Running head: FINAL PAPER
BY: JASON VANDERHEIDEN
SCHOOL: DEVRY UNIVERSITY
COURSE: LABOR RELATIONS
INSTRUCTOR: ERIN OETKEN
DATE: 13 February 2010
Throughout this paper I intend to compare and contrast labor and management strategies using the four schools of thought (neoclassical economics model, human resource management model, industrial relations model, and critical industrial relations model). The information presented in this paper is intended to provide a better understanding of the views and objectives of the differing schools of thought in traditional management strategies while providing examples of each.
The first school of thought I want to highlight is the neoclassical economics model. This school of thought is based on the belief that competition is based on an efficient allocation of resources and regulates economic activity that establishes equilibrium between demand and supply through the operation of market forces. It states that savings determines investment and it is concerned primarily with market equilibrium and growth at full employment instead of under-employment of resources (www.businessdictionary.com).
I will no highlight some of the more prominent features associated with this school of thought. One of the key features is the importance it finds in competitive markets. Another important aspect is the way it disregards the human side of labor. They do this so that it may be possible to address psychological and social concerns (Budd, 2008). Furthermore, this school has the belief that unions are monopolies that seek to raise wages above competitive levels. Next is the focus it places on the economic activity of self interested agents. The last feature I will highlight is the thought that the best protection from an employer is the allegiance of other employees.
One example of a common argument in the neoclassical economics school of thought is that increasing the minimum wage does more harm than...