During the period of rising economy, abundant jobs are available in the market. The bargaining power of the employees is then high. The employer has to offer not only a lucrative package, but also loads of other benefits. The employees are seen shifting jobs more frequently. In short, they have a lot of "power" in their hands.
During times of economic recession, like the one we have experienced very recently, there are a lot of job cuts. During this period, the power of negotiation is seen to be shifting from the employee to the employer. Then, the employer dictates most of the terms of the employment.
We can safely state that the power shifts, and both parties enjoy it for some time. Who ever has the power in hand tries to get the maximum out of the deal. When the power is in the hands of the employer, the offer they make are mostly "non-negotiable". When the employee is enjoying the power, then there are situations such as that of Darrel Hair arising.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Dear Varun,
You are very right in highlighting the role of "demand and supply" and its relationship with "bargaining power" in your posting.
However,what makes you think that Darrel Hair was enjoying power?
Even if you assume that he was enjoying power, what could be the source of such "bargaining power"?
In my opinion, simply highlighting the relationship between "demand and supply" and "bargaining power" (which we have already learned inside the class while discussing the first two themes) without addressing the above two critical issues would take us nowhere but circle around the same old demand and supply concept.
I hope it makes sense to address the critical issues around and beneath the so called "bargaining power".
With Regards,
Ganesh
Dear Sir,
Darrel Hair was a member of the elite panel of umpires of the ICC. Shreejit has already pointed out in his post regarding what gave Hair the power. I am quoting the below from the post by Shreejit:
"Now what gives Darrell Hair the bargaining power that he is able to make such a non-negotiable offer to the ICC? First of all, its Darrell Hair, a high profile International Umpire whose name is not unknown to thousands of people who follow the game religiously and why so? The reason is that he is definitely one of the best in the world in his profession to have got a place in the ICC's Elite Panel of umpires. Secondly, he was an independent contractor with the ICC and had his contract till March 2008. Now the contract may have some clauses relating to his removal from duties but here he has not done anything that is against the books (which ICC itself has confirmed) to make those clauses applicable. So, if ICC is asking him to discontinue based on whatever grounds (I call it external pressure here) then by the laws of that should prevail in any fair country (with my limited legal understanding the contract comes under UK's jurisdiction) the ICC has to pay some kind of compensation to Darrell Hair if they are to forfeit a legal (I assume) and professional contract. Otherwise Darrell Hair I believe has the rights to sue ICC for asking him to discontinue before his tenure without compensating."
The "bargaining power" is not confined to just the "supply and demand". It is governed by several other factors, as can be seen in case of Hair. Nevertheless, the supply and demand have a huge impact on the bargaining power, and it is one of the major driving factors for the same.
With Regards,
Varun Agarwal
Post a Comment