Model of Construction Dispute Negotiation Behaviour - Essay Example

In the business world companies many times face problems during the year related to affairs between the management of the company and the laborers concerning employee rights and workplace conditions. The most common complaint which often escalates is issues related to worker compensation. In many industries the blue collar workers united themselves by forming a union to formally represent them in collective negotiations in which the union representative act as the voice of the union membership and battle for the rights of all employees in the company, not just the unionized employees. Two cases were studied in this investigation which can be analyzed further with the assistance of primary research techniques to better understand what occur internally during the negotiation process. The two cases studies which merit other investigative techniques are the Motor Bus Company and Steel Benders cases. The primary research technique utilize to obtain more information about the cases is a questionnaire. There two types of questionnaires utilized: an initial interview and a follow-up interview. Since the interviews are not performed in person they are categorize as questionnaires. The method of invitation utilized in both cases to invite the members to participate is an online invitation to be sent to the presidents of the respective unions in both cases to learn about the perspective of the workers. In the Bus Company Case the questionnaire will be send to the CEO of the company. In the Steel Benders case the employer will be represented by the owners or general managers of 30 construction companies in Japan. Motor Bus Company vs. Employee Workers Union Conflict Logic for asking original six questions The Motor Bus Company is negotiating a resolution between the firm and the employees of the company. Both parties involved in the negotiation have claims regarding the terms of the proposed contract. The first question of the questionnaire seeks to obtain the desired terms in order to renegotiate a collective bargaining agreement. The specific position of each party will reveal the alternative offer to obtain a resolution to the dispute. The second question is a quest to obtain responses and a strategic position in the negotiation process among the people involved in the ordeal. If player A can gain insight about the innate response and acceptance of the offer of player B it can act and propose a counteroffer that may persuade a group to seek an immediate solution to end the dispute. The offer by the company was fair in comparison with the previous, but it was only a bluff since the company felt the workers union lacked unity and many employees were satisfied with a raise lower than the 4% request as long to keep the job security the firm provided to their employees. The union could have gotten better terms for its members. The employees had already conceded to lowering their pay raise request from 7.5% to 5.0% to the current 4.0% request; the company was going up in percentage fractions, while the employees conceded full percentage points. The employees were entitled to more and could have gotten a higher payoff if unity persisted. The play performed by the company was very risky and could have resulted in escalated collateral damage. It worked and allowed significance savings of 1.1% lower pay rates for the employees. The third questions inquiries about the possibility of a dispute resolution ending the ordeal. The questions provides the stand of each of the parties and provides the information needed for a mediator to intervene or to move the dispute forward to an alternative resolution system such as arbitration. Only with the knowledge of both sides of the game can a person truly understand how to reach an intermediate point that may satisfy both players in this game for justice being fought in the middle of a negotiation that involves financial rewards in the form of increasing pay levels for the workers of an enterprise. The company may want to end the conflict based on the economic losses associated with workers missing work in protest, reduce motivation, and work tension among other factors. The workers may want to end the dispute due to fatigue and family obligations. The fourth question leads to the strategic interchange of ideas that can enhance communication between parties in direct talks or by sending messages through media platforms such as television, radio or the internet. The continuance of negotiations among the parties may be due to desire of pay rate equity among this group of workers and other people participating in employment in this industry. The further negotiations from the company could be due to the desired to reduce labor cost. The answer to this question provides a platform that can allow both parties to reconsider their stance on the bargaining table. The 5th question provides a summary of what the players felt during the negotiation process and the way the internal negotiations when down between the workers and the company. The objective of this question is learn how the negotiations went down and what could have been done in the process to improve the outcome of the parties based on how they perceived the negotiation when down since the conflict started, until a resolution was achieved. The 6th question specifies the critical factors that actually got the result which finally helped the negotiation come to its final resolution. These factors might have been emotional, economical, fear, common sense, internal pressure, internal miscommunication between the workers and the union representatives among others. Logic behind asking six follow-up questions There are six follow up questions for the parties involved in the Motor Bus company conflict. The purpose of the first question is to learn how the previous negotiations and talks among players was in other conflicts prior to this one. A good relationship prior to the current conflict might have influenced the final outcome. The second question about the how was the atmosphere during the negotiation provides a sense of whether or not the workers and administration faced a hostile environment. Hostile environment are damaging towards acceleration a negotiation process. The subject matter of any negotiation determines the types of tactics the people involved during the process. In this case the subject matter was simple as far as being a clearly defined objective of a salary scale dispute. The more complex a negotiation is the longer it takes to find a resolution. Proving power to the main negotiation is a move that may induce a faster solution, but runs the risk of the negotiation taking a stand that goes against obtaining