Management Essay Paper on Employees versus the Management Perception of the Labor Laws

Employees versus the Management Perception of the Labor Laws

  The purpose of this paper is to discuss the different perceptions of employees and the management in relation to various labor related regulations in a hotel setting. I worked in a five star hotel in the city as a front office manager. My position gave me an ideal chance to witness the different views between the staff and their bosses. The organization had varied kinds of employees, including permanent and casual workers. Additionally, the company had various professionals that handled its various departments. In general, the hotel had over three hundred employees. Each group of employees worked under a supervisor to encourage teamwork in the firms.

The three main aspects that raised mixed feelings and different views between the employees and the management include flexibility of work, transfers, and restriction of overtime. The government has certain policies that govern the issues mentioned above, thus ensuring that both the employees and the employers do not take advantage of one another. The employees agreed with the alternative work schedule regulation because they allowed them to have quality time with their families. Consequently, the employees viewed the flexibility of work as a means of appreciation by the management (Corthesy & Harris, 2014). On the other hand, the hotel had various outlets where they could transfer the employees from time to time. Although the organization followed the right protocol in conducting the transfers, the employees did not appreciate the yearly transfer because it disoriented their personal lives. Consequently, the frequent transfers hindered the development of employee union ties in the organization (Jauhari, 2008). Lastly, the workers were comfortable with the policies that restrict overtime working. The company was always willing to pay for any extra work done thus motivating the employees to become more productive.

            The management on the other hand had varied views on the alternate work schedules, transfers and the restriction of overtime at the work place. The management saw the use of alternative work schedules as a weakness that reduces the general productivity of the employees. The management preferred a fixed schedule where the employees would report to work within specified time. The fixed time schedule will give supervisors and the managers an easy time in determining the pay and the hours that each employee worked (Corthesy & Harris, 2014). Additionally, the management did not support the restriction of overtime. The owner of the hotel argued that the policy allowed employees to become lazy. Employees can exploit this opportunity to drag their daily duties beyond the stipulated time. Therefore, the management preferred a mechanism that measured the productivity of the employee based on the quantity of work done rather than on time spent. Lastly, the management was in support of the transfer policies of the organization. The rotation of the employees ensured productivity and reduced instances of strikes (Emir & Selwyn, 2014).

            Effectiveness in organization can only be achieved when such differences between the management and the employees are resolved amicably. As such, the company needs to revise their overtime restriction policy to include the quantity of work that an employee should complete within the stipulated time. Additionally, the employees and the employers need to agree on the terms of the transfer to ensure that people are comfortable in the workplace. Lastly, to resolve the alternative work schedule issue, the company can set different schedule programs for different groups of people depending on their specific needs (Emir & Selwyn, 2014).


Corthesy, N. & Harris. (2014). Commonwealth Caribbean employment and labor law. Milton Park, Abindon, Oxon New York, NY: Routledge.

Emir, A. & Selwyn, N. (2014). Selwyn’s law of employment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jauhari, V. (2008). Global cases on hospitality industry. New York: Haworth Press.