The bargaining process is broken into four types of bargaining, according to Robert Walton and Robert McKersie. These two individuals decomposed the overall labor negotiations into distributive integrative, attitudinal, and intraorganizational bargaining. First of all, these four bargaining types take place during the collective bargaining when negotiating a contract and the first two subprocesses, distributive and integrative bargaining, are the major alternatives for negotiating terms and conditions of employment. The subprocesses include adversarial bargaining over conflicts of interest and collaborative problem solving for issues of mutual gain. For this reason, collective bargaining in both the private and public sectors is a mixture
The need for thorough preparation is equally great, the environment determines bargaining power, bargaining structures range from very decentralized to centralized. Furthermore, negotiations involve dynamic mixtures of distributive, integrative, and intraorganizational bargaining, as well as attitudinal structuring. With that being said, the diversity of legal jurisdictions governing public sector labor relations results in varying legal standards for bargaining across these jurisdictions. For example, some states have sunshine laws that require public sector negotiations to take place in the public and while the mandatory permissive distinction for bargaining items is common in the public sector, some public sector jurisdictions place greater restrictions on the allowable bargaining subjects. At the same time, the management structures of public sector agencies are not as hierarchical as in the private sector and are often composed of elected officials and professional managers who share or compete for decision-making authority. Collective bargaining in the public sector is characterized at times by multilateral bargaining, which is negotiations between more than two parties. Unions can also appeal for support directly to the other groups, who in turn can pressure the management officials at the bargaining
To conclude this analysis on the basis of the labor’s extensive history, Sloane & Witney (2010) propose, “it is entirely possible that labor’s remarkable staying power has been because of the simple fact that to many workers, from the nineteenth century to the present, there really has been no acceptable substitute for collective bargaining as a means of maintaining and improving employment conditions” (p.80). In the end, it is important to anticipate unions and employers presently work together to find solutions that will enhance collective bargaining strategies and practices to serve the interest of both parties.
Distributive bargaining consists of two parties in competition to maximize their share of a limited resource. In distributive bargaining, the goals of one party are in fundamental and direct conflict with the goals of the other party (Lewicki, Barry, & Saunders, 2011). In the negotiation over the job offer at Robust Routers, the resources being distributed were the items in the bargaining mix. As the human resources director, my goal was to gain more by giving less, and Joe’s goal was to gain more by receiving more of the company’s resources.
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2011). Essentials of negotiation (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill. ISBN-13: 9780073530369
Since the terms and conditions of employment is a broad subject, the NLRB has regulated what subjects are considered mandatory in the collective bargaining process. The court have also general upheld the issue of mandatory subjects in the collective bargaining process be as broad as possible. This allow each individual issue to a violation of unfair practices to be decided on a case by case basis. Employers must also agree to meet with the labor union at a reasonable time as part of its duty to bargain in good faith. If there is a non mandatory or permissive issue determined by the NLRA then employers can refuse to meet and negotiate with the labor about these subjects. Permissive subjects do not have to be in the labor union contract so refusal to negotiate will not be considered an unfair labor practice by management. The Supreme Court has narrow the criteria of whether or not the subject is mandatory or not. The first test is whether or not the issue is obviously significant to the work environment (Petersen & Boller,
Negotiations styles are scholastically recognized as being broken down into two general categories and those are distributive bargaining styles and integrative negotiation styles. Distributive bargaining styles of negotiation are understood to be a competitive type of negotiation. “Distributive bargaining, also known as positional bargaining, negotiating zero-sum, competitive negotiation, or win-lose negotiation, is a type or style of negotiation in which the parties compete for the distribution of a fixed amount of value” (Business Blog Reviews, 2011). This type of negotiation skill or style approach might be best represented in professional areas such as the stock market where there is a fixed goal in mind or even in a garage sale negotiation where the owner would have a specific value of which he/she would not go below. In contrast, an integrative negotiation approach/style is that of cooperative bargaining, or win-win types ...
Despite attempting to predict the eventual outcome of the negotiation, I did not anticipate the confrontations between Local H-56 and the management of Hotel Zinnia. Although they initially agreed to engage in integrative bargaining, the union and management subsequently entered an intense negotiation. When Local H-56 presented its proposal of wage increases and health insurance, management immediately responded with a counterproposal that surprised the union. Both the union and management eventually behaved confrontationally, accusing each other of bargaining unreasonably and focusing on the trivial aspects of the negotiation. Moreover, as the union and management felt increasingly frustrated, they suffered from a lack of unity in their teams. The union could not fulfill its objectives because its lead negotiator prevented other team members from contributing to the negotiation. On the other hand, several team members of management struggled to assert their authority as the lead negotiator. After observing these issues, I ultimately believe that the union and management failed to achieve their individual objectives. Moreover, by approaching the negotiation with a zero-sum strategy, I assert that the union and management failed to reach a mutually beneficial contract. At the same time, both sides of the bargaining table lacked cohesive teams and therefore struggled under the pressure of the negotiation.
