HRM231 - S1 Canvas

Employment Relations & Industrial Relations
Learning Outcomes
• Describe the key principles of Singapore’s legal employment
framework.
• Discuss the statutory employment laws in Singapore.
• Explain how legislations has been used to improve standards for
workers.
• Illustrate how the legal employment framework is used to resolve
employer-employee concerns and disputes.
• Demonstrate the role of the Ministry of Manpower in labour market
policies.
• Analyse how the practice of tripartism in Singapore affects
employment relations.
© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved.

HRM231 Study Unit 1
Perspectives and Evolution of

Employment and Industrial Relations
© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 2

Introduction
By the end of this unit, you should be able to:

• Define and understand the meaning of employment
and industrial relations.
• Describe the three employment relations
perspectives
• Understand and apply the Dunlop's model to explain
employment and industrial relations in Singapore
• Explain the origin of the industrial relations system in
Singapore – tripartism.

Employment vs. Industrial Relations
• Employment and Industrial Relations look at the interactions

between labour and management to establish the conditions of
employment.
• Some ambiguity
• ER → much broader & exists in both unionised and non-
unionised companies – human resource management
• IR → used more from a unionised perspective involving
collective bargaining and is seen to be a subset of ER – work
rules - substantive and procedural in nature

Employment Relations Perspectives
• Perspectives are like a frame of reference

• Refers to a person’s perspective on the world
• Comprises the assumptions, values, beliefs and convictions we
draw on to interpret and understand the way things are and why
they happen.
• Important tool for understanding why people behave the way
they do in employment relations
• Managers’ frames of reference shape the way they approach ER,
workers’ frames influence how they respond to authority,
governments’ frames shapes laws.

The Three Frames
• There is no one way of viewing the world of work - rather,

people will make judgements on the basis of their own
assumptions and beliefs’
– Unitarist
– Pluralist
– Radical/Marxist
• Are you a unitarist, pluralist or radical?

A unitarist perspective: HRM
• What is the unitarist perspective?

– Assumption of a common purpose and shared goals,
with no fundamental conflict of interest between labour
and capital.
– Conflict is an aberration, the result of:
• poor communications
• poor management.
– Unions are seen as an unwelcome intrusion:
• compete loyalty of employees.
– Role for strong management.

Approaches
• Approaches within unitarism:

– scientific management (Taylorism / scientific
management):
• work study / one best way
• establishment of work rules.
– human relations (Mayo / Hawthorne experiments)
• emphasis on work groups and social relations at
work
• less importance given to economic incentives.
The analytical tools of HRM
• HRM is the modern form that a unitarist approach to ER
typically takes, that is:
– the management of the employment relationship
primarily from the perspective of the employer.
• This can be seen in the main focuses of HRM:
– plan human-resource requirements
– recruit and select employees
– train and manage employee performance
– reward employees
– dismiss or retire employees.
What are the criticisms of unitarism?
• A narrow approach that neglects causes of conflict.
• Fails to explain the prevalence of conflict within

organisations.
• Does not account for uneven distribution of power among

employees and employers in the decision-making process.

A pluralist perspective
• First, what is the pluralist perspective?

– Conflict is inevitable: competing interests between the
parties.
– Power is diffused among the main bargaining groups
within the employment relationship: no-one
dominates.
– Trade unions are viewed as providing a mechanism
that legitimates employees’ rights to bargain within the
workplace.
– The state is regarded as an impartial entity, whose
primary function is to protect the ‘public interest’.
What are the criticisms of pluralism?
• Power is not evenly diffused:

– it is typically weighted towards management in the
workplace.
• Emphasis upon rational approach to conflict management:

A radical [Marxist] perspective
• What are the common features of radical perspectives?

– Fundamental and inherent conflicting interests between
management and workers.
– Uneven distribution of power between bargaining
groups, within the workplace and society.
– The role of trade unions - to challenge managerial
control.
– The state protects the interests of capitalists.

What are the criticisms of a radical perspective?
• Preoccupied with conflict:

– obscures any cooperation or shared goals between
management and workers.
• Class struggle not part of modern capitalism.
• Capital is not homogenous:
– competition among capitalists.
• Under-estimates the independence of the state.

