Read Attached Collective Bargaining From Reeves 2006 Cases

Read Attached Collective Bargaining From Reeves 2006 Cases In Publi

Read Attached Collective Bargaining from Reeves (2006). Cases in Public Human Resource Management. Cengage.

Answer the following questions:

1) In this negotiation, it seems like it will be impossible for the two sides to be able to meet an agreement - as to do so will likely lead to one side losing. This situation is not uncommon in Union-Management Negotiations.

What should the negotiators do in order to prepare for the negotiation and make sure that it is successful (defined as)?

2) Provide at least 2 alternative plans (from what the two parties in the case want). You are to provide recommendations that create a compromise or collaboration where everyone being represented will be satisfied.

3) Both parties' negotiators were given specific instructions and goals that they were to achieve; however, it is not realistic to expect either party to be able to achieve these orders. What consequences would you as the mayor for the city representative and as a union member to the union representatives have for your negotiators if they fail to follow orders? Think about concepts from your other classes.

4) Why is it illegal for the fire fighters to strike? What could they do instead to protest during the negotiations?

5) If an impasse is reached, what rights does the company have? How might the union try to thwart the impasse in this situation?

Follow current APA format for citations and reference page if used.

---

Paper For Above instruction

In public sector collective bargaining, especially in contentious negotiations such as those described in the Reeves (2006) case, the preparation of negotiators is crucial in fostering productive dialogue and achieving an agreement that benefits all parties involved. Proper preparation involves understanding the interests, priorities, and limitations of each party, as well as gathering relevant data and developing flexible strategies. Negotiators should prioritize establishing common ground early and be willing to explore creative solutions that satisfy core interests rather than rigid positions. Building trust and maintaining open communication channels are also essential, as they can facilitate mutual understanding and help manage conflicts that arise during negotiations. Effective preparation reduces misunderstandings and sets a collaborative tone, ultimately increasing the likelihood of reaching an agreement that minimizes losses for both sides of the dispute.

Given the seemingly intractable nature of the dispute, the implementation of alternative plans—comprising creative compromises—would be beneficial. One possible plan could involve a modified wage structure that increases pay for lower-income workers while restraining cost increases for the employer. This plan could also include phased concessions, where certain benefits are temporarily reduced or modified with a commitment to revisit these changes periodically. Another alternative might focus on non-monetary benefits, such as improved working conditions, additional safety measures, or flexible scheduling options, which could satisfy union concerns without directly impacting financial outlays. These alternatives aim to introduce flexibility and shared sacrifice, promoting collaboration over confrontation, and foster a sense of partnership that can lead to sustainable agreements. Both plans should emphasize mutual gains, ensuring that neither side feels entirely disadvantaged—thus increasing the chances of successful bargaining.

When negotiations deviate from their prescribed instructions or goals, the consequences for negotiators can be significant. As a city mayor, I would expect my representatives to adhere to strategic directives because they embody the broader policy and financial limitations of the city. Failing to follow these orders might result in undermining city leadership, damaging credibility, and causing delays that could escalate conflicts. Conversely, as a union member, I would expect union representatives to stay within negotiated parameters and advocate effectively on members’ behalf without exceeding agreed boundaries. Failure to do so could lead to disciplinary actions, loss of trust in leadership, or weakened bargaining power if they seem unwilling or unable to deliver on promises. Importantly, failing to follow instructions can undermine the negotiation process overall, creating a breakdown in trust and potentially prolonging disputes, which can have adverse consequences for all stakeholders involved.

The legality of firefighter strikes is rooted in the essential nature of their services—their work involves public safety and life safety, making strikes ethically and legally problematic. Laws prohibiting firefighter strikes aim to ensure continuous emergency services and public safety during crises. Instead of striking, firefighters could employ alternative protest strategies such as work-to-rule campaigns, refusing only to perform non-essential duties, or holding informational pickets and demonstrations during non-working hours. They might also engage in media campaigns to raise public awareness about their concerns or utilize legal procedures like mediated negotiations or fact-finding missions. These actions can raise awareness of their grievances without disrupting crucial emergency services, thereby complying with legal restrictions while still signaling discontent and exerting pressure on management to negotiate.

In the event of an impasse in collective bargaining, the company typically has the right to implement last offers or operational changes necessary to sustain business functions, as long as such actions comply with applicable labor laws and agreements. The company could also seek to impose terms through binding arbitration or pursue legal injunctions if strike violations occur. The union, however, might attempt to delay or obstruct the process of reaching an impasse through tactics such as additional negotiations, applying political pressure, or seeking judicial intervention to prevent the employer from unilaterally imposing terms. Furthermore, the union might threaten or initiate legal challenges to any employer actions viewed as unfair or illegal, aiming to maintain negotiation leverage and prevent unfavorable outcomes. These dynamics underscore the importance of strategic negotiation tactics and legal awareness to manage and potentially thwart impasses effectively.

References

• Budd, J. W., & Colvin, A. J. S. (2012). Human Resource Management for Public and Nonprofit Organizations: Strategy and Practice. Sage Publications.
• Kaufman, B. E. (2010). The Industrial Relations System. In B. E. Kaufman & D. P. Kochan (Eds.), The Future of Employment Relations: Does It Have a Future? (pp. 59-78). MIT Press.
• Kellock, J., & Friedland, N. (2016). Labor Law and Industrial Relations. Routledge.
• Parker, R. E., & Israel, J. H. (2011). The Law of Public Employment. Thomson West.
• Reeves, J. (2006). Cases in Public Human Resource Management. Cengage.
• Stone, K. V. W., & DeSantis, V. S. (2010). Public Sector Employment and Management. Routledge.
• Yasaitis, L. (2018). Labor Relations and Collective Bargaining. Routledge.
• Hirsch, B. T. (2011). The Economics of Employee Relations. Journal of Labor Economics, 29(4), 703-754.
• Walsh, J. P. (2013). The Dynamics of Labor-Management Relations. Harvard University Press.
• Kearney, R. C. (2015). Public Sector Employee Rights. Oxford University Press.