Author: faridgeorgesblog

Conflict Exercise Review

The

For our storyboard, we have selected the third trigger of an employee having problems working in an unorganized warehouse. Joe is the manager of the company and Julia overlooks the warehouse. Over time the warehouse has become chaotic due to how they have been maintaining inventory and storing items. This causes more stress for Julia because it causes further delays when retrieving items for pick-up by customers or delivery services. Julia eventually brings in the manager, Joe, to help organize the warehouse to help resolve the issues that the warehouse department is having. 

Throughout the story, we used different strategies that have been used in the course to help manage the conflict between Julia, the delivery team and the pick-up services department within the warehouse. We recognize that a work environment like this would use the three channels of communication. In our storyboard, Julia’s informal communication with the warehouse employees is taken well and they feel comfortable talking to Julia. Since Julia communicates with the warehouse, who puts together all the orders, it is imperative that this relationship has no conflict. However, the formal communication within the company – warehouse staff, delivery staff, Julia and Joe, it’s not shown well in the story because the company lacks attention to the dysfunctional workplace in the warehouse. This causes more stress for the employees in all the departments. When Julia went to Joe about the warehouse issues it shows that they are both willing to approach the issue at hand to work together and fix it. This lead to Joe coming to the warehouse to start a plan with his employees to develop a more organized layout for the products. 

Overall, our storyboard scenario uses different channels of communication in order to resolve the conflict in the workspace. The channels are looked at individually in order to understand how communication plays a significant role in order for companies, employers, and customers to receive an ideal service.  The combination of these channels helps the staff in our storyboard resolve the conflict within. 

Empr200: Introducing Myself!

IMG-20170612-WA0002

Hello Everyone,

My name is Farid George, you guys can call me Freddy. I am a Fourth-year international student, majoring in Economics. I find conflict management to be a very useful skill to learn since workplace conflict is an issue that all businesses face, and being able to identify, analyze and find a resolution of those conflicts would definitely benefit the business to move forward. I am mostly interested in learning the various strategies to resolve those workplace conflicts. By the end of my learning experience, I would like to have a strong base on how to handle conflict management so that I would apply it in my career afterward.

Cheers,

Farid G. Fawzy

 

Empr200: Google Employees Taking A Stand!

Due to the top management decision on rewarding several top male executives accused of sexual misconduct an exit package, employees of Google, one of the largest tech firms in the world, have demonstrated their discontent through a massive walkout that gathered almost 20,000 employees across the world. The protest seems to be significant for a couple of reasons. The first would be because it is considered to be the first protest of its kind by well-paid and benefit-rich high-tech workers. Secondly, it is one of the largest walkouts to be recorded.  

Let me begin with a bit of background information that has led to the gathering of 20,000 employees in about 40 Google offices. In the last decade, there were several executives at Google that were accused of sexual misconduct; the management handling of the situation has led to high profile protests by the employees. Although the executives were asked to resign their position, they were later rewarded with a generous sum as an exit package. The most recent incident was Google’s top executive, Andy Rubin, also known as the ‘Father of Android’ was recently awarded an exit package of $90,000,000. Google’s Chief Executive and Co-founder Lary Page gave Andy a hero’s farewell by stating: ” I want to wish Andy all the best with what’s next”

The New York Times in its article, How Google Protected Andy Rubin, the ‘Father of Android’, has described the management’s conduct by stating: “In two instances, it ousted senior executives, but softened the blow by paying them millions of dollars as they departed, even though it had no legal obligation to do so” The company is seen as protecting executives that were accused of sexual misconduct rather than disciplining them; thus causing outrage which has led to protests by their employees. Each time Google has remained silent about the accusations against its executives, thus choosing to protect them.

