative outcomes resulting from the application or misuse of the information
provided.

, For additional support +27 81 278 3372

QUESTION 1

1.1 Example of Perceived Distributive Injustice: The specific example of
distributive injustice in the case is that employees’ overtime earnings, which
constitute a significant part of their income, have been cut, while senior managers,
including Mr. Mkhize, continue to receive annual bonuses despite the company’s
financial challenges.

Explanation using the Equity Criterion: The equity criterion evaluates fairness
based on the proportional relationship between individuals' contributions and their
rewards. Employees feel this decision is unfair because they work extended hours
and rely on overtime to make ends meet, yet they are denied this essential income
while senior managers receive bonuses. This discrepancy in rewards undermines
the perceived fairness of the distribution of income within the company, as those
most dependent on overtime earnings are penalized, whereas higher-ranking staff
continue to receive additional benefits.

1.2 Example of Perceived Procedural Injustice: An example of procedural
injustice is when Mr. Mkhize held a meeting to explain the reduction of overtime but
did not allow employees to ask questions, make suggestions, or discuss alternative
cost-saving options. Additionally, when Sipho proposed exploring other measures to
reduce costs without affecting overtime, Mr. Mkhize dismissed his suggestion
outright.

Explanation using Procedural Justice Criteria:

• Representativeness: This criterion requires that all stakeholders impacted by
a decision should have their views considered in the decision-making
process. Mr. Mkhize did not allow employees to voice their opinions or
propose alternatives during the meeting, thus failing to represent their
interests in the decision-making process. This lack of representation led
employees to perceive the process as dismissive and unfair.

• Bias Suppression: Bias suppression requires that decision-makers avoid
favoritism and personal biases. In this case, Mr. Mkhize showed favoritism
towards senior management by disregarding the employees’ need for
overtime income while still preserving bonuses for higher-level managers. His

, For additional support +27 81 278 3372

dismissive response to employees’ suggestions and concerns further
suggests that his approach was biased in favor of management, contributing
to employees’ perception of an unfair and one-sided process.

1.3 Explanation of Perceived Unfairness and Impact on Trust: Mr. Mkhize’s
actions were perceived as unfair because he not only cut essential income for
employees but also dismissed their concerns without considering their input or
exploring alternatives. His approach contradicted his stated intent to protect their
best interests, as employees observed that he continued to protect benefits for
senior management. This perceived inconsistency between Mr. Mkhize’s words and
actions eroded employees' trust in management, as they felt that their well-being
was secondary to the interests of those in higher positions. Consequently, this lack
of trust has likely contributed to the growing support for union representation as
employees seek a fairer balance of power and accountability in their workplace.

QUESTION 2

2.1 Management’s Employment Relations Responsibilities: Key Functions of
Planning, Leading, Organising, and Controlling

As the Employment Relations Manager, my role is to ensure a balanced relationship
between management and employees, aiming to sustain a healthy, efficient, and fair
work environment. Let me explain how I am applying the four key management
functions in employment relations.

1. Planning: Planning is essential in employment relations to anticipate changes
and prepare solutions that serve both the company's goals and employees'
needs. Given the rising fuel costs and new environmental regulations, our
financial outlook changed. These factors necessitated a strategic cost-
reduction plan, which included the difficult decision to limit overtime. My goal
was to avoid retrenchments and to protect as many jobs as possible while
ensuring that the company remains financially stable. However, I
acknowledge that I could have planned better by actively involving employees
in discussions about cost-saving measures before implementing the decision.

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through EFT, credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying this summary from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Edge. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy this summary for R50,00. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

68175 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy summaries for 15 years now

Start selling

Exam (elaborations)

LRM2601 Assignment 6 (ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED

Document information

Subjects

Connected book

More summaries for

Written for

Seller

Reviews received

Content preview