LRM2601 Assignment 6 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DUE 6 November 2024
18 keer bekeken 0 keer verkocht
Vak
Labour Relations Management: Macro (LRM2601)
Instelling
University Of South Africa (Unisa)
Boek
South African Employment Relations
LRM2601 Assignment 6 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DUE 6 November 2024; 100% TRUSTED Complete, trusted solutions and explanations.
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 a ...
LRM2601 Assignment 6 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DUE 6 November 2024 Course Labour Relations Management: Macro (LRM2601) Institution University Of South Africa (Unisa) Book South African Empl...
LRM2601 Assignment 6 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DUE 6 November 2024; 100% TRUSTED Complete, trusted solutions and explanations.
LRM2601 Assignment 6 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DUE 6 November 2024 Course Labour Relations Management: Macro (LRM2601)
Alles voor dit studieboek
(10)
Geschreven voor
University of South Africa (Unisa)
Labour Relations Management: Macro (LRM2601)
Alle documenten voor dit vak (9)
Verkoper
Volgen
unisaassignmentsolutions
Ontvangen beoordelingen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
, LRM2601
Assignment 6
(COMPLETE
ANSWERS) Semester
2 2024 - DUE 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.
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 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.
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper unisaassignmentsolutions. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €2,69. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