 

105546169-1541087984311imagefromios7.1910x1000 (1).jpg

A sarcastic photo posted by CNBC demonstrating the discontent of Google employees

The protest had a number of objectives, the leaders of the protest stated five demands:[Kochan, 2018] 

  1. An end to forced arbitration in cases of harassment and discrimination
  2. A commitment to end pay and opportunity inequality
  3. A publicly disclosed sexual harassment transparency report
  4. A clear, uniform, globally inclusive process for reporting sexual misconduct safely and anonymously
  5. Promote the chief diversity officer to answer directly to the CEO and make recommendations directly to the board of directors. In addition, appoint an employee representative to the board.

In my opinion, these employees are asking for their voices to be heard. Their demands are reasonable and fair, the employees at Google are seeking for a safe workplace environment. Every employee who is credibly accused of sexual misconduct should be disciplined, whether they are a senior executive or a junior employee should not play a role. Instead of rewarding Andy Rubin with a multimillion-dollar package, Google should be disciplining him, thus demonstrating him as an exemplary case for any other senior executive misconducting.

Works Cited:

Kochan, Thomas. “Why Google’s Employees Walked out and What It Could Mean for the Future of Labor.” The Conversation, 24 Jan. 2019, theconversation.com/why-googles-employees-walked-out-and-what-it-could-mean-for-the-future-of-labor-106305.

Wakabayashi, Daisuke, and Katie Benner. “How Google Protected Andy Rubin, the ‘Father of Android’.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 25 Oct. 2018, http://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/technology/google-sexual-harassment-andy-rubin.html.

EMPR 240: Addiction is a disability!

Addiction is a disability, a disability is a prohibited ground and is protected under The Ontario Human Rights Code. My post will be going through an article published by The Star, it takes us through a timeline of how employers have changed how they deal with alcohol dependency in the workplace since 1990. The article can be found through the following link: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/03/01/new-guidelines-help-accommodate-workers-with-addiction-issues.html 

The article begins by taking us to the mid-1990s, where a forklift driver at a plumbing supply chain was submerged in alcoholism and struggling to fulfill basic duties like showing up for shifts or paying his bills. Mr. Bill Moynagh, a forklift driver, was caught drinking at work and was immediately fired.

“It was just, ‘You’re gone,’ ” said Moynagh, 59, who has been sober for over a decade.

Mr. Moyangh later goes on describing that the company never offered him any help to accommodate him through his rough time. Today, this is not the case anymore. The article goes to further describe that workers who are fired, or otherwise mistreated by employers, because of substance abuse issues are now often protected in the same way that a person fired for having a physical impairment would be. Under the Ontario Human Rights Code, an addiction is a disability and a disability is a prohibited ground. Employers have a duty to accommodate which means they need to take steps to remove barriers to equal participation in the workplace for employees covered by a prohibited ground.

In the case of Mr. Moyangh, the article describes that if this was to happen today, he would likely not be allowed to keep his position. However, the Canadian Human Rights Commission guidelines say employers should offer staff the option of taking time off while they seek treatment, or move staff with substance abuse issues into other jobs, where safety is not a concern.

The steps taken by the Ontario Human Rights Code is seen as a positive step towards a more productive workforce, by protecting and rehabilitating employees such as                  Mr. Moynagh we are enhancing workplace productivity. An interesting paper undertaken for the European Workplace Alcohol project and financed by the EU has demonstrated the negative effects that accompany alcohol dependency and given positive suggestions for how the most effective ways of workplace intervention. The paper suggested various forms of interventions ranging from peer support programs to brief intervention which support the steps of workplace intervention and concluded that it does, in fact, increase workplace productivity. The paper is a clear example that the steps taken by the Ontario Human Rights Code lead to a  positive effect in the workplace, the study can be found through the following URL, http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/191367/8-Alcohol-and-the-workplace.pdf

Work Cited:

EMPR 200: ‘No more loyalty,’ GM Oshawa workers describe.

