Data Bases • Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism? Links • Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com Free Essays • Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers	Search Lots of Essays Back to Subjects - Economics THE NEW WORKFORCE THE NEW WORKFORCE The new global economy has forced a reorganizing of the American workplace. In times past the workplace provided job security, training and internal employee development to improve employee performance and commitment. The new revolution in employee-employer relationships has allowed companies to reduce costs, increase flexibility, and generally improve performance. But where the old structure protected employees, new ones emphasize downsizing, part time or contingent workers, outsourcing, and compensation based on individual merit and overall organizational performance. These new organizations shift much of the risk of the company from stakeholders to employees and increase the demands on workers while reducing their compensation. Therefore employees have been penalized for the restructuring of the American workplace. There are three distinct periods of the American workplace: industrial, post-industrial and contemporary. The Industrial was the period before WWII. The Post-Industrial was prevalent for most of the 20th century, and the contemporary emerged during the late 1980’s and 1990’s. During the industrial period, training was informal and occurred on the job. Foreman had primary control over the workers. The fear of being fired was the primary source of worker control. There was no job security. The Post-industrial period was a product or partly in reaction to the growing union movement, partly from efforts by management to increase productivity on the heels of WWI. During this period there was a clear distinction between the interests of shareholders and those of management. Clear distinction between the work of management and the work of labor. Managers did the "thinking work," labor did the physical or mechanical work. Employment decisions were based on pre-established, objectives such as seniority, years of training, etc, rather than on individual merit. Unskilled workers were hired to work in the factories; recent college graduates for management. Factory workers started with simple task and gradually learned more difficult ones; young managers had more explicit training programs and job rotation. Large corporations might have training departments. Promotion tended to follow training schedules, one could move up as one learned to handle more complex assignments. There were often "fast tracks" for employees with special relationships or with highly desirable qualities. Organizational structures were organized by function. Decision-making power was at the top and had to flow through too many levels. There was a sense of job security, based on a seniority system. Middle managers enjoyed a high degree of job security. The stakeholders carried the risk for business outcomes, not the workers and consequently there was relatively little association between pay and company performance. Pay tended to vary by job title and seniority, not according to individual performance. Since the 1980’s a new employment restructuring has come to replace the traditional organization. New organizational structures are flatter (middle management have been cut out), more profitable, have been downsized, and provide a new relationship with employees. According to Robert Reich in his book “The Future of Success”, “American corporations have become more productive, and their goods and services dramatically better. All jobs and earnings have become less secure, and wages and benefits of routine production workers have eroded. Employees now bear many more of the risks of doing business due to reduced job security and contingent pay. “In 1997, almost 30 percent of the U.S. workforce was in non-traditional jobs.” Reducing staff to minimal levels and hiring contingent, part time, or contract workers may be a permanent trend rather than a temporary measure to increase profits. Robert Reich further states, that “companies are fighting more brazenly against unions, replacing strikers and firing workers who lead organizing efforts. Union membership has plummeted from 30 percent of all private-sector workers in 1973 to 9.6 percent in 2000.” Employers require more of employees but seem to offer them less. Worker morale and employee loyalty are both on a rapid decline. Employees are pressured to manage their own careers, develop themselves, and seek out opportunities to advance them to the next level. Market forces increasingly are governing the employee-employer relationship. There are fewer incentives for employers to provide training especially at entry levels—many entry- level jobs have been eliminated. As companies abort traditional work systems, it is difficult to see where work-based skills will come from to fill the new team-based jobs—what will be the impact on the changing workforce. Bibliography: Word Count: 707
Copyright © 1998-2008 College Term Papers, INC All Rights Reserved. DMCA Notifications and Requests