HUMAN RELATIONS AND MOTIVATION
Advantages and Disadvantages of Personality Test Screening
Employment applications outweigh the number of positions that companies have to fill during recruitment. Therefore, personality tests help the employer by narrowing down the number of applicants (That et al, 2014). This is achieved through character insight of applicant whereby the personality test determines which candidates are feasible for the position. Upon invitation by the employer for an interview, managers get the opportunity to craft questions based on the personality test that helps in getting a deeper insight into how the applicant can fit into the organization. Subsequently, the test saves on time in that interviews are tailored to address what the company is looking for from candidate’s skills and abilities (That et al, 2014). By detecting applicants’ interpersonal characteristics, the test gives unique individuals a chance for a face-to-face interview so that the organization is not flooded with applicants with similar traits with other employees in the organization.
The downside of the personality test is that applicants’ experience and training may conflict with the test selection criterion in that socially acceptable traits may be overemphasized. Personality tests take a lot of effort to complete, which translates to a lot of time. This may be a discouragement for potential candidates who may decide to move on to other applications (That et al, 2014). Diversity is another factor that personality test does not take into consideration whereby, upon selection completion, the workforce is made up of individuals with similar traits. Since tests are weighed and sometimes paid for, rightful candidates for the organization position may be overlooked. This means that an applicant can answer the questions as required, but they might not be right for the job (That et al, 2014). This dimension of the argument’s basic premise is for companies to use more than the personality test during employee recruitment.
Legal Issues during Candidate Selection
Discrimination is a major legal issue that trails the recruitment process. Starting with the job posting, discrimination in advertisements can attract legal action. Some of the core discrimination topics include color, race, place of origin, religion, marital status and family status, physical and mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, age, and gender (“Recruitment,” 2017). However, it is far easier to go against discrimination laws during the interview, as most discriminatory questions may seem harmless. For instance, an interviewer asking an applicant whether they have any medical issues after indicating that the job requires heavy lifting is discriminatory. In this case, it is advisable to ask whether the applicant can do the heavy lifting throughout the day (“Recruitment,” 2017). Most applicants add a list of references at the end of their application. Asking the referees about previous applicant position and wage ranges is considered illegal.
An example is the 2018 lawsuit against Nike’s sexism at the workplace. In the lawsuit, Nike female workers from Oregon went to court to decry the unequal pay they receive while doing the same work as men. Moreover, the lawsuit went further to indicate discrimination in recruitment and compensation practices that infringe on women’s rights. As much as Nike’s hiring processes were to be supervised by a monitor from the court, the consequences were far-reaching. Women in other companies such as Uber and Google also got a voice to express sexism in their workplaces. With the frustrations, Nike also changed its top human resources management with increased training for the incumbent members so that such cases do not repeat themselves as Nike prides itself on sustainability and a corporate culture that embraces diversity. Since Nike concealed the final decision of the court, the case highlighted issues of sexism-based discrimination in other companies (Ferrell et al., 2014)
Compensation and Benefits
Kaiser Permanente is a medical facility in Oakland, California, with excellent benefits for its employees, including paid time off and vacations. Moreover, the health insurance for employees is low premium meaning low out-of-pocket expenses and an excellent 401k plan. What attracted me to Kaiser is its organizational culture that values diversity and also the attractive benefits. Kaiser offers its employees’ health and wellness insurance, performance bonuses, equity incentive benefits, family and parenting benefits and vacations, discounts on legal assistance, company programs, and events, and professional support.
This has led to high employee satisfaction at Kaiser in all its locations, not forgetting the average annual employee bonus of $4,185. In this end, the salary rating for employee satisfaction at Kaiser is 66%, attracting many applicants to the organization. Because Kaiser considers offering support to its employees when it comes to adoption and education, the attractiveness of the environment further increases as it places its employees first before profitability and growth (Ferrell et al., 2014).
Importance of Workforce Diversity
A company that desires a strong brand name and image has to be diverse in its workforce. A diverse workplace attracts a wide pool of talent significance in enhancing the prospects of the company and motivating performance. Concurrently, a diverse workforce is innovative with a constant desire to grow and improve processes; employees in this workforce are good at brainstorming new ideas. At the same time, managers determine better ways to improve daily tasks while incorporating innovation (Stuart & Huzzard, 2017). The consequence of having a diverse workforce is increased morale whereby difference is not only accepted but also celebrated, meaningless conflict at the workplace, and employees are always eager to come to work.
Notwithstanding, when employees are motivated to come to work, they can increase their productivity, leading to low employee turnover and increased profitability (Stuart & Huzzard, 2017). Speaking of productivity, diversity clears path for efficiency and effectiveness in that training and team building often realizes value for everyone, mutual respect, and stronger understanding amongst co-workers. An organization that exemplifies ideal diversity is Emirates flight group, which employs workers from around the world due to its diverse culture for quality consumer experience.
Unionized and Non-Unionized HRM
An organization can either be unionized or not depending on the structure and employer power. In unionized HRM, the union’s wages can be negotiated on behalf of the workforce in that HRM, and their specialists will decide with the union representing the minimum wage employees have to receive (Stuart & Huzzard, 2017). With enough knowledge on union contracts, the agreements cannot be forfeited as doing such will attract legal battles. In a non-unionized HRM, the employee is free to negotiate the wages offered, which do not have to be agreed upon by the employer since it is not a collective bargaining issue.
For this reason, union HRM employees have almost similar wages while in non-unionized employee wages fluctuate. Working conditions benefits in unions are done through collective bargaining while in non-union organizations, the benefits are not negotiated, thus set based on employer determinations (Stuart & Huzard, 2017). Grievances and complaints in union HRM are made with union representatives being available; thus, collective bargaining is used again. On the other hand, non-unionized HRM does not have the arbitration process but rather engage simpler ways to resolve grievances whereby organizations such as the “U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission” may be contacted when the issue cannot be resolved amicably (Stuart & Huzzard, 2017, 33).
References
Ferrell, O. C., Hirt, G. A., & Ferrell, L. (2014). Business: A changing world (9th Ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Recruitment, discrimination, and restrictions on employment. (2017). The Employment of Merchant Seamen, 147-191. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315209487-3
Stuart, M., & Huzzard, T. (2017). Unions, the skills agenda, and workforce development. Oxford Handbooks Online. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199655366.013.12
Täht, K., Silm, G., & Must, O. (2014). Test taking behaviour and test results. Personality and Individual Differences, 60, S71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.07.314