SOLUTION: Considering the last decade in the UK, has the UK government provided more or less protection to the labour market? Why? Evaluate the different roles of the government in relation to the labour market in the UK (e.g., guarantor of employment rights, employer, redistributor, and arbitrator).

Navitas Programme

Managing Human Resources Module MN1012

Essay Assessment Brief

Please answer ONE of the following essay questions:

Considering the last decade in the UK, has the UK government provided more or less protection to the labour market? Why? Evaluate the different roles of the government in relation to the labour market in the UK (e.g., guarantor of employment rights, employer, redistributor, and arbitrator).

Assess the role of the employer in the employment relationship. What is the nature of the competing interests between employers and workers? To respond to this question, draw on the material regarding “the financialization of the business model” to discuss some of the strategies implemented by firms to increase their revenues and the implications of these strategies on the workers’ employment conditions.

Critically assess whether the decline in labour disputes through strike actions in the UK means that conflict in the employment relationship is declining. What are some of the factors that have influenced the decline in strike actions? Support your argument through examples of labour disputes in the UK in the last decade.

Critically assess whether the rising trend towards more flexible employment inevitably entails employment insecurity and a transfer of risk from employers to employees. To respond to this question, compare and contrast evidence from two labour markets (e.g., labour markets in two different countries).

What are some of the current challenges in the development of policies to enhance equality and diversity in the workplace? To respond to this question, assess the three theoretical perspectives analysed in class in relation to equality (the liberal, radical, and the business case approach).

Advice and Guidance:

You should write a 1,650 words at least
You need to submit your individual essay in week 15 (maximum date is 12^th of January at 10:00pm)
The following are some of the points that you are expected to cover for each of the questions.
1. For question 1 you are expected to present and describe the theoretical approach that best captures policymaking in the UK in the last decade (e.g., Keynesian approach, neoliberal approach). You should also present specific examples of policies developed after 2010 and their implications for the labour market. Also, you should cover whether there is any relation between policies developed after 2010 and of previous governments (e.g., governments in the UK between 1980 and 2010).

For question 2 you are expected to describe the different roles of employers and clearly present the nature of the struggle in the employment relationship. You are also expected to present the differences between the “financialization business model” and the “managerial business model”, detailed examples of strategies under the former model (e.g., merges and acquisitions), and their implications for the employment relationship.

For question 3 you are expected to describe and analyse the “Balloon hypothesis”. You are also expected to clearly present the different factors that have influenced the decline of strike action in the UK since 1980s (e.g., political ideologies) and assess whether during this time there has been an increase in other forms of expressions of labour discontent (e.g., employment tribunal cases). You need to support your answer through examples of labour disputes in the UK.

For question 4 you are expected to describe the change from a “traditional” form of employment (e.g., full-time and permanent) towards more flexible working hours and the factors that have influenced this change (e.g., the de-regulation of the market). You are also expected to cover why some workers choose to work flexible hours and the implications that these working arrangements have on their living standards.

For question 5 you are expected to describe, analyse, and present the limitations of the three theoretical approaches related to equality and diversity in the working place. You should present examples of practices implemented by organisations to improve equality in the working place and to assess the limitations of these practices. You need to clearly state how your selected examples relate to the three theoretical approaches.

Regardless of the question you choose to answer, you are expected to cover the following points:
1. A discussion of the social impacts/implications of the issue.
2. How does the issue affect the development and functioning of labour markets?
3. Controversies around the topic supported in literature and in the evidence.
4. You are expected to illustrate and support your arguments with specific and detailed examples.
5. You are expected to balance the structure of your essay. Give sufficient space to discuss the issue as well as the implications of the latter.
6. You are expected to provide in your conclusion policymaking suggestions on how to address the problem. These suggestions need to be grounded in the evidence provided and in literature.
7. You should use the conceptual and analytical tools delivered in the lectures and seminars, in addition to any readings/materials you consider relevant.
8. You should engage with the different approaches and theories discussed during your course. You should identify different arguments and discuss them developing your own point of view. Your discussion and position in the debate should be grounded in existing literature and arguments.
9. Finally, you are free to choose the structure of your essay. However, a good essay should contain some basic sections such as an abstract, introduction, main body, and conclusions.

