Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi

GÖNDERBİLGİ
EnglishTürkçe

Araştırma Makalesi


DOI :10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006   IUP :10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006    Tam Metin (PDF)

John W. Budd’ın ‘İnsani Bir Çalışma İlişkisi’ Kuramı 21. Yüzyıl Çalışma İlişkileri İçin Neler Söylüyor?

Fuat Man

21. yüzyıla çalışma ilişkileri bağlamında baktığımızda gördüğümüz şey pek iç açıcı değil. Kabaca çalışma hayatını koruyan mekanizmaların aşındığını veya gevşediğini ve çalışma hayatının çalışanlar için gittikçe güvencesizleştiğini söylemek mümkündür. Böyle bir durumda çalışma hayatının insani bir temele oturtulması mümkün mü? Bu çalışma, bu soruyu John W. Budd’ın ‘insani bir çalışma ilişkisi’ kuramı bağlamında cevaplandırmaya çalışmaktadır. Çalışmada öncelikle çalışma ilişkileri literatüründeki temel referans çerçeveleri sunulacak, daha sonra ise Budd’ın sözü edilen kuramının ana hatları ortaya konularak soru cevaplandırılmaya çalışılacaktır. 

Anahtar Kelimeler: John W. Budd, İnsani bir çalışma ilişkisi, İstihdam geometrisi
DOI :10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006   IUP :10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006    Tam Metin (PDF)

What Does John W. Budd’s Theory of ‘Employment with A Human Face’ Say for 21st Century Employment Relations?

Fuat Man

When we look at the 21st century in the context of employment relations, we could not see a heart-warming scene. Roughly, it is possible to say that the mechanisms that protect the working life have become eroded or loosened and the working life has become increasingly insecure for the employees. In such a case, is it possible to put the working life on a basis with a human face? This paper tries to answer this question by John W. Budd’s theory of ‘employment with a human face’. The paper begins with a section on the frames of reference which is an important concept in employment relations literature. The next section presents the main points of the Budd’s theory and tries to answer the question. 

Anahtar Kelimeler: John W. Budd, employment with a human face, geometry of employment

GENİŞLETİLMİŞ ÖZET


This paper aims to present some remarks for that question: Can 21st century employment relations be achieved a human face? The paper focus on that question and tries to present a theoretical explanation for employment with a human face. Since the explanation is theoretical, it is asked at the beginning of the paper that ‘do we have a need for a theory?’ In the introduction section the focus is on that question. Shortly it is demonstrated that why we need a theory. A theory is not an incomprehensible and sophisticated statement but an explanation of the facts. Most of us, in our everyday life, use theory-like explanation. Therefore in a scientific area the need for a theory is even higher and theories on employment relations can guide us for debates about working life. 

After that introduction the paper criticizes ‘the human face’ of modern human resources management. ‘Human’ of HRM implies that labour or workforce is not a simply economic commodity but a more valuable resource. However its practices do not verify its visible statements. Modern HRM obviously has more concerns about productivity rather than human dignity. Actually, in its every practice that seems focusing on ‘human’ the invisible main concern is productivity. Therefore, the theoretical perspective that paper demonstrate differs from the perspective of modern HRM. 

The next section of the paper presents a brief framework on the ‘frames of reference’ concept that is brought into labour relations. In his first formulation Alan Fox, mentioned two frames of reference, unitarist and pluralist. The first frame is also reflecting the perspective of modern HRM which sees the organisation as a structure of people with the same interest. Originating from political science, pluralist perspective establishes a similarity between society and organization. In another words, just as in society, organisations are also establishments of people with conflicting interests, but this conflict can be managed by institutions such as collective bargaining. The first formulation of Fox has been widened by himself and the other scholars. That paper presents just two other frames: radical and individual or egoist. The latter looks at the labour relations via lens of classical economics and the first via radical Marxist thought. 

The rest of the paper focuses on the approach of John W. Budd’s ‘geometry of employment’ or ‘employment with a human face’. After his textbook –Labor Relations: Striking a Balance- Budd developed his approach in his book titled Employment with a Human Face: Balancing Efficiency, Equity and Voice (EWHF) in 2004. In that theoretical text (EWHF) Budd begins with putting the main objectives of employment relations. According to Budd the social objectives of employment relations are efficiency, equity and voice. All of these objectives are moral imperatives so they have equal importance and need to be balanced. Budd’s words make his intention quite clear (Budd, 2005, p. 192): 

“Note carefully that the justification for equity and voice is not the profitmaximizing justification of contemporary human resource management. Providing employees with equity and voice might enhance employee commitment and therefore efficiency, but what happens when this wishful thinking is not true? The difficult problems in human resources and industrial relations as well as in employment and labor law are not when efficiency, equity, and voice are mutually supporting; rather, the most difficult problems are when these objectives conflict.(…) Because equity and voice are rooted in human dignity and democratic ideals, they must be respected even when they do not enhance efficiency. In short, efficiency, equity, and voice should be balanced in the modern employment relationship.”

At the end of his study Budd directs our attention to the academic field of labour relations and presents a suggestion about that field. According to Budd, the field of industrial relations needs to be redefined or structured to include the balance mentioned here. And his suggestion is human resources and industrial relations (HRIR) as an inclusive field that includes all perspectives on work. The location of HRIR in employment geometry is more centric than the other fields (Figure 1).

Now, if we go back to the question at the beginning what can we derive from Budd’s theoretical perspective? Budd does not aim to present a toolkit to solve all problems about working life but a theoretical basis for debates on contemporary employment relations with a human face. Of course this framework is not a magic wand but with its emphasis on ethical environment and since it sees three objectives as moral imperatives this theoretical explanation present quite important ground for the debates on the possibility of an employment with a human face for 21st century. 


PDF Görünüm

Referanslar

  • Adams, R. J. (2005). Efficiency, Equity, and Voice as Moral Imperatives. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 17(2), 111–117. google scholar
  • Bamber, G. J. (2005). The Geometry of Comperative Industrial Relations: Efficiency, Equity and Voice. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 17(2), 119–122. google scholar
  • Bauman, Z. (2016). Cemaatler: Güvenli olmayan bir dünyada güvenlik arayışı. Çev. Nurdan Soysal, İstanbul: Say. google scholar
  • Bauman, Z. (2017). Akışkan Modernite. Çev. Sinan Okan Çavuş, İstanbul: Can. google scholar
  • Bingham, C. (2016). Employment Relations: Fairness and Trust in the Workplace. London: Sage. google scholar
  • Budd, J. W. (2004). Employment With a Human Face. NY: ILR Press. google scholar
  • Budd, J. W. (2005). Employment with a Human Face: The Author Responds. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 17(3), 191–199. google scholar
  • Budd, J. W. (2012). Labor Relations: Striking a Balance. New York: McGrowHill. google scholar
  • Budd, J. W. (2016). Çalışma Düşüncesi. Çev. Fuat MAN, İstanbul: Ayrıntı. google scholar
  • Budd, J. W. (2018). İnsani Bir Çalışma İlişkisi: Verimlilik, Hakkaniyet ve Söz Hakkını Dengelemek. Çev. Fuat MAN, İstanbul: Küre. google scholar
  • Budd, J. W., & Bhave, D. (2008). Values, Ideologies and Frames of Reference in Industrial Relations. In P. Blyton, N. Bacon, J. Fiorito, & E. Heery (Eds.), Sage Handbook of Industrial Relations (pp. 92–112). London: Sage. google scholar
  • Budd, J. W., & Bhave, D. (2009). The Employment Relationship. In A. Wilkinson, T. Redman, S. Snell, & N. Bacon (Eds.), Sage Handbook of Human Resource Management. London: Sage. google scholar
  • Commons, J. R. (1919). Industrial Goodwill. New York: McGrowHill. google scholar
  • Cradden, C. (2011). Unitarism, Pluralism, Radicalism... And The Rest? Why the Frames Of Reference Approach Is Still Relevant To the Study of Industrial Relations, But Why We Need Nine Frames Rather Than Just Three., (7), 12. Retrieved from http://www.unige.ch/ses/socio/publications/dernierespublications/sociograph10-1/sociograph_working_paper_7.pdf google scholar
  • Craib, I. (1992). Modern Social Theory: From Parsons to Habermas. Harlow: Prentice Hall. google scholar
  • Devinatz, V. G. (2005). Symposium on John W. Budd: Employment with a Human Face: Four Views on Efficiency, Equity, and Voice in the World of Work. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 17(2), 109–110. google scholar
  • Dunlop, J. T. (1958). Industrial Reltions Systems. USA: Holt. google scholar
  • Estreicher, S. (2005). Geometry Does Not a Theory of Emplyment Make. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 17(2), 123–126. google scholar
  • Gennard, J., Judge, G., Bennett, T., & Saundry, R. (2016). Managing Employment Relations. London: CIPD. google scholar
  • Heery, E. (2015). Frames of reference and worker participation. In S. Johnstone & P. Ackers (Eds.), Finding a Voice at Work? New Perspectives on Employment Relations (pp. 21–43). Oxford: Oxford University Press. google scholar
  • Heery, E. (2016). Framing Work: Unitary, Pluralist and Critical Perspectives in the 21st Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press. google scholar
  • Hyman, R. (2005). Striking a Balance? Means, Ends and Ambiguities. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 17(2), 127–130. google scholar
  • Kaufman, B. E. (2004). Toward an Integrative Theory of Human Resource Management. In Theoretical Perspectives on Work and the Employment Relationship (pp. 321–366). New York: Cornell University Press. google scholar
  • Kaufman, B. E. (2007). The Development of HRM in Historical and International Perspective. In P. W. Peter Boxall, John Purcell (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Human Resource Management (pp. 19–47). New York: Oxford University Press. google scholar
  • Kaufman, B. E. (2008). Managing the Human Factor: The early years of human resource management in American industry. New York: Cornell University. google scholar
  • Kaufman, B. E. (2009). Hired Hands or Human Resources? Case Studies of HRM Programs and Practices in Early American Industry. Ithaca: ILR Press. google scholar
  • Kaufman, B. E. (2014). The historical ddevelopment of American HRM broadly viewed. Human Resource Management Review, 24(3), 196–218. google scholar
  • Kaufman, B. E. (2015). The future of employee voice in the USA: Predictions from an employment relations model of voice. In S. Johnstone & P. Ackers (Eds.), Finding a Voice at Work? New Perspectives on Employment Relations (pp. 278–300). Oxford: Oxford University Press. google scholar
  • Kellner, D., & Best, S. (2016). Postmodern Teori. Çev. Mehmet Küçük, İstanbul: Ayrıntı. Kundakçı, D. (2016). Max Weber. İstanbul: Say. google scholar
  • Marchinton, M., & Wilkinson, A. (2002). People Management and Development: Human Resource Management at Work. London: CIPD. google scholar
  • Müller-Jentsch, W. (2004). Theoretical Approaches to Industrial Relations. In B. E. Kaufman (Ed.), Theoretical Perspectives on Work and the Employment Relationship (pp. 1–40). Champaign: IRRA. google scholar
  • Webb, S., & Webb, B. (1894). The History of Trade Unionism. London: Longmans. google scholar

