Discuss the Effects of Centralized Vs

Question

Examlex · Accepted Answer

The Answer is suggested:In general, decentralized structures lead to bargaining outcomes determined mainly by market forces; this means greater wage dispersion between higher- and lower- paid workers and greater
union- non- union wage differentials. In good times, decentralized structures generally lead to higher wage settlements, since unions can whipsaw employers into accepting their times; in bad times, such structures typically lead to lower compensation levels, as employer whipsawing and increased competition from non- union firms force unions to agree to wage freezes or even reductions, or perhaps two- tier wage systems. Centralized structures generally lead to greater similarity of wages, benefits, and other terms of employment across industries or jurisdictions. In such structures, wages don't rise as much in good times but also don't fall as much in bad ones.

With respect to inflation, centralized structures have been associated with lower levels of inflation than decentralized ones, at least in good economic times. Greater wage moderation generally results a) from unions' loss of the ability to whipsaw, and b) in many cases, a shift in the locus of conflict from the workplace to the political level, which means that the labour movement may be able to achieve much of

Answer: its agenda politically and may well be induced to agree to lower wage settlements in return for job security, full employment guarantees, or pension and tax reform. Centralized structures have also been associated with lower unemployment levels not in text, but may be worth considering nonetheless; the source for this is the same Tarantelli article cited in the text).
As for strikes, internationally centralized structures generally result both in fewer strikes—this is almost a given—and in the loss of fewer working days to strikes. In Canada, however, centralization has been associated with an increase in both strike size and strike duration. This suggests that the real reason for the reduction in strike intensity in centralized structures comes from the shift in the locus of conflict to the political arena discussed above) rather than from the fact of centralization as such. In addition, centralized structures are often associated with increased wildcat strikes, due to increased internal union conflict and membership dissatisfaction with the union.

The effects of greater centralization on the bargaining process are somewhat mixed. On the one hand, it seems to make negotiations go more smoothly because of the superior negotiators conducting them, the presence of senior management personnel with real authority, and the greater likelihood of government involvement. On the other hand, because of the larger number of players and factions represented on each side, internal or intraorganizational bargaining tends to become more complex, which slows down negotiations. As well, centralized negotiations may increase local union negotiators' and rank- and- file members' feelings of alienation from the negotiations, which may well be a factor in the higher incidence of wildcat strikes found in centralized structures.

Centralized structures have the most detrimental effects on representational issues. By definition, they tend to focus more on issues of general importance such as the monetary package or pensions, leaving out issues of more purely local interest and causing union officials and lower level managers to feel left out of the process. This in turn may lead to a higher rate of both wildcat strikes and contract rejections in centralized structures. Two- tier or multi- tier systems, common in Europe, are one way around this type of problem. It is also worth noting that in a number of European countries, shop- floor issues which would be addressed by unions in Canada are addressed by other organizations, such as works councils.

Discuss the Effects of Centralized Vs

Definitions: