ASSIGNMENT details as mentioned in the documents
ECM22EKM: Leadership and People Management Individual Assignment (contributes 50% to module mark) January 2023 Date of submission: To be specified by EAU Word count 3000 words (+20%/-10%) excluding appendices and bibliography/ references. This assessment requires you read the attached case study (Romanian lorry driver reveals why Brexit means shortages). This case study is based on an article published on the London Economic website and is intended to assess the effects of Brexit on Land Transport of Goods in the United Kingdom. In particular how it resulted in a severe shortage of lorry drivers in the country. You may also look at: https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-to-blame-as-lorry-driver-shortages-hit-100000-says-yorkshire-logistics-boss-3359867 Amongst many things, Brexit has certainly shocked the land transport of goods within the UK. It has been a cause for serious “change” within the sector. As a manager, tasked with the mitigation of such an issue, what are the measures you would consider to alleviate the consequences of lorry drivers shortage? How would you make things better and bring in and retain the needed human resource? Use your learning from this module to identify relevant academic models, arguments, and critiques to suggest practices that leaders, managers, and HR practitioners should consider or avoid. ___________ CASE STUDY Romanian lorry driver reveals why Brexit means shortages by Andra Maciuca 2021-08-02 13:47 https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/romanian-lorry-driver-brexit-supermarket-shortages-284155/ A lorry driver has explained why he is thinking of following in the footsteps of his colleagues and moving back to Romania to work across Europe. Viorel Alexandru Onu used to work as a lorry driver across the continent for a firm in his native Transylviania, Romania. He was working six weeks at a time followed by two weeks off at home, and used to sleep in the lorry cabin until an EU law meant he had to rest for 45 hours in a hotel room every week. He thinks his previous work conditions were better than the ones he has in the UK. “I don’t currently have time for anything else,” he said. He has been working as a lorry driver in the UK for nine months, having previously worked in Britain six years ago, and has delivered a variety of goods, including for supermarkets. “I have been thinking of going back to Romania and working across the whole of Europe again because of what I am left with here versus there”, Onu told The London Economic. He added: “Here you pay rent, bills, car insurance, fuel and so on, there you only spend money on food. Higher prices and higher risk “There is a difference between food prices in the UK six years ago when I worked here versus food prices now. Back then, I could live on £40 for a week, now I spend up to £120 per week so the costs are three times higher. Fuel prices have increased as well over the past nine months.” Onu said being a lorry driver requires sacrifices and is not “necessarily a pleasure to do”. He added there is now more risk, tiredness, and pressure on lorry drivers delivering to UK supermarkets, because they are expected to cover for Brexit-related drivers shortages under even longer working hours approved by the government. He said: “Without any doubt, the prolonged hours are raising the risks for lorry drivers and for other road users. “I think those who focus on delivering goods for supermarkets experience higher stress to do as many deliveries as possible; and to do the same deliveries with the same lorry drivers to make up for the shortages. “I think that means more tiredness and lack of sleep which can result in accidents.” Working hours Onu told TLE that before Brexit he could finish work after 10-12 hours, but drivers can now work up until 15 hours three times a week, after which they can work a maximum of 13 hours. He said: “I don’t have time to give to my girlfriend anymore, and not having the possibility to spend time together as much as possible brings all sorts of problems. “After 15 hours of work, you get home, you shower, you eat and go to bed. In the morning I start work at 5, I have to leave for work, it’s quite bad.” Onu added his brother-in-law worked as a lorry driver in the UK up until last Saturday, but resigned because of the working hours. “He was starting work for supermarkets between 10pm and 1am. It was tiring, you can get home around 12 noon the next day or work up to 15 hours, and you can’t really sleep during day time, it’s not the same as a night sleep,” Onu said. Shortages Onu said there is a “strong” shortage of lorry drivers which means supermarket shelves “started being quite empty”. But he thinks the government prolonging working hours for existing drivers will not help with deliveries after 100,000 UK lorry drivers left their jobs. And he thinks companies