the optimum result since the primary objective of the negotiation is find a solution. In cases where the negotiation has a lot of power to decide when to end the conflict there must be clear guidelines or parameters of what offer can be accepted and what should rejected. Emotions typically run high during disputes and can affect the way the tactics utilized by the players. For example an extremely emotional party can make irrational moves that can hurt them in the long run during the process. The questions relating to intellectual capacity are necessary to learn about the credential and capacity of the people with the most responsibility in the negotiation. If a follow up audit determines the credentials of the negotiation were weak, then the parties can take measures to improve their position for future events by upgrading this important variable. The interdependence questions provide greater insight on how the actual event when down and what were the strategic choices that cause a good or bad outcome for a particular party. Third parties are a wild card that can be inserted into a negotiation in order to change the course of the battle, in this case there were no visible third parties, but it is possible some consultant or expert might have been working the game behind close doors. The Construction Industry vs. Steel Benders Workers Conflict Logic for asking original six questions The steel benders working in the construction industry in Hong Honk desired a pay scale that raised their overall pay to match the pay received by steel benders in other countries such as Europe. Their request was a daily pay of 950 yen. The first question provides a way to obtain a basic understanding of what the dispute is all about from each of the parties involved. In this case workers are requiring the pay raise from an entire industry thus the claim requires the cooperation multiple employers to get a deal done. The position of the industry is to stall and keep things running as it is since the employers the workers have any ground to receive any type of raise and they refuse to raise the salary of the steel benders. The primary objective of the companies involved in the conflict is to keep salary growth at cero percent, while the workers want a raise that provides equity with workers in other nations. The constraints of the contractors might be culturally based since the claim of the workers is based on comparative basis with workers from other nation which in Japan is that might not go well with the conservative class. The workers simply want more money, but the second question can help obtain other insight from the workers such as the last time a pay raise was given to them, worker conditions and other insight to see where the true roots of the pay raise claims. The 3rd question provides insight into the resilience of there were imminent that the workers wanted to stop the conflict, the companies on the other hand had greater motivation to take a different stance since a complete stoppage of a project may cost the company thousands of dollars per day as well as external pressures placed by powerful institutions which wanted an immediate stop to all this non-sense. The pressures made some of the companies give in and move to negotiation table to find a resolution. As far the workers since there were multiple companies involved in the conflict some of the gave in and that group of workers stop the protest since a resolution had finally arrived, on the other hand the workers whose company did not pay the extra daily money requested had to continue to battle for their rights. The state of the union is not as strong anymore. The state of the negotiation is important fact to know since it provides information about whether the problem can be solved easily or if extreme measures must be taken. In this case the hostile and uncooperative attitude of the companies who offer nothing forced the workers to go out into the streets to force pressure on the greedy contractors in order to obtain fair wages. Help and support came from unexpected sources during the protest. There was nothing positive about the attitude of the contractors who simple refused to pay more for whatever reasons. During the conflict it was never clear the true motivation of the contractors to allow financial losses to occur from work stoppages for a few yens. In this ordeal the positive factors that led to some contractors to give in to the demands of the workers is very important information since this positive outcome could repeat itself among the other workers who were not given the desired raise by their employer. Logic behind asking six follow-up questions There are six follow up question that must be asked to learn more about the nature of this laborer conflict with its employer. The relationship questions are good indicators of the history between the two parties. If in the past the employer was also hostile, then this provides the answer to why the workers immediately took the conflict to the general public in the form of a protest to put pressure on the companies who do not solve their problems with the employees in a good manner showing good will and understanding for the workers economic needs. The complexity of a dispute is good question to ask. It is possible that the employers are going through a downward economic spiral which is tying their hands as far them not having the cash flow to increase the employers pay, this type of situation make a solution more complex because higher wages could mean the layoff of some workers to make the difference. In theory a workers compensation issue is not really a complex problems, but there could be facts which may cleared up why this problem is occurring. Emotion and passion are two human feelings which can affect the outcome of a negotiation. The fury of the workers in the protest and the support they receive from outside parties such as the student body, other blue collar workers and the general community made the contractors look like tyrants and some of the gave in to the request of the workers due to emotional factors. The intellectual capacity of the negotiator is very important information that reveals if this variable affected the capacity to reach a deal early. Interdependence is something that can greatly affect a negotiation along with the intervention of third parties. The 6th follow up question touches this subject. In this conflict the intervention of the community as a third party paid off dividends for the workers. The pressure of people who protested alongside the workers open up the eyes of executive who depend on the support of the community for construction permits and to obtain business contracts to build housing for the community. Read More