The World of Work: Industrial Society and Human Relations, Case Study Example

The party with stronger bargaining power in the contract is the company for which the employee is working for. The consideration over this matter is basically dependent on the desire to make a distinct impact on how the company aims to protect its rights in the hope of making a determined point of conditioning of holding their employees responsible for the acts that they may take against the company [in case conflicts did occur] (Dubin, 1958, 213). Noticeably, this allows the company to protect its assets while it opens its doors to employees who ought to support their company-needs while also giving a chance to each employee to embrace growth and personal development.

The no employment agreement policy is a binding clause that holds the worker in response to the responsibility he is expected to give attention to with regards his or her connection with the company even after being employed in the organization (Dubin, 1958, 2013). This consideration is held important on the part of the employer as it does mandate a better sense of defining how their rights to the property ought to be respected by individual even after the employment relationship ends.

B of the first policy which states: My employment creates a relationship of trust between the Company and me with respect to information that may be made known to me or learned by me during my employment; this passage basically insists on the fact that while the employee is responsible for keeping the high integrity of privacy intact, it shall also provide a distinct sense of protection for any particular information that the employee would share with the company. As a sense of respect, nothing that has been shared by the employee to the company should be presented in public; even when possible cases arise in the future [this mostly involves persona information that might be used against the employee later on].

When it comes to agreeing on personal and professional contributions for the company’s growth especially in relation to the inventions I make, I would be concerned that somehow, the three-year window time that ought to be given attention to after the employment’s termination ought to be clear enough so that I might be able to use my own ideas in my personal growth after the said time. While I do understand that the company aims to protect its competitive position in the market, I too should be given the right to create and be personally productive based on the yields of my own efforts of research and developed ideas after engaging in business with the company (Stone, 2005, 414).

There are two particular sections in the agreement that hold the employee responsible over some matters with regards the connection he makes with the company even after being employed with the organization. These clauses include the following:

Use of confidential information of other persons: this agreement holds the employee responsible over the need of protecting the rights of the individuals that were connected to the individual while he is still connected to the company (Stone, 2005, 414). Using the information about the individuals working within the company or the information of the clients for whom the past employee has been assigned to engage with is punishable through the clauses of this section of the agreement.

Restrictive Covenant:  The covenant over the need to protect one’s personal data with that of the employers’ right to assumed directive on how their rights are protected ought to be given high concern (Wood, 2004, 357). Nothing that has been shared with the company ought to be disclosed out in the public by the employee even after the termination of the agreement.

Works Cited

Dubin, Robert (1958). The World of Work: Industrial Society and Human Relations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall. p. 213.

Stone, Raymond J. (2005). Human Resource Management (5th ed.). Milton, Qld: John Wiley. pp. 412–414.

Wood, Jack M. (2004). Organisational Behaviour: A Global Perspective (3rd ed.). Milton, Qld: Wiley. pp. 355–357.