paying bigger salaries for less drivers to do as many deliveries as possible will not help either. He said: “The problem is there are the same drivers left in the UK. To cover for the shortages, you have to bring drivers from abroad. “If you pay better salaries, you attract existing drivers from other companies, but those companies then have drivers shortages and it’s the same thing.” Brexit rules Under the new Brexit rules, lorry drivers cannot be recruited from the EU anymore because of a government focus on high-skilled workers who can speak English well, among other conditions. But Onu thinks a lot of the current problems with lorry drivers and supermarket shortages stem from Brexit rules. He said: “Primarily, lorry drivers in the UK were Romanian, Polish and Lithuanian. A lot of my acquaintances who are lorry drivers left the UK, as soon as the new Brexit rules came into place. I know of around 10 drivers from my group of friends who went back to Romania completely, and other drivers changed their jobs. “Before, there were people who were coming to the UK speaking very little English but they were managing. When I first came here I couldn’t speak English almost at all, but by working in the field I started knowing the basic things, especially the ones related to the job.” He said Brexit also means he now gets taxed 25 percent every week, which leads to “quite a big difference” in his income. “Before, you were paying the taxes at the end of the year and you were able to claim money for fuel, expenses, work clothes. Now I have a friend who was earning £1,350 and ended up earning £940,” he said. This assignment assesses the following course objectives: 1. Analyse the existing Human Resources Management (HRM) practices in an organization to plan how to facilitate and manage changes. 4. Evaluate best practices in communicating with employees both directly and through trades unions/workers’ cooperatives Assessment criteria: Nature of the topic/introduction 10% A review of appropriate academic literature30% Analysis and discussion35% Conclusions and recommendations15% Presentation & referencing10% (You are required to provide a minimum of 10 appropriate academic references to support your work) General Guidelines Nature of the topic/introduction (10% of marks = approximately 350 words). In this section of your assignment it is expected that you identify the key issues associated with LPM, from the perspective of the employer. Review of appropriate academic literature (30% of marks = approximately 950 words). In order to build knowledge, it is important that you access a range of relevant resources. A literature review is concerned with judging the merit or otherwise of a body of research that addresses a research question. A further definition is “In writing the literature review, the purpose is to convey to the reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. The literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (eg. your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries. http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/specific-types-of-writing/literature-review Analysis and Discussion (35% of marks = approximately 1150 words). Having reviewed relevant literature on LPM, as per earlier section, it should be possible to carry out an analysis and discussion. In this section you will be identifying key challenges for employers and exploring ways of overcoming these. Conclusions and recommendations (15% of marks = approximately 550 words). In this section you conclude the main points of earlier research and discussion – please note that you should not include any new materials at this point. Also, you provide your recommendations. Presentation and referencing (10% of marks) this is a critical element of undertaking academic study. It is imperative that you correctly cite and reference all sources used to inform your work. Guidelines on Harvard Referencing are available on Moodle. IMPORTANT: Date of submission: To be specified by EAU Word count 3000 words (+20%/-10%) excluding appendices and bibliography/references. Exceeding or falling short of the admissible word count incurs a one-grade penalty; i.e. the next lower grade will be applied to your overall assignment, or will be considered a Fail if 40% or more below or above the admissible scope for the assignment. Assignments are to be submitted to turnitin.com (as will be advised in separate instructions) prior to submission for marking according to the attached assessment sheet. Assignments can be accepted only in MS Word Document format (2007 or later versions), not as PDF. The assignment should be formatted single-spaced, with font size 12 (Times, Roman, or Ariel), and set within standard page margins of 1 inch. BUSINESS DOCUMENT This document is intended for business use and should be distributed to intended recipients only. Marking Rubric GRADE ANSWER RELEVANCE ARGUMENT & COHERENCE EVIDENCE SUMMARY First ≥70 Innovative response, answers the question fully, addressing the learning objectives of the assessment task. Evidence of critical analysis, synthesis and evaluation. A clear, consistent in-depth critical and evaluative argument, displaying the ability to develop original ideas from a range of sources. Engagement with theoretical and conceptual analysis. Wide range of appropriately supporting evidence provided, going beyond the recommended texts. Correctly referenced. An outstanding, well-structured and appropriately referenced answer, demonstrating a high degree of understanding and critical analytic skills. Upper Second 60-69 A very good attempt to address the objectives of the assessment task with an emphasis on those elements requiring critical review. A generally clear line of critical and evaluative argument is presented. Relationships between statements and sections are easy to follow, and there is a sound, coherent structure. A very good range of relevant sources is used in a largely consistent way as supporting evidence. There is use of some sources beyond recommended texts. Correctly referenced in the main. The answer demonstrates a very good understanding of theories, concepts and issues, with evidence of reading beyond the recommended minimum. Well organised and clearly written. Lower Second 55-59 Competently addresses objectives, but may contain errors or omissions and critical discussion of issues may be superficial or limited in places. Some critical discussion, but the argument is not always convincing, and the work is descriptive in places, with over-reliance on the work of others. A range of relevant sources is used, but the critical evaluation aspect is not fully presented. There is limited use of sources beyond the standard recommended materials. Referencing is not always correctly presented. The answer demonstrates a good understanding of some relevant theories, concepts and issues, but there are some errors and irrelevant material included. The structure lacks clarity. Third 50-54 Addresses most objectives of the assessment task, with some notable omissions. The structure is unclear in parts, and there is limited analysis. The work is descriptive with minimal critical discussion and limited theoretical engagement. A limited range of relevant sources used without appropriate presentation as supporting or conflicting evidence coupled with very limited critical analysis. Referencing has some errors. Some understanding is demonstrated but is incomplete, and there is evidence of limited research on the topic. Poor structure and presentation, with few and/or poorly presented references. Fail <50 some deviation from the objectives of the assessment task. may not consistently address the assignment brief. at the lower end fails to answer the question set or address the learning outcomes. there is minimal evidence of analysis or evaluation. descriptive with no evidence of theoretical engagement, critical discussion or theoretical engagement. at the lower end displays a minimal level of understanding. very limited use and application of relevant sources as supporting evidence. at the lower end demonstrates a lack of real understanding. poor presentation of references. whilst some relevant material is present, the level of understanding is poor with limited evidence of wider reading. poor structure and poor presentation, including referencing. at the lower end there is evidence of a lack of comprehension, resulting in an assignment that is well below the required standard. late submission 0 0 0 0 some="" deviation="" from="" the="" objectives="" of="" the="" assessment="" task.="" may="" not="" consistently="" address="" the="" assignment="" brief.="" at="" the="" lower="" end="" fails="" to="" answer="" the="" question="" set="" or="" address="" the="" learning="" outcomes.="" there="" is="" minimal="" evidence="" of="" analysis="" or="" evaluation.="" descriptive="" with="" no="" evidence="" of="" theoretical="" engagement,="" critical="" discussion="" or="" theoretical="" engagement.="" at="" the="" lower="" end="" displays="" a="" minimal="" level="" of="" understanding.="" very="" limited="" use="" and="" application="" of="" relevant="" sources="" as="" supporting="" evidence.="" at="" the="" lower="" end="" demonstrates="" a="" lack="" of="" real="" understanding.="" poor="" presentation="" of="" references.="" whilst="" some="" relevant="" material="" is="" present,="" the="" level="" of="" understanding="" is="" poor="" with="" limited="" evidence="" of="" wider="" reading.="" poor="" structure="" and="" poor="" presentation,="" including="" referencing.="" at="" the="" lower="" end="" there="" is="" evidence="" of="" a="" lack="" of="" comprehension,="" resulting="" in="" an="" assignment="" that="" is="" well="" below="" the="" required="" standard.="" late="" submission="" 0="" 0="" 0="">