2.7.2 (HL)—Employee and employer approaches to conflict

Employees and employers can respond to conflict through discussion, collective bargaining, industrial action, changes to terms, mediation or formal escalation.

The choice depends on urgency, legal constraints, relative power, the value of the relationship and the cost of disruption. Collective action can increase employee bargaining power but may reduce income and output; unilateral action can be fast but damage trust.

A union may seek a negotiated workload review before considering a strike because the service is safety-critical and both sides need continuity. The approach preserves a route to agreement while keeping credible pressure.

A stronger tactic is not always a better tactic. Evaluate leverage, stakeholders, short-term cost and the possibility of a workable settlement.

Employee approaches include collective bargaining, work-to-rule (performing only contractual duties and rules) and strike action (withdrawing labour). Employers may also bargain collectively, threaten redundancies, change contracts, close operations or impose a lockout that prevents employees from working. Work-to-rule can disrupt output while limiting lost wages but may be slow; a strike creates stronger pressure but costs employees income and harms customers. Redundancy threats or contract changes can cut costs or force adjustment, but may intensify conflict, damage trust and lose skills. Closure and lockout exert high pressure but impose severe stakeholder and reputational costs.