Due to a massive transition in the auto industry, General Motors decided to shut down Oshawa’s assembly plant. This post goes through a recent employment issue that affected close to 3,000 employees in Canada alone. We will be discussing an article published by CBC news titled as “’No more loyalty,’ GM Oshawa workers describe feeling betrayed at Windsor rally” which can be found through the following URL https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/gm-workers-oshawa-windsor-rally-unifor-1.4975705

General Motors’ famous Oshawa plant has been up and running for almost 66 years. Since 1953, the plant has been providing cars for Canadian households. Throughout those numerous years, it has created a loyal customer base and more importantly a loyal relationship with its workers. The article begins by taking us to a rally set up in Windsor to show us a glimpse as to what those loyal workers are going through. Dave Greenwood, a loyal worker who has been working for GM for 30 years, had this to say, “People are crying in the plant.” He later added that he does not feel proud anymore for being a GM worker. Greenwood goes on describing how he feels betrayed by saying: “They’re frustrated. We’ve been loyal GM customers, loyal GM employees and there’s just no loyalty back. It’s shame, shame on General Motors.”

General Motors Canada’s vice-president of corporate affairs, justified the company’s action by stating: “Right now the auto industry is being massively disrupted and we’re trying to get ahead of that, if the company doesn’t take bold steps to move to the new technology, then there won’t be any jobs.” [Financial Post]  The company has also stated that it had committed millions of dollars to retrain and help Oshawa workers transition to new jobs. [Global News] However, employees present at Windsor’s rally had something different to say. Anto Bozic, a GM employee taking part at the rally, refuted the claims made by the company about training opportunities and stated: “It’s a crock.” Doug Lyon an electrician at GM Oshawa supported Bozic’s by adding “outright lies.”

It is evident to see that those workers feel betrayed, they were loyal customers, as well as, loyal employees. General Motors claims that the closure of the plant was necessary for the survival of the company, they claim that the auto industry is going through a change and that they would need to begin to invest in new technology such as electric cars and self-driving cars. [Financial Post]

Perhaps a smoother transition into closing down the plant would have been taken more lightly. General Motors, just as all businesses, have their ups and downs, perhaps after the transition is over and they begin implementing their research, we would see a reopening in Oshawa…

 

Bibliography:

EMPR 240: An Economic Lens On The Minimum Wage Hike.

A change to increase the minimum wage benefits the economy by increasing household income, as well as, lowering workplace turnover and absenteeism.  This blog will be analyzing the principle of minimum wage presented in the article, “The Benefits to Raising Ontario’s Minimum Wage Are Tangible” by David Olive. https://www.thestar.com/business/2018/08/25/the-benefits-to-raising-ontarios-minimum-wage-are-tangible.html,

A recent study, conducted by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA), found that low-income families in Ontario are earning less while richer families are watching their income grow. The report suggested that between the years 2000 and 2015, the top half of Ontario families in terms of income now takes home 81 percent of all earnings, up from 78 percent in 2000. [Dunn 2017]

The study demonstrates an alarming increase in the number of working poor in Ontario. As a result, the Ontario government led by Doug Ford has promised to increase the minimum wage. In order to fully grasp the article provided, we would first need to take a short Economics 101 lesson. To begin with, the concept of the minimum wage has always been a center of debate among economists. Amid the numerous schools, there are two main perspectives, the Neoclassical perspective, and the Keynesian model. In short, the Neoclassical perspective suggests that state intervention leads to inefficiency. On the other hand, the Keynesian model suggests that state intervention improves public welfare. [Marchal]

I know what you are thinking, how can an increase in minimum wage be an inefficiency? The answer to such a question can be easily explained in the following graph.

Demand And Supply Of Labor

If the state imposes a minimum wage higher than the equilibrium wage, therefore, the supply of labor would be more than the demand for labor which creates an excess supply of labor which is basically unemployment.

Going back to our article, the article supports the decision of the Ontario government to increase the minimum wage of Ontario to $15 per hour. Olive emphasizes how the policy would affect the disadvantaged by stating: “Increasing the minimum wage is one of the most effective means we have of assisting the economically disadvantaged. It puts a new, higher floor under all wages, including those earned by millions of Ontarians living just above the poverty line.”