Atıflar

Biçimlendirilmiş bir atıfı kopyalayıp yapıştırın veya seçtiğiniz biçimde dışa aktarmak için seçeneklerden birini kullanın


DIŞA AKTAR



APA

Man, F. (2019). John W. Budd’ın ‘İnsani Bir Çalışma İlişkisi’ Kuramı 21. Yüzyıl Çalışma İlişkileri İçin Neler Söylüyor?. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, 0(76), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006


AMA

Man F. John W. Budd’ın ‘İnsani Bir Çalışma İlişkisi’ Kuramı 21. Yüzyıl Çalışma İlişkileri İçin Neler Söylüyor?. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi. 2019;0(76):1-27. https://doi.org/10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006


ABNT

Man, F. John W. Budd’ın ‘İnsani Bir Çalışma İlişkisi’ Kuramı 21. Yüzyıl Çalışma İlişkileri İçin Neler Söylüyor?. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, [Publisher Location], v. 0, n. 76, p. 1-27, 2019.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Man, Fuat,. 2019. “John W. Budd’ın ‘İnsani Bir Çalışma İlişkisi’ Kuramı 21. Yüzyıl Çalışma İlişkileri İçin Neler Söylüyor?.” Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi 0, no. 76: 1-27. https://doi.org/10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006


Chicago: Humanities Style

Man, Fuat,. “John W. Budd’ın ‘İnsani Bir Çalışma İlişkisi’ Kuramı 21. Yüzyıl Çalışma İlişkileri İçin Neler Söylüyor?.” Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi 0, no. 76 (Jun. 2025): 1-27. https://doi.org/10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006


Harvard: Australian Style

Man, F 2019, 'John W. Budd’ın ‘İnsani Bir Çalışma İlişkisi’ Kuramı 21. Yüzyıl Çalışma İlişkileri İçin Neler Söylüyor?', Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, vol. 0, no. 76, pp. 1-27, viewed 6 Jun. 2025, https://doi.org/10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Man, F. (2019) ‘John W. Budd’ın ‘İnsani Bir Çalışma İlişkisi’ Kuramı 21. Yüzyıl Çalışma İlişkileri İçin Neler Söylüyor?’, Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, 0(76), pp. 1-27. https://doi.org/10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006 (6 Jun. 2025).


MLA

Man, Fuat,. “John W. Budd’ın ‘İnsani Bir Çalışma İlişkisi’ Kuramı 21. Yüzyıl Çalışma İlişkileri İçin Neler Söylüyor?.” Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, vol. 0, no. 76, 2019, pp. 1-27. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006


Vancouver

Man F. John W. Budd’ın ‘İnsani Bir Çalışma İlişkisi’ Kuramı 21. Yüzyıl Çalışma İlişkileri İçin Neler Söylüyor?. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi [Internet]. 6 Jun. 2025 [cited 6 Jun. 2025];0(76):1-27. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006 doi: 10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006


ISNAD

Man, Fuat. “John W. Budd’ın ‘İnsani Bir Çalışma İlişkisi’ Kuramı 21. Yüzyıl Çalışma İlişkileri İçin Neler Söylüyor?”. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi 0/76 (Jun. 2025): 1-27. https://doi.org/10.26650/jspc.2019.76.0006



ZAMAN ÇİZELGESİ


Gönderim28.04.2019
Kabul19.06.2019
Çevrimiçi Yayınlanma12.07.2019

LİSANS


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


PAYLAŞ



İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, uluslararası yayıncılık standartları ve etiğine uygun olarak, yüksek kalitede bilimsel dergi ve kitapların yayınlanmasıyla giderek artan bilimsel bilginin yayılmasına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları açık erişimli, ticari olmayan, bilimsel yayıncılığı takip etmektedir.