Unitarism operates in the perception that all the stakeholders in the entire organization are functioning as one team. In this context, Chand has assumed that the people in the company are working towards the goal of making profits for the company. Ironically, Chand perception only benefits Chand and the company. Workers are exploited in this situation. Chand needs to pay competitive market rates and follow the mandates to pay the employees. Chand has already undertaken Unitarism approach. He can pay the employees more for the overall benefit and sustenance of the company. Other than that, undertaking pluralist approach can also find amiable solutions. By developing a pluralist perspective, more power and empowerment can be given to the employees. Bargaining act stipulates that the employees can work under the agreed pay rate provided the employer has provided with information regarding their rights. The people are allowed to express or voice their views against such payment within 14 days of signing the agreement.
In this case, the mother of a teenage son has filed a complaint about the functioning of the company. Owing to this, the restaurant owner needs to show how they had taken up the efforts to explain the government mandated employee rights to the employees. In the employee agreement, if it was signed, there should have been a flexibility clause in the agreement. In this case based on the factual evidence, it can be seen that the restaurant owner did not act in good faith efforts. The workers did not have the knowledge about their rights. Essentially 110 workers were grossly underpaid. In this scenario, there is no pluralist or unitarist objective of common good. Hence, it can be said that the method of payment of the employees cannot be constituted as being legal. Even though the employees agreed to the terms, they are exploited owing to their lack of knowledge or experience. From the analysis of the events, it can be said that the restaurant owner has exploited the employees. Paying for food and beverages is not correct even though the employees of the company agreed it upon.