Industrial relations
• Practical focus
• Generally pluralist in orientation
• Focus on rules
• Systems approach popular in IR.

Systems approach to ER / IR
• Dunlop (1958). Derived from wider systems approach, i.e.

actors, contexts, inputs, outputs
• central function of IR is the determination of workplace
rules
• System comprises: actors, contexts, ideology, web of rules
• Actors interact in various contexts to produce rules that
enable the system to keep functioning.

Dunlop’s ER / IR System Model
1-17
• Four key features:
1. Actors
• specialized government agencies
• managers and their representatives
• non-managerial employees and their
representatives
2. Shared Ideology
• set of ideas and beliefs held by the actors
• helps to bind or integrate the system together

Dunlop’s ER / IR System Model
3. Contexts
• environmental factors that influence actors
• technology
• market/budgetary constraints
• distribution of power in the larger society
4. Rules
• the regulatory framework, developed by a range of
process and presented in variety of forms which
expresses the terms and nature of the
employment relationship.

A simplified version of Dunlop’s Approach to IR
Participants inn the System

Environmental Forces
Output
1. Market or Workers Rules of
Budgetary workplace
Restraints Management
2. Technology Government
3. Distribution
of power in
society
Feedback
More on Actors
• We must pay attention to the parties in rule-making in employment
relations
– People
• All have different values, motives and past experiences
• Because they are all different, would probably make different
choices in the same situation
– Organisations
• Are also all different from each other
• Different purpose, history, governance, goals
• All these factors impact on what response to a given situation
will be chosen
• To explain patterns of employment relations, we must therefore
understand people and their organisations
More on Contexts
• Dunlop identified three interrelated contexts:

1. Technology
2. Market or budgetary constraints
3. Power relations and status of the actors
• These three ‘contexts’ have emerged and re-emerged

many times as being important explanatory factors in the
quest to understand patterns of employment relations in
different nations, industries and enterprises

Technology, markets and power
• The nature of the technology, markets and distribution of

power in society generally impacts on employment relations:
– fixed or variable workplace
– stability of workforce and operations
– job content
– schedules and shifts of the workplace
– number of competitors
– availability of substitute products
– sources of supply
– consumer demand
• The nature and distribution of power, e.g. role of the State
determines the relative power and status of the actors
The Tripartite GUM Model
• Dunlop’s model has been extended and re-

labelled GUM model (government, union and
management) to reflect Singapore’s tripartite
situation.
• 5 key features:
-- The government playing the central role as policy maker
-- Outcomes: economic growth, political stability, harmony

-- A single federation of trade unions
-- Symbiotic relations: government and union leaders
-- Win-win problem-solving approach

Reflection Question
• Is tripartism a unique feature of employment

relations in Singapore?
• Is the Singapore situation an "ideal" one?
This may be discussed by using Dunlop's
model. ("Ideal" from whose perspective and
expectation: workers? management?
government?)

Origin of the ER / IR System
▪ Achieved self-government in 1959 and task of developing

the economy was defined by a number of limiting factors:
✓ Few natural resources to support either primary industry
or an industrial sector
✓ Little local capital for development
✓ Small size of population meant a dependence on external

rather than a domestic market for goods and services
produced

▪ Two basic and interdependent pre-requisites

emerged for success in economic development:
✓ The need for capital, and
✓ The necessity of a stable and attractive workforce

to attract such investments to Singapore

▪ From the outset, Government has played the central

role in creating and expanding the industrial base
and, it follows, in developing the IR system of
Singapore
✓ Deliberately defined the concepts, legislation,

institutions and procedures to achieve a peaceful
and stable IR climate attractive to investors

▪ Imperative that the Trade Union Movement be

incorporated as a co-operative rather than an
adversarial force
✓ Government determination to develop a close working
relationship with union leaders with the understanding
that the worker's well-being was inextricably linked to
the development of the nation

▪ Imperative that the Trade Union Movement take a

non adversarial approach toward employers:
✓ The creation of jobs depended on attracting
investors to set up companies in Singapore

Labour Management
Government
Thus the necessary foundation of the IRS was defined:

➢ Cooperation among the three parties, labor, management and
government for mutual gain

Summary
• A new spirit of tripartism was thus born,

with the government, a responsible labour
movement, and enlightened employers
adopting a consultative problem-solving
approach to address the challenges of
industrialisation for the mutual benefit of
employers, workers, and society.

