This Instructor's Manual, to accompany



Download 0,88 Mb.
Page9/10
Date conversion13.09.2017
Size0,88 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10
Duration

(Mos.)
First-Year

Wage Increases

Subsequent

Increases
COLA

Holidays

Vacations
Pension
Insurance
SUB
Work Rules
Overtime
New Technology
Other

Estimated

Total Cost
SUMMARY OF CONTRACT PROPOSALS AND ESTIMATED COSTS

Language Incremental Costs

Union Security

Duration

(Mos.)
First-Year

Wage Increases

Subsequent

Increases

COLA

Holidays

Vacations
Pension
Insurance

SUB
Work Rules

Overtime
New Technology
Other
Estimated

Total Cost

(For Use When Students Do Manual Contract Costing)



Memorandum to Mock Bargaining Students -- D.G. Barnhouse,

Manual Contract Costing

TO: Students


FROM: Professor __________
DATE: __________
SUBJ: Instructions Concerning the Mock Collective

Bargaining Exercise

This memorandum provides important information concerning the mock collective bargaining exercise rules, procedures, and requirements.
1. In the period prior to the beginning of the formal bargaining session you should formulate demands and proposals, and consider your bargaining strategy. You should read the D.G. Barnhouse material including your company or union supplementary memos. You are urged to spend at least two hours meeting in your groups prior to the game as well.
2. Actual bargaining will take place on __________________ in various assigned rooms.
3. The strike deadline is ______ on the day of the bargaining. Any group that has not reached settlement by that time will write a ten-page paper (each team member) explaining your strategy during the strike.
4. A memorandum signed by each union and management team member, describing the terms of the settlement, is to be handed in to your instructor no later than ______ on the day of bargaining. You will receive a format for this memo in class. All students should be prepared to discuss the settlement, strategy, and tactics of their negotiations in class on ________.

5. Professor __________ will judge the agreements reached from the standpoints of rank-and-file members and the CEO of the firm. If there is reason to believe that either the rank and file or the CEO would reject the agreement, it will be returned to the negotiating teams for reconsideration.


6. During bargaining do not manufacture self-serving facts about the case. This detracts from the realism of the exercise.
7. You are free to schedule meetings or to communicate to your opposing team in writing prior to the formal negotiating session if you so desire.
8. Please do not make a big issue out of any inconsistencies in the accounting. Complete and entirely accurate information is not always present, even in the most effective and well-run firms. There are a few small differences between the cost and accounting data on the CBG disk and in the tables (in Appendix A). Students should consider the CBG disk data to be the official information.


9. No later than __________ on __________, each union team will submit to Professor __________ in a sealed envelope a statement outlining:
a. the least the union will be willing to accept rather than calling a strike;
b. the package the union reasonably hopes to settle for;
Each management team will submit a statement outlining:
a. the most the company will grant rather than taking a strike;
b. the package the company reasonably hopes to settle for.
These statements should include economic and noneconomic items. Costs should be estimated for the economic items in the packages outlining a and b. These costs figures should estimate the incremental costs of the new contract (including any costs from a COLA).
The contents of the envelope should be kept in strict confidence by the teams. What is contained in the envelopes is not binding on the teams. New considerations may arise during the negotiations which require a revision of the original estimates.
Your grade on this exercise will depend heavily on the clarity and completeness of the cost estimates you turn in before and after the negotiations and on how well you engage in serious bargaining during the exercise.


The Debriefing of the D.G. Barnhouse Mock Bargaining Exercise --After Negotiations


