Insights Into the Roles of HR Practitioners When Managing Labour Relations Incidents in the Correctional Services in South Africa
Lesley I. Makau & Lené I. Graupner
What the paper says
Human resource professionals aim to optimise employee performance to align with the employer’s strategic goals. Their multifaceted roles often involve challenges, especially when duties conflict with organisational values in labour relations. Some labour relations incidents might have psychological aspects that are not fully addressed by current policies or resolution methods. This study explored the roles assumed by HR practitioners in the Department of Correctional services (DCS) in South Africa, when managing labour relations incidents. It aimed to identify the support available and needed by these practitioners. The study employed a qualitative approach, with a purposive sample of 21 HR practitioners from the DCS involved in labour relations. The data were collected through structured interviews, and were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. HR professionals in correctional services were found to undertake diverse roles, including those of advisors and facilitators. They managed a range of incidents, from minor infractions to serious offences such as smuggling or use of force. A notable gap was identified between the support they receive and what they need, which indicated potential areas for organisational support improvement. The study highlights the importance of psychological support mechanisms to help HR practitioners manage challenging job demands. The study suggests that HR practitioners be trained in conflict resolution techniques. Addressing resource constraints through increased budget allocations and enhancing IT support is crucial for efficient incident management. Open communication channels are essential for HR practitioners to express concerns freely. Management and leadership development programmes focusing on ethical practices and creative problem-solving are recommended to address mismanagement and misuse of authority.
1 citation
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.68 × 0.4 = 0.27 |
| M · momentum | 0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.