Author: Louis French

I chose to look at labor unions because I think they are one of those topics where the answer is not completely one-sided. From the employee side, unions can provide real benefits. A union gives workers a collective voice when negotiating pay, benefits, schedules and working conditions. The U.S. Department of Labor explains that unions help employees act together so they have more power when discussing wages, health insurance, vacation days, sick leave and retirement benefits with their employer (U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.).

What Unions Can Do Well

One of the biggest takeaways from my research is that unions can improve pay and benefits for workers. The Economic Policy Institute reports that workers covered by union contracts earn more on average than similar workers in nonunion workplaces (Economic Policy Institute, 2025). That makes sense to me because one person negotiating alone usually has less leverage than a group of employees negotiating together. Unions can also help create safer working conditions, clearer rules and more protection from unfair treatment.

The Other Side

At the same time, unions can create challenges for employers. Higher wages and stronger benefits can increase labor costs. Union contracts may also reduce flexibility in scheduling, staffing or discipline decisions. From a broader society view, unions can help reduce inequality and raise workplace standards, but they can also create tension when labor and management stop working together and become too adversarial.

My Takeaway

I do not think I would automatically want to join a union in every workplace. If I had fair pay, safe conditions, good managers and real communication, I probably would not feel the same need. But if employees were underpaid, ignored, unsafe or punished for speaking up, I would support a unionization effort. My biggest takeaway is that unions are often a response to broken trust. When management listens, the pressure to unionize may be lower. When employees feel powerless, a union can become the only realistic way to be heard.

References

Economic Policy Institute. (2025). Unions aren’t just good for workers; they also benefit communities and democracy. https://www.epi.org/publication/unions-arent-just-good-for-workers-they-also-benefit-communities-and-democracy/

U.S. Department of Labor. (n.d.). What is a union? https://beta.dol.gov/policy-regulations/unions-collective-bargaining/what-union

After taking the Life Stress Inventory, Coping and Stress Management Skills Test and Type A Personality Survey, I honestly was’nt that surprised by my results. My Type A score was 74/100 which put me in the Type A range. I usually stay busy, push myself hard and feel like I always need to be doing something productive. That can be a good thing because it keeps me motivated, but it also explains why I get overwhelmed when too many things pile up at once. When I am really stressed, I feel it physically before anything else. My stomach gets tight, my body feels tense and my thoughts start moving way too fast.

The Life Stress Inventory also made me realize that stress is not always one huge thing. A lot of the time it is smaller things adding up, like changes in work hours, sleep, responsibilities and tension at work. Some of the suggested ways to reduce stress were simple things like exercise, deep breathing, getting rest, staying organized, making to-do lists and realizing your own limits (Life Stress Questionnaire). Those are basic but they are also probably the first things I stop doing when I get busy.

As I move into my professional career, I think I need to get better at managing stress before I hit a breaking point. For me, that means sleeping more consistently, writing things down instead of trying to keep everything in my head and giving myself permission to slow down sometimes. Being productive should not always mean being stressed.

Organizations are also starting to treat stress as a real workplace issue. The American Psychological Association reported that most workers think it is important to work for an organization that values emotional and psychological well-being (APA, 2023). The CDC also explains that employers can reduce stress by improving workplace policies and practices, not just telling employees to manage it on their own (CDC). Companies can help through EAPs, flexible schedules, wellness programs, mental health resources and better manager training. Stress is not only personal; workplaces help create it too.

One situation where I’ve seen compensation motivate behavior is through running my own company and trying to figure out how to keep people motivated to do good work. In small businesses, especially service-based work, pay makes a huge difference because the work can be physical, repetitive and not always glamorous. I’ve noticed that when people feel like the pay is fair for the amount of effort required, they are more willing to show up consistently, work harder and take more pride in the job. When the pay does not feel worth it, effort can drop pretty quickly. People may still complete the task, but they are less likely to go above and beyond.

I think compensation motivates this behavior because employees compare the reward to the effort they are putting in. If someone is working outside, dealing with difficult jobs or doing labor-intensive work, they want to feel like the pay matches the difficulty of the work. This connects to the idea that compensation is not just about money, but also about fairness, motivation and whether employees feel valued. A slightly higher wage or bonus can signal that the company recognizes the effort being given. On the other hand, if employees feel underpaid, they may begin to see the job as temporary or not worth their full effort.

This also shows why compensation decisions matter so much for managers. Pay alone does not fix everything, but it can strongly influence behavior. If compensation is fair and connected to performance, it can encourage better effort, lower turnover and help employees feel more committed. From my experience, people do not always need the highest pay possible, but they do need to feel like the pay is fair for the work being asked of them.

One class I found really beneficial was COMM 101 because it felt like one of the few classes that directly translated into real life situations. A lot of college classes can start to feel repetitive or disconnected from reality, but COMM 101 was different because we were constantly applying what we learned instead of just memorizing information for a test. The class was very interactive with presentations, discussions and group activities, which made it easier to stay engaged and actually retain the material. I also think having to practice communication in front of other people helped build confidence over time, even if it was uncomfortable at first. This connects a lot with the training material from this week, especially the idea that effective training should make content meaningful, provide opportunities to practice and connect directly to real situations employees or learners will face (Lecture 1 – Training). The feedback throughout the class also made a big difference because it gave people the chance to improve instead of just getting a grade and moving on.

