Question

2. Insofar as impasses are concerned, do you think the rules concerning the use of strikes and lockouts are fair and balanced between unions and employers? Does either side have stronger leverage with respect to these tools? Why or why not?

Answer 1

Strikes and lock outs are very common in the business environment which is developed as a result of the disagreements between the employer, employee and the unions. The strikes are done by the employees and the unions through stopping their work and claiming or their rights and requirements. The lock outs are done by the employers through shutting down the operations or the production units.

When conducting the strikes as well as the lockouts the employee and the employer should look into the legal part. There are lawful and unlawful strikes and lockouts which can bring the legal implications. When considering the fairness of the rules concerning the strikes and lockouts and its balance it can be considered that these rules maximum supports the employers.

Since the unnecessary strikes and lockouts can bring many social and economical calamities and other issues the rules doesn’t encourage the strikes and lock outs. The labor legislations act insists both the parties to enter into preconditions like bargaining, conciliation process etc to avoid the issues related to it. These legislations support the employer as they are the party who suffers from either the strike or through the lock out.

When considering the leverage of the strikes and lock out on the employer and the employee, these tools have strong leverage on both the parties. The strikes of the employees and the trade union can influence the employer to accept or to enter into the negotiations with the employees requirements. The lock out can impact the employment opportunity and hence can influence the behaviour of the other party.