Employee-Employer Grievances: A Review

Abstract

The focus of industrial conflict has shifted from collective confrontation to grievances between employee and employer. This narrative review encompasses a range of international research on individual employee-employer grievances. The literature is reviewed in four key stages: (1) the incidence of grievable events; (2) the employee's response to a potential grievance issue; (3) the effectiveness of grievance processing; and (4) outcomes. The incidence of grievable events cannot be estimated precisely, because most are either not pursued by the employee or are settled informally (and so not recorded). Most research has been done on the second stage, investigating when a grievance will be pursued. The theoretical frame of exit, voice and loyalty, adapted from A.O. Hirschman (Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organisations, and States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970) has been prominent, but a series of findings have challenged the validity of this model and suggest a range of competing theories which may explain the apparent conundrum of negative outcomes associated with formal grievance procedures. The role of power has regained prominence, and this is part of a fuller understanding of grievance outcomes. The focus has been on the employee perspective, and it is now timely to broaden the focus, modelling a progression through a sequence of stages and emphasizing the role of employers in designing and managing grievance processes which are effective and fair.

Developing a framework of effective prevention and response strategies in workplace sexual harassment

“…A consistent theme is that effective complaint-handling requires that the complainant perceives the process as fair and effective, even if they do not agree with the outcome (Walker and Hamilton 2011). These include ensuring appropriate manager responses to complaints, the availability of multiple reporting channels, the timeliness of investigations, the application of appropriate sanctions, and the use of mediation.…”

What influences the progression of employment rights disputes?

“…Yet, in most cases, mediation was the prelude to termination. Lewin (2005) notes that grievance procedures are generally invoked when a relationship has already deteriorated, and the literature suggests that grievance procedures themselves may produce additional deterioration (Walker and Hamilton, 2011). The present findings, particularly the pervasive influence of dispute type, along with the nexus of a contending interaction and low employee influence, go some way to explaining these outcomes, defining the process of decline that became endemic.…”

“…This frames grievances in terms of a single filing decision and most often in the North American context (Lewin, 2004: 402-403). There are significant gaps in the research concerning aspects such as the role of other parties and other jurisdictions (Walker and Hamilton, 2011). This study reframes disputes as involving a progression of stages and a number of parties.…”

Legal and Ethical Values in the Resolution of Research-Related Disputes: How Can IRBs Respond to Participant Complaints?

“…These deficiencies highlight the need for alternative processes for resolving complaints, and there are regulatory and ethical reasons to assert that IRBs should play a central role in, at minimum, overseeing the design and operation of such programs. Given the lack of attention to this topic in research ethics, IRBs developing dispute resolution systems may seek specific guidance from prior work in alternative dispute resolution (Smith & Martinez, 2009), social psychology concepts such as procedural justice (Hollander-Blumoff, 2010; Hollander-Blumoff & Tyler, 2011), medical malpractice dispute resolution (Szmania, Johnson, & Mulligan, 2008), and workplace grievance procedures (Walker & Hamilton, 2011). …”