Fatal consequences: An analysis of the failed employee voice system at the Bundaberg Hospital

In this paper we discuss the failure of the employee voice system at the Bundaberg Base Hospital (BBH) in Australia. Surgeon Jayant Patel was arrested over the deaths of patients on whom he operated when he was the director of surgery at the hospital. Our interest is in the reasons the established employee voice mechanisms failed when employees attempted to bring serious issues to the attention of managers. Our data is based on an analysis of the sworn testimonies of participants who participated in two inquiries concerning these events. An analysis of the events with a particular focus on the failings of the voice system is presented. We ask the following: how and why did the voice systems in the case of the BBH fail?

Asking for it? Practices and structures that perpetuate employee silence in pursuing customised work arrangements

A component of broader scholarship addressing the social context in which individuals work, has focused on the role of ‘employee voice’ in determining flexible-work outcomes (Donnelly et al., 2012). Employee voice incorporates a spectrum of practices designed to give employees a say in organisational decisions (Dundon et al., 2004). This paper extends work on voice and workplace flexibility in two ways. First, it focuses not simply on ‘voice’ but on its antithesis, employee silence, which is defined (following Van Dyne et al., 2003) as the intentional withholding of ideas and opinions. We utilise an alternative reading of silence to the majority of literature which interprets it as a product of employee motivation, by focusing on the role of management and by adopting a framework which considers silence as a control dialectic (Donaghey et al., 2011). Second, the study examines silence with respect to preferences for customising the terms/conditions of employment beyond narrowly defined notions of ‘flexible work’ (e.g., reduced hours; home-working). The study utilises 30 telephone interviews with employees who had been previously identified as ‘discontent non-requesters’ (Skinner and Pocock, 2011: 75), that is they had expressed a desire to request flexible working provisions, but had not done so. Interviewees were asked to articulate the reasons for, and consequences of, their silence. The findings reveal nuanced workplace practices and structures that close down possibilities for employee voice and perpetuate silence on matters relating to customising work. They also illustrate a disjuncture between espoused organizational goals and everyday practices and norms encountered in workplaces.

The sound of silence : the absence of voice in determining flexible working arrangements

In the context of a dramatically reconfigured labour market characterized by an individualistic culture and increasingly enmeshed life domains of employees, there is raised awareness of how employees may shape or modify their work arrangements. A small component of broader scholarship addressing issues that affect the social context in which individuals work, has focused on the role of ‘employee voice' in determining flexible-work outcomes (Donnelly et al., 2012). Employee voice is a broad term incorporating a spectrum of different practices designed to give employees a say in organisational issues and decisions (Dundon et al., 2004). This article extends work on voice and workplace flexibility by focusing not simply on ‘voice' but on its antithesis: employee silence. Silence is defined here, (following Van Dyne et al., 2003), as the intentional withholding of ideas, information and opinions. The consequences of employee silence in achieving work-life preferences are likely to be significant for both individuals and organizations, in achieving for example, the goals of business efficiency and facilitating employees' needs to fulfill multiple roles and minimize work-life interference.

Union strategies in representing ‘new workers’ : the case of UK retail union

The purpose of this paper is to explore the changing nature of employee voice through trade union representation in the retail industry. The retail industry is a major employer in the UK and is one of the few private sector service industries with union representation (Griffin et al 2003). The requisite union: the Distributive and Allied Workers (USDAW) union is one of the biggest unions in the country. However, the characteristics of the industry provide unique challenges for employee voice and representation including: high labour turnover; high use of casual, female and student labour; and, variable levels of union recognition (Reynolds et al 2005). Irrespective of these challenges, any extension of representation and organisation by unions in the retail sector is inherently valuable, socially and politically, given that retail workers are often categorised as vulnerable, due to the fact that they are among the lowest paid in the economy, sourced from disadvantages labour markets and increasingly subject to atypical employment arrangements (Broadbridge 2002; Henley 2006; Lynch 2005; Roan 2003).

Union strategies in representing ‘new’ workers : the comparative case of UK and Australian retail unions

This paper is a comparative exploratory study of the changing nature of employee voice through trade union representation in the retail industry in the UK and Australia. In both countries, the retail industry is a major employer and is one of the few private sector service industries with significant union membership (Griffin et al 2003). The relevant unions, the Distributive and Allied Workers Union (USDAW) and the Shop, Distributive and Allied Union (SDA), are the fourth largest and largest unions in the UK and Australia respectively. However, despite this seeming numerical strength in membership, the characteristics of the industry provide unique challenges for employee voice and representation. The significance of the study is that any extension of representation and organisation by unions in the retail sector is valuable socially and politically, given that retail workers are often categorised a s vulnerable, due to their low pay, the predominance of disadvantaged labour market groups such a s women and young people, workers’ atypical employment arrangements and, in the case of the UK, variable levels of union recognition which inhibit representation (Broadbridge 2002; Henley 2006; Lynch 2005; Roan & Diamond 2003; Reynolds et al 2005). In addition, specifically comparative projects have value in that they allow some variables relating to the ‘industry’ to be held constant, thus reducing the range of potential explanations of differences in union strategy. They also have value in that the research partners may be more likely to notice and problematise taken-for-granted aspects of practices in another country, thus bringing to the fore key features and potentially leading to theoretical innovation. Finally, such projects may assist in transnational diffusion of union strategy.