I have used the following procedure to discuss with students their experiences and the outcomes of the mock bargaining exercise. Note: I recommend the same debriefing procedure whether or not the CBG contract costing disk is used as part of the exercise.
I spend one whole class period discussing the mock bargaining experience with students after they have negotiated. Prior to the start of this class, for every student I make copies of the contract summary page turned in to me after the negotiations concluded by each negotiating team. At the start of class I hand out this packet of contract summaries. (An alternative is to put each of the contract summaries onto an overhead transparency.) I then spend the first part of the debriefing session reviewing with the class the major features of each team's settlement and the issues that led to a strike in any of the teams that experienced a strike.
A comparison across the contracts allows the instructor to point out the diversity across the settlements. I ask each management team whether their settlement followed strategy one or two as outlined in the memo from Barnhouse included in the supplementary management materials. Namely, I ask the teams whether they thought they had agreed to a settlement that entailed a reinvestment at Grandville (and the associated cost savings asked for by Barnhouse in this approach) or whether their intent was to move to Newton. Some management teams agree to very costly settlements yet expect to stay in Grandville. I ask these teams to explain what they will say to Barnhouse, who might find such a settlement unacceptable. In some cases where management expects to move the new technology to Newton the union side is surprised to learn of this plan. I then ask the union what they were expecting and what they could do when management aggressively starts moving new technology to Newton. During the debriefing I also point out any important contract costing mistakes made by any of the teams.
After reviewing and comparing the settlements, I ask the students if they had pursued either a grand strategy or negotiating style strategies during bargaining. For example, some of the teams have well thought out strategies, while others seem to play it as it goes. During bargaining some of the teams divide up and play out a good cop -- bad cop bargaining style either accidentally or intentionally. I then ask the teams to give examples of the four subprocesses (Walton and McKersie) as they appeared during their mock negotiations.
I conclude the debriefing by giving the students my impressions regarding how mock bargaining differs from real labor negotiations. I remind them that their strike penalty (the ten- page paper) is very different from the income losses that both sides would suffer from a real strike. Typically, in mock bargaining the students act overly cordial and rational with their bargaining opponents. They often spend much of their time exchanging cost estimates. Mock negotiations rarely inspire the full range of emotions that arise in real bargaining, although sometimes students get drawn up dramatically into the experience.


Overall, students gain a lot from mock bargaining. They often find it to be one of the most rewarding parts of the course. I also have found that students do not need much prodding to take the exercise seriously. They are quickly drawn into the exercise and start acting out appropriate roles.

Instructions to Instructors Concerning Queen City Mock Bargaining Exercise Preparation

1. I hand out the Memorandum to Mock Bargaining Students -- Queen City and discuss it with students two weeks before the start of face-to-face mock bargaining. Students also should be reminded that the basic Queen City mock bargaining material is provided in Appendix B of the text.


2. I put three students on each bargaining team (i.e., three union and three management team members). I give the students the opportunity to submit to me their preferred bargaining team members and their opposition team if the other side agrees in advance of when I hand out the materials described above. I have in the past occasionally assigned all teams on a random basis. But, I have found that students enjoy and tend to get more out of the exercise if they can bargain with or against students they know. Knowing other team members makes it easier for the students to meet before class and prepare for the mock bargaining exercise (see below). I do assign students who do not have a strong preference to a bargaining team and try to avoid the impression that students are expected to know people in the class and have a bargaining team preference.
3. When using both the D.G. Barnhouse and the Queen City mock bargaining exercises during the same term (I do this regularly) I recommend assigning the students to the bargaining teams in the following manner. I encourage the students to stay with the same bargaining team they bargained with during the Barnhouse exercise. I do allow students upon request to move to another team if they did not get along with other members of their team. I have the teams switch sides (i.e., the management teams at Barnhouse bargain with Queen City as union, and vice versa). Note: I do change who each team bargains against. I do not let the teams in Queen City bargaining against the same team they bargained against in Barnhouse.
4. The form "Queen City--Contract Proposal" which should be handed out to assist students in reporting their proposals and the costs of these proposals as required in the memorandum. Students can use the form "Queen City--Contract Settlement," which students can use to summarize their contract settlement once they have reached agreement. Note, I do not ask students to engage in contract cost estimates either before or after the Queen City exercise, although I remind them that contract costs should be taken into account as they bargain.
5. A strike is the impasse resolution option and not interest arbitration in my use of Queen City. I do not make use of the arbitration options described in the exercise in Appendix B. I do this since my classes are so large; administering the arbitration options is not feasible.
6. I have used two different schedules to determine when and for how long the union and management teams should bargain face to face. In some classes face to face mock bargaining occurs on one day (usually a Saturday). In this case, students are told to previously assigned bargaining rooms at 10:00 a.m. and are told that they must reach a settlement or announce impasse by 2:00 p.m. that day. I also have had classes that meet and bargain during two successive normally scheduled class sessions (when these class sessions each are at least 1 hour and 15 minutes long). In the latter case, students must reach settlement or announce impasse by the end of the second class session.

7. While students are engaged in face-to-face bargaining I (and my teaching assistant) observe them and move across the various bargaining groups. I use these observations and the requirements described in the Memorandum to Students as the basis for student grades.




