Unilever Hr Case
Unilever case, HR studies
Question 1:
For changing working time, considerations being taken into account in Unilever case were: ➢ Economic: • Minimization the labour cost; for example; in1991, with the annualized hours contracts based on payment for a 37.5 hour week, Unilever could call upon banked hours to cover absence, holidays, training, meetings, rectification work or extra production, so they don’t need make an extra payment for an extra works, and it help them to reduce the labour cost. • Maximization the product quality and output; - ex; in 1992, the changing to 24-hour working was rejected by managers and one of the reasons was they are afraid of the employee physiological condition cannot maintain the high productivity of permanent night shift. ➢ Political: • Maintain a good enterprise culture: -ex; Unilever managers prefer to have a unified culture because they are afraid that if they apply the 24-hours working, managers of working days would rarely see the night shift and it would create two culture which could ran against the total quality culture. • High degree of flexibility in hours of attendance; -ex; with a 37.5 hours week system Unilever expected to have more available worker in time of need. ➢ Company-wide: • Motivation of employee; for ex; in 37.5 hours week system, Unilever employees have lost their motivation because even they have been already paid for working over time but since they are not use to work on banked hours they feel like they have to bring more effort but gain nothing back for supplementary. • Employee life style and labour market needs: for ex: at the end of the case when Unilever managers agree to change from part-time to full-time working system they found out that it had a big impact on the recruitment and loosing some skilful employees because part-time working had suited the needs of many employees in the local labour market like female workforce
Question 1:
For changing working time, considerations being taken into account in Unilever case were: ➢ Economic: • Minimization the labour cost; for example; in1991, with the annualized hours contracts based on payment for a 37.5 hour week, Unilever could call upon banked hours to cover absence, holidays, training, meetings, rectification work or extra production, so they don’t need make an extra payment for an extra works, and it help them to reduce the labour cost. • Maximization the product quality and output; - ex; in 1992, the changing to 24-hour working was rejected by managers and one of the reasons was they are afraid of the employee physiological condition cannot maintain the high productivity of permanent night shift. ➢ Political: • Maintain a good enterprise culture: -ex; Unilever managers prefer to have a unified culture because they are afraid that if they apply the 24-hours working, managers of working days would rarely see the night shift and it would create two culture which could ran against the total quality culture. • High degree of flexibility in hours of attendance; -ex; with a 37.5 hours week system Unilever expected to have more available worker in time of need. ➢ Company-wide: • Motivation of employee; for ex; in 37.5 hours week system, Unilever employees have lost their motivation because even they have been already paid for working over time but since they are not use to work on banked hours they feel like they have to bring more effort but gain nothing back for supplementary. • Employee life style and labour market needs: for ex: at the end of the case when Unilever managers agree to change from part-time to full-time working system they found out that it had a big impact on the recruitment and loosing some skilful employees because part-time working had suited the needs of many employees in the local labour market like female workforce