Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorParumasur, Sanjana Brijball.
dc.creatorJugwanth, Usha.
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-20T13:14:35Z
dc.date.available2010-09-20T13:14:35Z
dc.date.created2008
dc.date.issued2008
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10413/1247
dc.descriptionThesis (M.Admin.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, 2008.en_US
dc.description.abstractIt has been observed within the provincial department under study, that officials occupying levels 1-4 constituted approximately 70% of the population that participated in the National Public Service Strike of 2007. Higher level employees piggy-back on the efforts of low level employees, since they do not participate in industrial action, do not have any deductions made from their salaries due to the implementation of the 'no work no pay' rule, but derive benefits from the collective efforts of industrial action. This study explored the rationale for the participation of low level employees in industrial action in a Public Sector Provincial Department. The objectives of the study was to establish the psychological motivation for low level employees engaging in collective action and the types of behaviour low level employees engage in when participating in industrial action. In this study, the population constituted all level 1-4 employees that participated in the Public Service Strike of 2007. The sample included 80 subjects that were selected, using the probability simple random sampling design, from the population. The questionnaire was used as a data collection tool. Frequency distributions, percentages, chisquare distributions and graphs were used to analyse the data. Very strong response rates were received for subjects indicating that they did not participate in strike/protest action because they thought that they can have a holiday or that the supervisor will not be at work. Very strong response rates were also recorded for subjects indicating that they did not force/influence other people to participate in strike/protest action when they themselves participated in strike/protest action. Strong response rates were received for subjects indicating that they did not participate in strike/protest action because other employees of similar level as them participated in strike/protest action, they were not absent on the day of a strike/protest action because of the pressure from union officials or that they were forced by union officials not to attend work, that when they participated in strike/protest action they were notified by the union about the strike, that when they participated in strike/protest action they participated in union marches/rallies, that they participated in strike/protest action because their grievances were not attended to and that they participated in strike/protest action because they believed that they could control events by their own behaviour. Moderate response rates were recorded for subjects indicating that they participated in strike/protest because they felt that they were worse off than other employees who earn more and have greater benefits than they have, that they participated in strike/protest because they were frustrated and dissatisfied in the work place and that they participated in strike/protest action because they believed that such behaviour could impact on political processes. This study has provided greater insight into the rationale for the participation of low level employees in industrial action despite the monetary losses they suffer due to the implementation of the 'no work no pay' rule.
dc.subjectPersonnel planning.en_US
dc.subjectEmployment, Low level.en_US
dc.subjectTheses--Business administration.en_US
dc.titleRationale for the participation of low level employees in industrial action in a public sector provincial department.


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record