Man 712 Final Exam: Collective Bargaining (Positional)

Man 712 Final Exam collective Bargaining (Positional) Taking the Firefighters’ Heat

Man 712 Final Examcollective Bargainingpositionaltaking The Firefigh

MAN 712 Final Exam Collective Bargaining (Positional) Taking the Firefighters’ Heat Great negotiators are not “naturals”—they do not possess a hidden talent that prepares them to succeed without effort. Effectiveness in negotiation hinges on skill-building that develops through knowledge and deliberate practice in each negotiation situation. Positional bargaining, a common negotiation strategy, involves parties moving from stance to stance—often without revealing true objectives—until they reach a compromise. Unlike integrative or problem-solving negotiation, often summarized as “getting to yes,” positional bargaining is more about “getting to OK,” emphasizing strategic movement rather than mutual problem resolution.

The City of Concord, New Hampshire with a population of 50,000, is preparing for negotiations with the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF), Local #37. This union represents 120 full-time firefighters and paramedics across seven stations. Relations under the current collective bargaining agreement have been strained, with disagreements over wages, benefits, and work conditions contributing to a tense atmosphere.

Paper For Above instruction

In analyzing the upcoming collective bargaining negotiations between the City of Concord and IAFF Local #37, it is crucial to understand the political, economic, and relational dynamics involved. This analysis will explore the positional bargaining framework, the strategic interests of both parties, and the potential implications of their negotiation strategies.

The City’s Position

The city’s negotiating team comprises three members: the personnel director, the budget director, and the fire department chief. The personnel and budget directors are classified employees, whereas the fire chief is a political appointee with close ties to the mayor. The city’s financial stance reflects a need to control costs, with firefighters earning an average of $30,000 in wages plus benefits worth an additional $20,000, summing to approximately $6 million annually for the entire unionized workforce. Management faces pressure to contain payroll, health care, and overtime expenses, which currently total about $7.2 million annually.

The city’s financial constraints are reinforced by comparables with neighboring Manchester, which offers higher wages and more leave. Concord aims to limit labor costs to prevent layoffs, which are likely if expenses rise. The city’s leadership has been advised to consider schedule flexibility to reduce overtime but is cautious about union opposition to such measures. Additionally, management is permitted to threaten layoffs or station closures to strengthen their bargaining position.

Specific issues in negotiations include wage increases, health care contributions, and annual leave. The union demands a 6% wage increase in the first year, followed by 4% annually, and seeks to maintain current health benefits and enhance leave. Meanwhile, the city’s position is to restrict expenses, possibly delaying wage increases, increasing copayments, or modifying benefits. The current contract provides for incremental raises and leave based on tenure, and the city is reluctant to extend beyond a two-year agreement due to fiscal uncertainty.

The Union’s Position

The union’s bargaining team includes a professional negotiator, the local president, and the secretary-treasurer. Members are frustrated by disparities in pay and benefits compared to neighboring Manchester, which pays about $2,000 more annually and offers more leave. The union’s rank-and-file members feel their sacrifices are undervalued given their job risks and the importance of their role in public safety. Consequently, the union is pushing for a 6% salary increase in the first year, with 4% annually afterward, to align wages with Manchester’s levels.

They are also committed to maintaining current health benefits and increasing annual leave to match Manchester’s offerings. The union perceives the city’s fiscal restrictions and threats of layoffs as excuses for neglecting employee welfare. They believe demonstrating parity with Manchester is essential for recognition and fairness, and they are willing to escalate to a strike, despite its illegality, if their demands are not met.

Despite the antagonistic posturing, both sides understand that the negotiations involve imperfect trade-offs. The union aims to leverage their authorization to strike to exert pressure on the city, emphasizing the professionalism and dedication of their members, who risk their lives for modest compensation. They argue that equitable wages and benefits are essential for morale and retention, especially given the demanding nature of firefighting profession.

Strategic Considerations in Positional Bargaining

The negotiations are substantial because both parties exhibit positional bargaining tendencies—each side firmly anchoring their positions on wages, benefits, and job security, with limited initial openness to face-saving or integrative solutions. From the city’s perspective, aggressive tactics like threats of layoffs and station closures serve as leverage to constrain costs. The union, on the other hand, relies on their strike authorization and parity argument to demand concessions.

Effective negotiation in this context would involve understanding the underlying interests—cost containment for the city and fair recognition for the union—and working to find a resolution that satisfies the core needs of both. While positional bargaining can often lead to stalemate or adversarial relations, an awareness of BATNA (best alternative to a negotiated agreement) for each side can guide concessions and strategy. For example, the city’s BATNA may involve austerity measures, whereas the union’s BATNA might be escalation towards strike action.

Given the hostile environment and the importance of maintaining public safety, both parties need to cautiously shift from positional to interest-based negotiations. Building mutual understanding could facilitate more productive discussions, enabling the city to deliver acceptable wage and benefit packages without risking costly layoffs or station closures, and allowing the union to secure equitable treatment and avoid strike escalation.

Conclusion

The upcoming negotiations between Concord and IAFF Local #37 exemplify the dynamics of positional bargaining within a strained labor-management relationship. By understanding each side’s core interests—cost control for the city and fair compensation for firefighters—both parties can navigate their positions towards solutions that balance fiscal prudence with fair labor practices. Effective negotiation strategies must transcend rigid positional standoffs, fostering collaboration and shared problem-solving. Preparing for potential impasses, using objective criteria, and emphasizing the mutual benefits of a sustainable agreement are critical steps toward a successful bargaining outcome that addresses the needs of both the city’s taxpayers and its firefighters.

References

• Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (2011). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Penguin Books.
• Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2015). Negotiation. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Shell, G. R. (2006). Bargaining for Advantage: Negotiation Strategies for Reasonable People. Penguin Books.
• Brett, J. M. (2018). Negotiating Globally: How to Negotiate Deals, Resolve Disputes, and Make Decisions Across Cultural Boundaries. Jossey-Bass.
• Eisenberg, E. M. (2006). Beyond words: A reader in encounter and dialogic ethics. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Wall, J. A., & Blum, W. (2007). Winning Is Only Half the Battle: How to Recognize and Avoid the Hidden Pitfalls of Negotiation. Harvard Business Review.
• Thompson, L. (2015). The mind and heart of the negotiator. Pearson Education.
• Malhotra, D., & Murnighan, J. K. (2002). The Extremes of Everyday Negotiation: How Ninety Percent of Negotiators Fail. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 261–273.
• Rubin, J. Z., & Brown, B. R. (2014). Negotiation: Readings, Exercises, and Cases. Routledge.
• Carnevale, P. J., & Pruitt, D. G. (1992). Negotiation in Social Conflict. Open University Press.