The business columnist believes that the benefits are tangible, he proposes that an increased minimum wage, increases household incomes, consumer spending, as well as, decreases the workplace turnover and absenteeism. The way Olive supports his argument is simply by debunking the studies that claim that an increase in minimum wage would show job loss, as well as, demonstrating different examples of successful attempts of a hike in minimum wage, on both, the micro level, as well as, the macro level. On the macroeconomic level, Olive mentions an embarrassing incident, where a number of alarmists, such as the Bank of Canada, TD Bank, National Bank Financial and a couple of others, predicted that Ontario would lose between 50,000 and 140,000 jobs because of the new $14 minimum wage. However, by August, the Ontario jobless rate had dropped to an 18-year low, of 5.4 percent. On the micro level, the article points out to Canada’s biggest casual-dining operator, Recipe Unlimited Corp., having the strongest sales in Ontario among all other provinces since the $14 minimum wage came into effect.

In conclusion, further studies would need to be conducted in order to fully understand the repercussions associated with a wage increase. Perhaps the solution lies in an increase in benefits.

 

 

Work Cited:

Workplace Issue Blog

Workplace bullying, harassment targeted in OHS changes

The article starts by describing a harassment incident that occurred in 2002 at a Whyte Avenue bar in Edmonton. During the first day of her job, a customer grabbed Ms. Thea Bowering, pulled her towards him and then licked her face. She, later on, went to complain to her supervisor at the bar, the person who is in charge at that time, who just told her to avoid that man and offered little else to help Ms. Bowering. It, later on, goes on saying that under the new Occupational Health and Safety regulations that Alberta will be implementing, behavior like the one mentioned above will be covered. Employers will be required to have violence and harassment prevention plans as well as investigate any complaint raised from the employees. The article described that change as “part of a larger overhaul of OHS and workers’ compensation laws under the current government, bringing Alberta into line with most other provinces”

In my opinion, I do believe that harassment and violence incidents in the workplace are very frequent. Just to demonstrate the magnitude of harassment, a survey conducted by the Human resource professional association members, states that 17 percent reported having witnessed an employee being sexually harassed or assaulted at work. Another online survey conducted by the Ministry of Employment, Workforce Development, and Labour reported that 60% of the survey respondents have experienced harassment in the workplace. In order for employees to be working efficiently/productively, they need to have the necessary basic sense of security in the workplace. The surveys conducted demonstrated the necessary need for a change in the regulations. Therefore a stricter regulation that would target workplace harassment is definitely seen as a positive step taken by the province of Alberta. The change in the regulation would impact all employees since it would encourage employees to speak up of any incident while knowing that they would be protected. The article stated that “Anyone who brings forward a complaint will be protected from unfair reprisal, including termination.” this is a very important issue since many of the employees do not bring any claims since they are unsure whether it will lead to any steps being taken.

Work Cited:

 

The No A-hole Rule

Prof. Sutton’s has many interesting solutions to tackle having an office bully inside the organization. The First solution that the Prof. suggests is to keep the bullies out of the hiring process, but an issue that arrises in such a solution is that office bullies are not easily recognizable especially not at the interview process. Many office bullies don’t start acting like bullies until they are given power, or perhaps until an unpleasant experience makes them one. So the main issue that arrises from such a solution is the difficulty of identifying an office bully. “Treating an office bully as an incompetent employe” was another solution of the prof. , but the question here is what if the office bully is good at his work?, does being a jerk to other employees enough of a reason to be fired for?            A solution that i found very useful to the well-being of the organization is teaching constructive confrontation, this method helps to eliminate office bullies as well as turns a negative experience into a positive one. Bill 168, Ontario’s Law on Workplace Violence and Harassment, definitely helps HR professionals to deal with workplace bullies. The bill requires employers to create written workplace violence and harassment policies, train employees on such policies, undertake risk assessments to determine the possibility or prevalence of workplace, as well as provide ways for employees to report instances or risks of workplace violence and harassment. The bill aims mainly to help identify an office bully which is considered a challenge to any organization, as well as to train employees to not becoming bullies in the workplace.