Articles

Equality and fairness in the workplace – simple add-ons or a must?

by Irina Ivan 

In workplaces, like in any other area of our lives, success starts far beyond the letter of the law, being built on a deep knowledge of the unwritten rules and mechanisms.

The fifth article of the Romanian Labor Code states that work relations are based on the principle of an equal treatment for all the employees and employers. But as any other labor norms, it focuses more on defining the direct discrimination cases (on criteria such as sexual orientation, age, nationality, religion, etc). The acts of exclusion, differentiation, restriction or favoritism based on other criteria than the classical ones go into the wide "indirect discrimination" category. Given the ambiguity provided by the legislation, one has to follow unwritten laws when he is assessing the fairness and equality in his workplace.

It goes without saying that, in a workplace that thinks itself civilized and democratic, no one is spared from respecting the procedures and rules and that employees performing similar work need to have access to workstations, tools, stationary and facilities providing them with the same level of security, comfort and ease. And although real needs and the principle of equality should dictate the distribution of the material support between employees, there is no rarity to see that a simple employee holds a Pentium II and a third hand monitor and his supervisor a last generation PC or MAC, although the nature of their work does not justify such a gap. Or seeing that someone who spends his entire 8 working hours in the office benefits of a company's car and someone who runs errands uses the public transport.

If reality is full of such deviations from the normality when it comes to something so basic as providing equal means of work, can we talk about equality and fairness when it comes to complex matters such as financial and non-financial incentives? Are we entitled to an equal treatment when it comes to something else than means, conditions of work and procedures? Is "fairness" just an utopia or is it tangible? In what ways are equality and fairness helpful for an organization?

We like to hear saying that people have equal rights and obligations as it reassures our ego and dignity. Generally speaking, people have and should have equal rights and obligations. But if we transfer this assertion to a micro-level (like an organization or a team, for instance) it becomes a myth. At work, people don't have the same obligations and rights. They don't perform equally well, they are not equally competent. They are not equally fast, patient, communicative, smiling, daring, polite, enthusiast, supportive, etc. They do not have the same workload and their tasks are not equally difficult. Therefore, they cannot receive the same salary and the same treatment. They cannot be treated the same way, but they still can be treated equally by putting into practice the principle of fairness or equity. It is important for a manager to customize the way he treats people upon their own skills and personality, but also to dose the rewards (financial and non-financial) that each employee receives back for his performance, so that the feeling of unfairness or inequity does not exist.

Seen as a matter of ethics only, fairness is often overlooked. And alongside with it, so is the motivation of the employees. A study of Team Action Management mentions that the top three motivators in life, that determine any individual to take action, are the following: the promise of sex, fair play, greed and/or personal power. Considering that the first one cannot be applied to workplaces (apart isolated cases), the first motivation factor for employees is their perception of working in a fair place, where, just as in sport, rules are alike respected by all parties. The fact that employees' motivation starts with the way they perceive their workplace in terms of equity/fairness/fair play is confirmed by at least two theories in HR: the Equity Theory formulated by J.S.Adams in 1963 and the theory of the Distributive Justice, formulated by Dr.Hal Erying, similar to the first one.

The Equity Theory claims that in their relation with the employer, people are seeking for a balance between their input and the outcome they receive back. Moreover, people take their own perception on how fairly they are treated by comparing the rewards they get with the ones received by someone who, in their opinion, performs or is supposed to perform the same amount of input. If, based on this way of assessment, any hint of unfairness is perceived, people become de-motivated and take one of the following steps: alter inputs/outcome (decrease the effort, for instance); distort input/outcome in the job (start thinking that the other is a better performer); demand increase in outcome (e.g. increase in salary or recognition, responsibility); terminate relationship (this can range from lowering involvement and performance to zero, resisting to any new idea to resignation and leaving of the organization).

The theory of the Distributive Justice focuses on the same tendency that people have of comparing their performance and rewards. Dr. Hal Erying shows that, from the point where unfairness is perceived, people transition more phases of discomfort, first re-perceiving the situation and trying to find explanations for the discovered lack of balance, demanding more benefits to correct it, afterwards, reducing the input and ultimately attacking the person is comparing to or the one he holds responsible for the injustice (the authority).

It is worth pointing out that each one's own way of calculating the fairness of the treatment they receive involves a lot more than a simple workload/wage report. Input includes besides performance itself variables such as: involvement, enthusiasm, support, commitment, personal sacrifice, loyalty. In comparing their outcomes, people do not limit to the financial incentives; they also compare how many thanks each receives within a time span and the circumstances in which this happens for each, how much empowerment each one receives, how much each one is involved and kept updated on the important matters and on what grounds, how much time each one spends with the boss, etc.

Equity is a sensitive matter because it is always perceived only from one side, and justified from the other side by calling upon the differences between people and the relationships they build. Disturbing for some and cozy for others, unfairness is always insidious, toxic and tension generator. It undermines authority and deteriorates relations. But being nothing more than a perception, it can be easily prevented or eliminated by keen observer managers with a strong focus on the people side of the business.

Resources:

Favoritism in the Workplace (Advice from The Ethics Office at Texas Instruments Corporation) - Article number 295: Playing Favorites, www.onlineethics.org

Adam's Theory. Balancing Employees Inputs and Outputs, www.mindtools.com

Equity in the Workplace: The Equity Theory, www.soloden.com

Team Management Action, What's the matter with my workplace, www.tamplc.com

Team Management Action, Fair Play, a powerful key driver of Performance within the Organization, www.tamplc.com