Then the opposite would be the classes I’ve taken where the entire structure was basically just slides, readings and quizzes with very little interaction. Those classes usually felt harder to care about because there was no real application behind the material. Even if the information itself was important, it never really stuck because we weren’t using it in a meaningful way. Looking back, those classes lacked a lot of the things the lectures described as important for creating an effective learning environment, like relevance, practice and regular feedback (Lecture 1 – Training). It made the experience feel more like trying to survive the class instead of actually learning something useful.

Even though I haven’t personally been on the interview side as a candidate, I have been the one running interviews for people at my own company, and that experience has definitely changed how I think about the process. Looking back, I can see how inconsistent interviews can become if you don’t have a clear structure going in. Some interviews felt more like conversations, others felt rushed, and the questions would shift depending on the person. At the time it didn’t seem like a big deal, but now it’s clear that this hurts reliability. If every candidate isn’t being evaluated the same way, it’s hard to compare them fairly or feel confident in the decision (Lecture 2 – Introduction to Selection).

Another thing that stands out is how easy it is to focus on the wrong things. It’s natural to pay attention to how someone talks, their energy, or how well you connect with them, but that doesn’t always mean they’ll perform well on the job. That’s where validity becomes an issue. The lectures explain that interviews should be tied directly to job requirements, which is why structured interviews with set questions and scoring guides tend to work better (Lecture 4 – Increasing Interview Effectiveness). Thinking back, I can see how first impressions or small details could influence decisions more than they should have.

If I could go back, I would approach interviews with a lot more intention. I’d build questions around the actual job and what success looks like, and I’d use a consistent way to evaluate answers. That would make the process feel more fair and less dependent on gut instinct. It would also improve utility, since better hiring decisions save time, reduce turnover and make the whole process more efficient in the long run (Lecture 2 – Introduction to Selection).

As I’ve been learning more about job analysis and job descriptions, it’s become clear how important they are, but also how easy it is for companies to overlook them. Even without direct experience writing job descriptions, it’s easy to see how they can become outdated or ignored over time. One of the biggest challenges is that jobs are constantly changing, especially in fast paced environments. When job descriptions are not updated regularly, they stop reflecting what employees actually do and this can create confusion around expectations and make it harder to evaluate performance. The material explains that job analysis is the foundation for things like recruiting, training and performance management, so if that foundation is weak everything else is affected (lecture 1 job analysis).

another challenge is maintaining them in the first place. A lot of managers and even HR treat job descriptions as a one time task instead of something that should be updated regularly. The “job worth doing” article mentions that job descriptions are often not treated like living documents, even though they impact almost every part of the employment process (job worth doing article). when they are outdated it can lead to poor hiring decisions, unclear performance expectations and even legal problems.

To deal with this, companies need to treat job descriptions as something ongoing. This means updating them consistently, getting input from employees and managers and making sure they actually match the work being done. Taking this approach makes things clearer for everyone and helps the company stay organized, efficient and protected.

As I get closer to graduating and thinking about future career paths, I’ve started paying more attention to what actually makes a company a great place to work. After reviewing the Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For, I looked further into Fannie Mae, Deloitte, Cisco, and American Express to understand how their HR practices support employees.

I looked into Fannie Mae first which has a strong focus on diversity and inclusion. The company received a perfect score on the Corporate Equality Index for nine consecutive years, showing a clear commitment to creating an inclusive and supportive work environment (Fannie Mae, 2023). This connects directly to HR functions like managing diversity and employee engagement, as shown in Lecture 1 – Importance of HR Management, which help create a positive workplace culture. According to our lecture material, HR practices play a major role in shaping organizational culture and employee behavior . Deloitte also emphasizes its people-first culture by focusing on collaboration as a team, diversity, and development opportunities (Deloitte, 2025). This culture reflects strategic Human Resource Management, where HR practices are aligned with company goals to improve performance, as discussed in the Strategic HRM lecture. Cisco and American Express similarly focus heavily on employee wellbeing, flexibility, and psychological safety, which helps improve motivation, retention, and productivity.

If I were a manager, I would want to balance performance with how employees are treated, making sure expectations are clear while still supporting employees’ development. These companies show that when employees feel supported, they are more productive and engaged, which reflects evidence-based HR practices that use data and outcomes to guide decisions, as discussed in the Evidence-Based HR lecture. I think one of the most challenging aspects of being a manager will be balancing company goals with employees’ differing needs, especially when difficult decisions need to be made. HR plays a key role in helping managers navigate these challenges by providing systems for staffing, compensation, training, and employee programs. These companies show that strong HR practices are not just about policies, but about creating an environment where employees can succeed and contribute to company goals.

Works Cited

Fannie Mae receives “equality 100 award” from human rights campaign foundation. Fannie Mae. (n.d.). https://www.fanniemae.com/newsroom/fannie-mae-news/fannie-mae-receives-equality-100-award-human-rights-campaign-foundation

Our people. Deloitte. (n.d.). https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/about/people.html

Cisco. Great Place To Work®. https://www.greatplacetowork.com/certified-company/1000064