Singapore’s ER / IR transformations
Transformations have been in response to the state of the world economy,

although partly precipitated by immediate local and regional crises.
▪ The first was a result of commitment to industrialisation by a
Government released from the constraints of colonial administration.
▪ The second was the result of pre-empting the employment effect
of the withdrawal of the British military base from Singapore.
▪ The third was due to a realisation that if the standard of living of
Singaporeans were to continue to rise, MNC investment had to shift to
high technology, high value-added production.
These three transformations involved institutional changes that have
determined the infrastructural arrangements for the fourth.
Chris Leggett, The fourth transformation of Singapore’s industrial relations

Four periods of transformation in Singaporean ER / IR
▪ Colonial Administration to Regulated Pluralism (1960-67)
▪ Regulated Pluralism to Corporatism (1968-78)
▪ Corporatism to Corporate Paternalism (1979-97)
▪ From Industrial Relations to Manpower Planning
Ref: Leggett C (2007), ‘From Industrial Relations to Manpower Planning: the transformations of
Singapore’s IR’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol 18, No 4, 642-664.

Colonial Administration to Regulated Pluralism (1960-1967)
• During Colonial rule the basic objective was to maintain worker

dependency, and suppress conflict
• High levels of industrial conflict during 1940s/50s attributed to infiltration
by Malaysian communists
• With self-government, the PAP (nationalists) put collective bargaining on
a legal footing, and establish the Industrial Arbitration Court; also use
union registration in attempt to control unions
• 1963 landmark dispute with two Public Daily Rated Employees’ Unions
who had called an unlawful strike. Both unions de-registered in 1966.
Anti strike provision for public servants introduced.
• The PAP-supported National Trades Union Congress is established and
emerges as the peak body.
Regulated pluralism to Corporatism (1968-78)
• Withdrawal of British military bases posed serious economic
challenges; needed to redouble efforts to attract MNC business;
imperative to industrialize
• Government legislates to make the Singapore workforce
attractive to investors: low wages, no disputes, functional
flexibility (no negotiation over workplace issues); union decline
begins
• Establishes Tripartite National Wages Council (SNEF and NTUC
incorporated)
• NTUC becomes a ‘transmission belt’ for government imperatives,
especially productivity improvements
• Mediation, conciliation, and compulsory arbitration (strikes illegal)
A Definition of Corporatism
“a political structure…which integrates organized socio-economic

groups through a system of representation and cooperative mutual
interaction at the leadership level and of mobilization and social
control at the mass level” (Panitch, 1977,p66)
i.e. a POLITICAL rather than institutional arrangement in which
sectional interests voluntarily subordinate themselves to a national
interest.
Ref: Panitch L (1977), ‘The Development of Corporatism in Liberal Democracies’, Comparative
Political Studies, Vol 10, No 1, 61-90

Corporatism to Corporate Paternalism (1979-1997)
• Government objective to restructure Singapore economy towards
capital intensive, high tech, value added business;
• In face of tight labor markets NWC boosts wage levels to choke off
increase in employment, and force productivity increases;
• NTUC restructured to form industry wide unions, then enterprise
unions (following Japan);
• Some notable disputes e.g. Singapore Airlines flight crew. Resulted in
public ‘dressing down’ for pilots for letting down the Singaporean
people.
• Employers using paternalist HR policies; long-term employment.
• 1985 recession (Growth at -1.8%); increased wage restraint, foreign
workers repatriated.
• Growing pressure for more flexibility in wage systems.
Post 1997: IR to Manpower Planning
• 1997 Asian Economic Crisis, growth plummets from 10.4% to 0.2%;
results in immediate cost-cutting;
• Singapore government’s Ministry of Manpower thrown into the fore
to develop a strategy of long-term transformation to a knowledge
economy including:
➢ Integrated manpower planning
➢ Development of lifelong learning and employability
➢ Augmentation of the talent pool
➢ Competitive based wage system (more variable pay)
➢ Strong tripartite collaboration
Reflection Question
• Read the article by Soh on the success of

the tripartism in Singapore and speculation
about the future of the model. Discuss why
does Soh argue that tripartism has played
a key role in Singapore’s economic
success? What do you think lies ahead for
the tripartite model?

