The four schools of thought in regard to labour relations
The handling of day-to-day labour relation and interactions is complex and uniquely elaborate in contemporary societies. In most cases, it comprises the use of human power, resources, and the integration of voices of reason that strive to retain the rights and privileges that are bestowed upon the workers. Indeed, there are numerous challenges that confront the labour sector across world. The aforementioned challenges are complimented by the reality of existent solutions to issues that affect workers in the work place contexts. Ergonomic experts have developed schools of thought that are designed to evaluate and ultimately contextualize the essence of labour relations in modern times.
The mainstream economics school of thought looks into the interactions and engagements between corporations and their workers. Furthermore, it focuses on the recurrent competition that pits both entities against one another. This premise validates the relationship between ideas, action, and the willingness to speak out on issues and complexities that arise in the work environments. The human resource management school attributes labour challenges to poor and inappropriate managerial strategies. It maintains that solutions to the existent labour challenges can only be achieved through the proper training of leaders in response to diverse contexts in corporate realms of interaction and engagement. The industrial relations school attributes the challenges in labour contexts to the interplay of factors that determine power relations in the workplace. Solutions can only be achieved through initiating relevant approaches that promote the appropriate use and practice of power in contemporary workplaces. The critical industrial relations school argues that capitalism is enhanced and sustained by hegemonic entities that are keen to take control of all the relevant factors of production in society. Ideally, some of the challenges can only addressed through the redistribution of resources and establishment of structures that recognize the plight of the working masses.
Working conditions during the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire
The triangle waist fire was experienced in 1911 at an industrial entity in the metropolitan section of New York. The factory was a clear example of modern versions of sweatshops. Sweatshops are classified as industrial entities that operate in total disregard of legal provisions that govern labour engagements in the society. In most instances, the working conditions in sweatshops are characterized by exploitation, coercion, intimidation, and inappropriate working conditions. Workers during that period did not have unions that could represent them in their official engagements with their employers. Therefore, the employers exploited them.
Sweatshops in the 20th and 21st Centuries
The sweatshops in the 21st Century have relatively improved working conditions or environments, especially when compared to the conditions that their predecessors presented. Currently, sweatshops are more cognizant of the plights of their workers. Despite the improvements, there are certain areas that require improvement, especially in regard to the sustenance of human dignity and status in the workplace. The most recurrent feature of sweatshops in both periods is the undue exploitation of workers and the disregard for human rights and privileges that exist in regard to industrial workplaces. Primarily, the proprietors of modern sweatshops should strive to improve the workers’ working conditions. They should understand the fact that better working conditions always play a crucial and integral role in improving the overall productivity of a company. The proprietors of sweatshops should not only follow labour laws, but they should also devise a mechanism that promotes engagement and interaction between employers and workers.
