The Luggers versus the Butchers Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 5000 words

The Luggers versus the Butchers - Case Study Example dy clearly perform entirely different types of tasks but this does not mean that they should also be treated in a contrasting or a conflicting manner by those armed with managerial responsibilities. The managers at FMC tended to behave very strictly with the butchers but had close affiliation with the luggers on the other hand. The butchers were overworked and the luggers were not in anyone’s control. Such negative workplace attitudes reflect issues of inequity and injustice and research stresses that â€Å"organizational peace, communication and justice perception are very important factors in order to be successful† (Ince & Gul, 2011, p. 106). When employees are not treated equally and their concerns are not heard, they start losing their confidence and develop low self-esteems (Katcher & Snyder, 2007, p. ix; Ganster & Schaubroeck, 1991). That is why the unhappy butchers developed deep feelings of hatred and resentment for the management. â€Å"Organizations can avoi d having unhappy employees by successfully addressing their concerns† (Katcher, 2006). Organizational commitment is a valuable tool to mention here for the managers as a way of addressing the issues at FMC. This refers to the â€Å"relative strength of an individual’s identiï ¬ cation and involvement in a particular organization† (Steers, cited in Paik, Parboteeah, & Shim, 2007, p. 1770; Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982, p. 27) and it is widely believed that the more organizational commitment an employee has, the less are the chances of him/her leaving the organization. â€Å"Organizational commitment is cognitive assessment that reflects characteristics of the work environment† (Gelade, Dobson, & Gilbert, 2006, p. 543) which implies that the butchers had low commitment because the work environment in itself was degrading, unfair, and discriminatory. An employee’s commitment to the organization also related to the factor of leadership behaviors (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990, p. 171) which were especially low