Labor Management Relations

Katszubas write-up, which appears in the admirer Tribune, is similar to Lulli and Hensons (2006) expression in two aspects. First, both articles assume contends associated with childbed center organizing. Katszubas article describes a problem associated with efforts to work a labor totality in an percentage that appears to be disembarrass from labor amount of money organizing according to separate Laws. In the same manner, Lulli and Henson are interested in the dynamics of labor union organizing in a growingly difficult environs where caperes are more interested in diminution labor costs and retaining their competitive advantage.Another similarity is that both articles typify the semipolitical factors that affect labor union organizing wherein both explore the political precedents behind union formation. Both Katszubas and Lulli and Hensons article presents the docket behind union organizing for the employees and other interest groups and personalities.On the oth er hand, on that point are differences among Katszubas extend and Lulli and Hensons (2006) article in terms of data and facts presented, specific issues raised, and the perspective from which the general issue of labor union organizing is discussed. Lulli and Hensons article clearly present the general business and economic environment where labor unions are situated, the factors that promote labor union organizing activities, and the political, social, technological, and internal business practice agenda forwarded by the labor movement.They flack to provide a wide understanding of the innovations in strategies and manoeuvre busy by labor unions in general. Mean patch, Katszuba describes a more particular scenario involving the organizing efforts of a labor union at the state of matter Attorney ordinarys office. His article focuses more on the conflicting interests between the labor union, the State Attorney General as employer, and the employees of the Attorney Generals off ice.Likewise, Lulli and Henson raises the issue of the political, economic, and social impact of more advanced strategies and tactics used by labor unions to further their sectoral interests. The article discusses in detail the various ways in which labor unions are equal to influence legislation, pressure politicians and investors into retentivity businesses that are deemed anti-labor from opening new markets in some states, expand rank through a planned recruitment strategy targetting the younger genesis of workers, take advantage of technology to advance their organizing efforts and reach a wider audience, and move mergers and other business activities into opportunities to consolidate and strengthen their ranks.Lulli and Henson note how the results of credible surveys much(prenominal) and polls point to an uptrend for labor union power, support, and influence among the population and how an environment that is supportive of labor unions is encouraged by political and econo mic developments. They thence give credit to the labor unions for being able to stand up for their interests and being able to come up with better strategies in organizing. At the same time, the authors observe that human resource professionals must be able to take note and study these developments in the labor movement critically in launch to formulate appropriate approaches and tactics in dealings with increased union activity.Katszuba, on the other hand, highlights the tensions and problems created by the labor union organizing attempts in the State Attorney Generals office between employer and employees and within the labor union movement itself due to the illegality of labor organizing in the AGs office. Likewise, the article not only raises the question of the rigourousness of establishing a labor union in the State Attorney Generals office but besides the question of motive in such efforts.To this effect, the article presents the controversy that a former candidate for t he State Generals Office is behind the labor organizing efforts and is fanning the embers of employee dissatisfaction in order to destabilize the Office and embarrass the incumbent Attorney General. The question of motive is a crucial point in this article since it influences the readers perception of the trouble arising from labor union activities and seems to discredit the efforts of the labor union to gain employee representation by ascribing their motives to an external force other than the employees.The master(prenominal) difference between the two articles lies in the perspective from which union activities and tactics are discussed. Lulli and Hensons article approaches the subject of evolving labor union strategies academically and in a neutral manner. They present the data in a way that attempts to provide Human Resource personnel with useful education on handling labor union organizing efforts and activities.In contrast, Katszubas article presents the story of the organiz ing flap in the Attorney Generals office in a more sensationalized manner. Although there is an attempt to establish objectiveness by presenting both sides of the contending parties, the article is unfortunately lacking in more detailed explanation of the legislative factor that renders the organizing activities illegal.Thus, Mike Katszubas report on the organizing flap in the AGs office and Lulli and Hensons (2006) article on union organizing trends and tactics are similar in that they examine the phenomenon and issues of labor union organizing. However, a deeper scrutiny of the two articles reveals that while there may be similarities between these reports, there are also salient differences in terms of the facts they present, the issues they raise, and the perspective and objectives that the respective authors wish to bear to their readers.