The Challenges of Tripartism
• Widening Socioeconomic Disparity
• Growing Workforce Diversity
• Alternative Platforms for Representation and Advocacy
• Risk of Complacency

The Future of Tripartism: Scenario 1
Tripartism Endangered
• Driving forces in the environment are pulling the respective
tripartite partners in different directions, and gaming by any
one of the partners to gain maximum benefits for its
constituents could damage trust in tripartite processes.
Tripartism could be superseded by growing numbers of
disparate independent interest groups advocating and
contending for different worker interests - such as older
workers, women, foreigners and local workers - along with
alternative business interest groups who have similarly
broken away from a federation representing employers’
interests.
Tripartism Rejuvenated
• The adaptive capacity and resilience and the institutional
strength of Singapore’s tripartite model could prevail,
allowing the essence of trust, mutual understanding and
consensus to be retained while engaging with more diverse
and complex worker demands. Should the process of
negotiations and consensus building then become messier
and more complex, the Government would have to play a
greater role in balancing the interests between business
and workers.

From Tripartite to Multipartite Relations

• The essence of trust, mutual understanding and
cooperation may well be preserved within the tripartite
partnership. But rather than having individual leaders
representing aggregated interests from each stakeholder
group, there will be collective leadership from businesses
and unions to represent variegated stakeholder interests.
Similarly, the Government would have to play a greater
role in balancing these interests.

Reference
Soh Tze Min 2012, ‘The future of tripartism in Singapore: Concertation or

dissonance?’, Ethos, issue 11, August.

HRM231 - S1 Canvas

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

HRM231 - S1 Canvas

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Employment Relations & Industrial Relations

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved.

Perspectives and Evolution of

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 2

By the end of this unit, you should be able to:

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 3

• Employment and Industrial Relations look at the interactions

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 4

• Perspectives are like a frame of reference

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 5

• There is no one way of viewing the world of work - rather,

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 6

• What is the unitarist perspective?

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 7

• Approaches within unitarism:

• A narrow approach that neglects causes of conflict.

• Fails to explain the prevalence of conflict within

• Does not account for uneven distribution of power among

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 10

• First, what is the pluralist perspective?

• Power is not evenly diffused:

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 12

• What are the common features of radical perspectives?

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 13

• Preoccupied with conflict:

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 14

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 15

• Dunlop (1958). Derived from wider systems approach, i.e.

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 16

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 17

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 18

Participants inn the System

• Dunlop identified three interrelated contexts:

2. Market or budgetary constraints

3. Power relations and status of the actors

• These three ‘contexts’ have emerged and re-emerged

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 21

• The nature of the technology, markets and distribution of

• Dunlop’s model has been extended and re-

-- Outcomes: economic growth, political stability, harmony

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 23

• Is tripartism a unique feature of employment

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 24

▪ Achieved self-government in 1959 and task of developing

✓ Little local capital for development

✓ Small size of population meant a dependence on external

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 25

▪ Two basic and interdependent pre-requisites

✓ The necessity of a stable and attractive workforce

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 26

▪ From the outset, Government has played the central

✓ Deliberately defined the concepts, legislation,

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 27

▪ Imperative that the Trade Union Movement be

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 28

▪ Imperative that the Trade Union Movement take a

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 29

Thus the necessary foundation of the IRS was defined:

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 30

• A new spirit of tripartism was thus born,

© 2021 SUSS. All rights reserved. S1 - 31

Transformations have been in response to the state of the world economy,