Why do companies typically prefer a nonunion workforce? How does a unionized workforce affect HRM and its policies? What will be an ideal response?

Employers tend to avoid union workers due to the disadvantages they bring to the company. On the other hand, non-union workers have some advantages that make them preferable. First, the promotion of non-union workers is often based on merit and not pressure from the union. Secondly, employers want more freedom during the dismissal of an employee. The process of dismissing a unionized worker is lengthy and hefty, even for a good cause. Lastly, salary negotiations for non-union workers are based on individual agreements, and an increase often stems from increased productivity.

Unions pose some challenges for HRM. First, the national labor act prohibits employers from interfering with the employees' rights to organize and bargain. Secondly, wages, benefits, and working conditions are stipulated by the union and not the company HR policy. Lastly, in case of conflict, the management has to deal with the union and not the employee, thus altering the company's disciplinary and conflict resolution policies. The ideal response is to have a complete set of human resources policies and procedures that follow the applicable laws and are fair to employees. The company's HRM must work with management and employees to ensure the policies are followed properly. Furthermore, all levels of management should be properly trained, fully accountable for their actions, and operating in a way that treats employees fairly and doesn't show favoritism. If all of this is in place one could argue that a union is not necessary. If a union is brought in, management's response must be to negotiate with the union in good faith and explain clearly the operational challenges that exist. In the end, if a union is present, management and the union must work together for the good of everyone involved.