Mark	Undergraduate Grade Descriptor
85-100%	Scholarship: Excellent application of a rigorous and extensive knowledge of subject matter; perceptive; demonstrates a critical appreciation of subject and extensive and detailed critical analysis of the key issues; displays independence of thought and/ or a novel and relevant approach to the subject; reveals both breadth and depth of understanding, showing insight and appreciation of argument. Independent learning: Work draws on a wide range of relevant literature and is not confined to reading lists, textbooks or lecture notes; arguments are well supported by a variety of means and specific/detailed examples. Writing skills: Writing skills are excellent; writing is clear and precise; arguments are logical, well-structured and sustained, and demonstrate thorough understanding; conclusions are reasoned and justified by evidence. Analysis: Work demonstrates a robust approach to analysis that is evident of a deep understanding of relevant concepts, theories, principles and techniques. For quantitative modules analysis is complete and entirely relevant to the problem.
70-84%	Scholarship: Very good application of a rigorous and extensive knowledge of subject matter; demonstrates a critical appreciation of subject; displays detailed thought and consideration of the subject; reveals very good breadth and depth of understanding. Independent learning: Work draws on a range of relevant literature and is not confined to reading lists, textbooks or lecture notes. Writing skills: Writing skills are well-developed; writing is clear and precise; arguments are logical, well-structured and demonstrate thorough understanding; conclusions are justified by evidence and examples. Analysis: Analytical steps carried out carefully and correctly demonstrating that it is based on a sound understanding. Analysis is relevant to the problem and is complete and is placed in a clear context.
60-69%	Scholarship: Good, broad-based understanding of subject manner; makes effective use of understanding to provide an informative, balanced argument that is focussed on the topic; reveals some attempt at creative, independent thinking; main points well covered, displaying breadth or depth but not necessarily both; broadly complete and relevant argument; Independent learning: Sources range beyond textbooks and lecture material and are used effectively to illustrate points and justify arguments. Writing skills: Arguments are presented logically and coherently within a clear structure and are justified with appropriate supporting evidence; capably written with good use of English throughout; free from major errors; complex ideas are expressed clearly and fluently using specialist technical terminology where appropriate. Analysis: Some minor slips in the steps of the analysis and some minor gaps in understanding of underlying principles. Analysis is relevant to the problem and mostly complete. A good interpretation which conveys most of its meaning.
50-59%	Scholarship: Some but limited engagement with, and understanding of, relevant material but may lack focus, organisation, breadth, and/or depth; relatively straightforward ideas are expressed clearly and fluently though there may be little or no attempt to synthesise or evaluate more complex ideas; exhibits limited independent creative thought; adequate analysis but some key points only mentioned in passing; arguments satisfactory but some errors and perhaps lacking completeness and relevance in parts. Independent learning: Sources may range beyond lecture material and textbooks though effective engagement with and use of the wider literature is limited. Writing skills: The question is addressed in a reasonably clear, coherent and structured manner but some sections may be poorly written making the essay difficult to follow, obscuring key points or leading to over-generalisation; competently written with a good use of English throughout (few, if any, errors of spelling, grammar and punctuation). Answers that have upper second-class qualities may fall into this category if they are too short, unfinished or badly organised. Analysis: Minor slips and occasional basic errors in analysis. Underlying principles are mostly understood, but clear gaps are apparent. Analysis falls short of completeness and is a little irrelevant in place but a reasonable interpretation which goes some way to convey its meaning