Directing Democracy : The Case of the John Lewis Partnership

The John Lewis Partnership was founded in 1929 as an “experiment in industrial democracy” (Lewis, 1948). This thesis explores the meaning of democracy in the Partnership and examines the wider implications of the case. It argues that democracy in work should be viewed as something which is intrinsically valuable because of its connection to furthering justice, equality, freedom and the rights and interests of all workers. The thesis makes three main contributions. Firstly, the production of a historically situated exploration of democratic participation in the John Lewis Partnership – the largest co-owned business in the UK. Secondly, an analysis of power relations in the organisation and an examination of the ways in which disciplinary power and regimes of truth both constrain democratic practice and offer the potential for resistance and challenge. Thirdly, the thesis challenges critics of the Partnership who have dismissed it as a form of “pseudo democracy” (Pateman, 1970: 73) and “suffocatingly paternalistic” (Ramsay, 1980: 52). Despite the constant threat of degeneration and dilution of the value framework laid down by the founder, the Partnership’s continued commitment to democratic participation provides an important contribution to our understanding of co-ownership and democratically organised forms of work. The analysis shows that management have attempted to direct and define democracy in a highly constrained way, assigning it an instrumental purpose, and privileging the ‘business case’ for democratic engagement. However, the study emphasises that the meaning of democracy is heavily contested and fraught with contradictions and paradoxes. This creates a space in which understandings of equality, solidarity and democracy are debated by the 69,000 employees who are co-owners of the business.

Paradoxes of participation : non-union workplace partnerships in John Lewis

The extent to which workplace partnership delivers mutual gains is subject to considerable debate amongst practitioners and scholars. One of the oldest and largest examples of workplace partnership is the John Lewis Partnership that began using forms of non-union employee representation in 1929. Despite ongoing interest from researchers in employee representation, and specifically non-union forms of employee voice, there have been few in-depth studies of the Partnership's organisational structure and practices since the 1980s. This paper explores in detail the operation of representation structures in the John Lewis Partnership, which is a significant case of non-union workplace partnership with the potential for mutual gains. A key finding of the paper was that the decision-making structures that characterise the Partnership, and that are protected by a constitution, are under constant threat from the discursive struggle to define partnership in a way that privileges managerial interests. The paper argues, therefore, that mutual gains need to be secured both structurally and discursively to address the tensions and paradoxes at the heart of debates about the meaning and aims of employee representation.

Developing a framework of effective prevention and response strategies in workplace sexual harassment

Sexual harassment remains a widespread workplace phenomenon, despite laws that proscribe it. Drawing initially on a typology from the violence prevention literature that conceptualizes prevention and response approaches according to when they occur, the paper synthesizes strategies identified in literature addressing workplace sexual harassment, as well as other workplace injustices or grievances. The paper utilizes this previous research to develop a framework of sexual harassment prevention strategies along two dimensions: functions and timing. The framework offers a research-informed set of organization-wide preventative and remedial approaches, a systemic approach to what is often seen as an individual problem, and a means to better focus interventions that are often disparate and unco-ordinated. The paper also highlights important areas for future research including a stronger focus on longer-term (tertiary) corrective actions.

Hearing voice and silence during stressful economic times

Purpose - It is ironic that in stressful economic times, when new ideas and positive behaviors could be most valuable, employees may not speak up, leading to reduced employee participation, less organizational learning, less innovation and less receptiveness to change. The supervisor is the organization’s first line of defense against a culture of silence and towards a culture of openness. This research asks what helps supervisors to hear prosocial voice and notice defensive silence. Design/methodology/approach - We conducted a cross-sectional field study of 142 supervisors. Findings - Our results indicate that prosocial voice is increased by supervisor tension and trust in employees, while defensive silence is increased by supervisor tension but reduced by unionization of employees and trust in employees. This indicates that, as hypothesized by others, voice and silence are orthogonal and not opposites of the same construct. Research limitations/implications - The data is measured at one point in time, and further longitudinal study would be helpful to further understand the phenomena. Practical implications - This research highlights the potential for supervisors in stressful situations to selectively hear voice and silence from employees. Originality/value - This study adds to our knowledge of prosocial voice and defensive silence by testing supervisors’ perceptions of these constructs during difficult times. It provides valuable empirical insights to a literature dominated by conceptual non-empirical papers. Limited research on silence might reflect how difficult it is to study such an ambiguous and passive construct as silence (often simply viewed as a lack of speech). also contribute to trust literature by identifying its role in increasing supervisor’s perceptions of prosocial voice and reducing perceptions of defensive silence.