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Barry, B. (2005). Negotiation, Fifth Ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Barry, B. (2010). Negotiation: Readings, exercises, and cases. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin
Lewicki, R., Saunders, D.M., Barry B., (2010) Negotiation: Readings, Exercises, and Cases. 6th Ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin. New York, NY
A collective bargaining agreement collectively sets the terms on which an employer offers individual work contracts to each of its employees in the bargaining unit. A bargaining agreement, also herein referred to as a labour agreement, is a legally enforceable written commitment, which states the rights and duties of all parties involved. The labour agreement should be made in good faith and is intended to be observed and not violated. The National Labour Relations Act obligates employers and unions to bargain in good faith concerning terms and conditions of employment, including hours and wages. Like any normal contract, competent parties must enter into a labour agreement. However, a labour agreement is unique from other legal contracts in that there is no consideration involved and nothing tangible is exchanged. Many, but not all, unions require formal ratification of a new labour contract by a majority membership acceptance, which is determined through vote by the members. Until majority approval of those voting in a ratification election is received, the proposed labour contract is not final. While each labour agreement is unique to the needs of an organization and its employees, most agreements include five issues: (1) Management Rights, (2) Union Security, (3) Wages and Benefits, (4) Individual Security (Seniority) Rights, and (5) Dispute Resolution. Management Rights “Management” is the process of working with people and resources to accomplish organizational goals by making the best possible use of money, time, materials and people. The management process, when properly executed, involves a wide variety of activities including planning, organizing, directing and controlling. It is management’s role to perform all of these functions in order to maximize results.
Negotiations always occur between parties who believe that some benefit may come of purposeful discussion. The parties to a negotiation usually share an intention to reach an agreement. This is the touchstone to which any thinking of negotiations must refer. While there may be some reason to view negotiations as attempts by each party to get the better of the other, this particular type of adversarial negotiation is really just one of the options available. Among the beginning principles of a negotiation must be an acknowledgment that the parties to a negotiation have both individual and group interests that are partially shared and partially in conflict, though the parameters and proportions of these agreements and disagreements will never be thoroughly known; this acknowledgment identifies both the reason and the essential subject matter for reflection on a wide range of issues relevant to a negotiation. (Gregory Tropea, November 1996)
Traditional literature in the field of labor relations has focused immensely on its benefit towards the employer and in the process equating it to working rules. This has been so despite the field being expected to cover the process of, labor management, union formation, and collective bargain; all which are anticipated to create a positive employer-employee relationship. This relationship is said to be positive if there exist a balance between employment functions and the rights of the laborer. Also important to note, is that this relation is equally important to the public sector as it is to the private one. Therefore, to ensure a mutually conducive labor environment exists, effective labor management process and inclusive negotiation program should be adopted (Mulve 2006; Walton, 2008).
Collective bargaining may happen in several kinds of fields, ranging politics to sports. It allows appropriate settlement of disputes and issues that benefit both parties involved, producing a result that is not one-sided. Collective bargaining is “the negotiation of wages and other conditions of employment by an organized body of employees” (Beal, Wickersham, & Kienast 5). Four issues that are probable components of a collective bargaining agreement are:
Negotiation approaches are generally described as either distributive or integrative. At the heart of each strategy is a measurement of conflict between each party’s desired outcomes. Consider the following situation. Chris, an entrepreneur, is starting a new business that will occupy most of his free time for the near future. Living in a fancy new development, Chris is concerned that his new business will prevent him from taking care of his lawn, which has strict requirements under neighborhood rules. Not wanted to upset his neighbors, Chris decides to hire Matt to cut his grass.
Distributive bargaining does play some role in integrative bargaining as the “pie” does ultimately need to be split up. To make the “pie” as large as it could possibly be, integrative bargaining is invaluable, unfortunately there is still only one “pie” and the value it holds must be distributed through negotiation. In an integrative process, everyone agrees on who gets what. The idea being that the last step of divvying up will not be difficult once the state is reached. This is due to the interest-based approach that creates a cooperative working relationship in which all parties feel satisfied with the outcome. Theoretically, everyone should know who wants what by the time the “pie” is