Union Negotiations Case
1. Without planning and determination of one's initial offer, target point, and resistance point, a negotiator may be at a disadvantage during the negotiation. What evidence of planning was demonstrated by Alisa and Katherine?
“Union negotiations are very much like a tug of war between labor and management. One side wants what the other doesn’t have or won’t give” (Patton, 2013). The process of planning and having the determination to offer, target and resist can put a negotiator at an advantage as long as negotiator sticks to their agenda.
Alisa intentions were to scare Katherine by going to the media. By doing so, Alisa believes she has the upper hand in the negotiations process and on Katherine at the same time, by releasing to the …show more content…
From the situation between Katherine and Alisa, it is very clear that, the common goal is the well being of all the employees. Having the discussion revolve around the main goal, can aid the negotiation process in a way that clarifies what is going on between the workers and management in regards to the big separation of money and seeing improvements of workers benefits. Also establishing, common ground between both parties is important.
6. Katherine discussed a potential solution (bonus sharing) that had not previously been discussed before. Is this an example of "unlawful circumvention" according to labor laws? Why or why not?
It is not an unlawful circumvention according to the labor law to share bonuses between management and employees. In addition, Katherine was discussing this issue with a union representative. The Labor law allows companies to give bonuses or give any other kind of appreciation to their employees on top of their regular salary only if the company was making large profits. If Alisa was an employee who isn’t representing the union, then this could be considered a case of unlawfully circumventing the union.
7. Assume Katherine refused to make a concession to Alisa's request. According to the National Labor Code, could Alisa organize a
“Union negotiations are very much like a tug of war between labor and management. One side wants what the other doesn’t have or won’t give” (Patton, 2013). The process of planning and having the determination to offer, target and resist can put a negotiator at an advantage as long as negotiator sticks to their agenda.
Alisa intentions were to scare Katherine by going to the media. By doing so, Alisa believes she has the upper hand in the negotiations process and on Katherine at the same time, by releasing to the …show more content…
From the situation between Katherine and Alisa, it is very clear that, the common goal is the well being of all the employees. Having the discussion revolve around the main goal, can aid the negotiation process in a way that clarifies what is going on between the workers and management in regards to the big separation of money and seeing improvements of workers benefits. Also establishing, common ground between both parties is important.
6. Katherine discussed a potential solution (bonus sharing) that had not previously been discussed before. Is this an example of "unlawful circumvention" according to labor laws? Why or why not?
It is not an unlawful circumvention according to the labor law to share bonuses between management and employees. In addition, Katherine was discussing this issue with a union representative. The Labor law allows companies to give bonuses or give any other kind of appreciation to their employees on top of their regular salary only if the company was making large profits. If Alisa was an employee who isn’t representing the union, then this could be considered a case of unlawfully circumventing the union.
7. Assume Katherine refused to make a concession to Alisa's request. According to the National Labor Code, could Alisa organize a