Employers and workers must talk to each other

Thai Airways International and Bangkok Bank have to different degrees faced labour uproar over bonuses. It’s a basic problem that few business organisations can avoid, no matter how “fair” they think they are toward those working for them. Dizzying technological advancement and the imminent arrival of the Asean Economic Community only complicate the situation. And, in this era, companies are finding it harder to balance how they want the public to regard them and the reality they want their employees to appreciate.

That is where communication comes in, which should lead to something even more important than communication itself – understanding. Companies that are successful in labour relations know how to really communicate and get results that both management and workers consider fair. It’s nothing if management unilaterally insists it’s doing its best to be fair. On the other hand, the labour side cannot one-sidedly claim injustice without listening to the other’s reasons. Both sides have the same responsibility – to give and to take while being fair toward each other. 

Labour strife and technological progress are like twins. When there is one, there must be the other. Technology affects workforces all the time, even in cases like Thai Airways and Bangkok Bank, where the main causes of conflict seemed to be something else. That is why communication is crucial. Workers must try to understand the need for them to adapt and upgrade their skills, whereas employers must learn to implement changes without giving absolute importance to the balance sheet.

There have been reported cases of workers sympathetically accepting their employers’ inability to meet the Bt300 daily minimum wage enforced by the government. This rare phenomenon might have to do with workers’ knowledge that being selfish won’t do them any good, but it also underlines the benefits of letting the labour side know the reality of the business concerned. It’s too bad that, in general, the wall of distrust remains high and solid. Employers are afraid that making workers privy to all of management’s information could lead to an exodus when things are bad, or affect the form’s public image. Workers, meanwhile, always want more, come rain or shine. To labour unions, all management takes advantage one way or another. To management, the labour unions always demand unreasonably more and are impossible to satisfy.

This unhealthy environment is common, according to a participant at the TV round-table. Luis Danai Kristhanin of Aon Hewitt Consulting (Thailand) said that around 70 per cent of all labour problems stem from miscommunication. He insisted that employees seldom get crucial information firsthand from management, depending instead on other sources. Problems can intensify at firms with complicated or diversified structures that prevent truthful messages from finding their way from top to bottom, he added.

How can effective communication be achieved? Dr Jiraporn Pruksarnukul, director of Indigo Consulting Group, stressed the importance of corporate transparency. Dr Atchara Juicharern, managing director of AcComm & Image International Co, insisted that, apart from job security and rewards, employees want to be treated with dignity. Luis Danai Kristhanin prefers executives who “walk around” to seek firsthand information on how employees are doing and feeling. Everyone agreed that the labour side must not only listen to its own views, but also understand that improved skills are for mutual benefit.

Those proposals might sum up how hard real communication can be. It could be a tricky thing as well, because one side might think it’s communicating when actually it is not. That’s because communication is a two-way street, meaning if one side is not really listening, chances are it might not actually be communicating at all.