40-49%	Scholarship: Minimum acceptable level of understanding; extremely basic and partial understanding of key issues and concepts; some material may be used inappropriately; uninspired and unoriginal; relies on limited knowledge; analysis poor or obscure, superficial or inconsistent in places; arguments incomplete, partly irrelevant or naive. Independent learning: Sources restricted to core lecture material with no evidence of wider reading. Writing skills: Though errors may be few and generally insignificant, answer may be poorly focussed on the question, lack rigour and/or consist of a series of repetitive, poorly organised points or unsubstantiated assertions that do not relate well to one another or to the question, although some structure discernible; borderline or poor competence in English (some problems of spelling, punctuation and grammar that occasionally obscures comprehension). Analysis: Some knowledge of the analysis to be followed, but frequent errors. Some attention paid to underlying principles, but lacking in understanding and frequently irrelevant. Some interpretation is given, but it does not place the analysis in any real context
40-44%	Scholarship: Minimum acceptable level of understanding; extremely basic and partial understanding of key issues and concepts; some material may be used inappropriately. Independent learning: Sources restricted to core lecture material with no evidence of wider reading. Writing skills: Though errors may be few and generally insignificant, answer may be poorly focused on the question, lack rigour and/or consist of a series of repetitious, poorly organised points or unsubstantiated assertions that do not relate well to one another or to the question; borderline competence in English (some problems of spelling, punctuation and grammar that occasionally obscures comprehension).
30-39%	Minimum requirements have not been met. Scholarship: Inadequate knowledge of relevant material; omission of key ideas/material; significant parts may be irrelevant, superficial or factually incorrect; inappropriate use of some material; mere paraphrasing of course texts or lecture notes; key points barely mentioned; very weak grasp or complete misunderstanding of the issues; inclusion of irrelevant material; does not address the topic or question. Independent learning: Restricted to a basic awareness or no awareness of course material and textbooks; very meagre use of supporting material or unsupported assertions; use of irrelevant or unconvincing material. Writing skills: Unacceptable use of English (i.e. comprehension obscured by significant and intrusive errors of spelling, punctuation and grammar); poor and unclear, or totally incoherent, structure. Answers that ‘run out of time’ or miss the point of the question may fall into this (or a lower) class. Analysis: Erroneous analysis with mistakes. Very little attention paid to the underlying principles of the analysis. Far from complete with little relevance to the problem. Limited interpretation that reveals little, if anything, about the meaning
20-29%	Scholarship: Displays a superficial appreciation of the demands and broad context of the question but is largely irrelevant, fundamentally flawed, or factually incorrect; inappropriate use of material; mere paraphrasing of course texts or lecture notes; key points barely mentioned; complete misunderstanding of the issues; inclusion of irrelevant material. Independent learning: Restricted to a limited awareness of basic course material; unsupported assertions; use of irrelevant or unconvincing material. Writing skills: Minimal structure, though may only list key themes or ideas with limited comment or explanation. Analysis: Analysis has very significant omissions demonstrating little understanding of problem or underlying principles. Analysis may be ill suited to problem. Very little interpretation of meaning of the analysis.
10-19%	Scholarship: No recognition of the demands or scope of the question and no serious attempt to answer it. Complete misunderstanding of the issues; inclusion of irrelevant material. May have simply failed to address the question/topic set. Independent learning: No evidence that the most basic course material has been understood; unsupported assertions; use of irrelevant or unconvincing material. Writing skills: Without structure; comprehension may be completely obscured by poor grammar, spelling, punctuation. Analysis: Virtually complete failure to carry out analysis. No evidence of understanding of underlying principles and bears no relevance to the problem. No attempt to interpret or explain the meaning of the analysis.

CITATION

CLICK HERE TO ORDER A SIMILAR OR ANY OTHER ASSIGNMENT YOU HAVE ASSIGNMENT

The post Considering the last decade in the UK, has the UK government provided more or less protection to the labour market? Why? Evaluate the different roles of the government in relation to the labour market in the UK (e.g., guarantor of employment rights, employer, redistributor, and arbitrator). appeared first on Apax Researchers.