Memorandum to Students Providing Instructions for the

Queen City Mock Bargaining Exercise

TO: Members of the __________ Class


FROM: Professor ____________
DATE: _______________
SUBJ: Instructions Concerning the Queen City Mock Bargaining

This memorandum provides important information concerning the Queen City mock collective bargaining game procedures and requirements.


1. In the period prior to the beginning of the formal bargaining session you should formulate demands and proposals, and consider your bargaining strategy. You should read the Queen City material. You are urged to spend at least two hours meeting with your team prior to the game as well.
2. Actual bargaining will take place on ____________________ in various assigned rooms. You will have three hours to negotiate an agreement.
3. Any group that does not reach a negotiated settlement will write a ten-page paper (each team member) explaining your strategy during the strike.
4. By ___________________________ each union and management team should turn in to Professor ____________ an envelope containing your team's planned contract proposals by issue. You should use the Queen City -- Contract Proposal to report your proposals. It is not necessary to report the costs of the proposals, although you should consider costs and budget constraints when negotiating.
The contents of the envelope described above should be kept in strict confidence by the teams. What is contained in the envelopes is not binding on the teams. New considerations may arise during the negotiations.
5. A contract summary (using a reporting form to be supplied by Professor ____________) signed by each union and management team member, describing the terms of the settlement, to be handed in to

Professor __________ at the conclusion of the bargaining session. All students should be prepared to discuss the settlement, strategy, and tactics of their negotiations in class on __________.


6. Professor ____________ will judge the agreements reached from the standpoints of rank and file members and the mayor of Queen City. If there is reason to believe that either the rank and file or the mayor would reject the agreement, it will be returned to the negotiating teams for reconsideration.
7. During bargaining do not manufacture self-serving facts about the case. This detracts from the realism of the exercise.
8. You are free to schedule meetings or to communicate to your opposing team in writing prior to the formal negotiating session if you so desire.

Your grade on this exercise will depend on how well you follow the above instructions and how well you engage in serious bargaining during the exercise.

Queen City -- Contract Proposal

Contract


Duration
Wage Increase

COLA

Holidays

Vacations

Medical, Life, or

Dental Insurance

Shift Premium

Longevity Pay

Sick Leave

Job Security

Role of Seniority

Discipline Language

Uniform Allowance

Public Review Board

Other
Queen City -- Contract Settlement

Contract Duration

Wage Increase



COLA

Holidays



Vacations

Medical, Life, or Dental Insurance

Shift Premium

Longevity



Pay

Sick Leave

Job Security

Role of Seniority

Discipline Language

Uniform Allowance

Public Review Board

Other


The Debriefing of the Queen City Mock Bargaining Exercise --

After Negotiations

I have used the following procedure to discuss with students their experiences and the outcomes of the Queen City police mock bargaining exercise.


I spend one whole class period discussing the mock bargaining experience with students after they have negotiated. Prior to the start of this class, for every student I make copies of the contract summary page each of the negotiating teams turned in to me after their negotiations concluded. At the start of class I hand out this packet of contract summaries. (An alternative is to put each of the contract summaries onto an overhead transparency.) I then spend the first part of the debriefing session reviewing with the class the major features of each team's settlement and the issues that led to a strike in any of the teams that experienced a strike.
A comparison across the contracts allows the instructor to point out the diversity across the settlements. After reviewing and comparing the settlements, I ask the students if they had pursued either a grand strategy or negotiating style strategies during bargaining. For example, some of the teams have well thought out strategies, while others seem to play it as it goes. During bargaining, divide up and play out a good cop-bad cop bargaining style either accidentally or intentionally. I then ask the teams to give examples of the four subprocesses (Walton and McKersie) as they appeared during their mock negotiations.
As with my use of the D.G. Barnhouse mock bargaining exercise, when students are mock bargaining the Queen City exercise, I and my teaching assistant(s) visit each of the bargaining pairs during bargaining and observe their negotiations. I do this for several purposes. The visits help me formulate a grade for each student (along with my grade of the materials they are required to turn in to me -- see the memos I distribute with instructions for the students). Observations of their bargaining also serves to add to the seriousness of the exercise and prevent any students from goofing off (few choose to do so anyway). By observing the bargaining groups I also learn about some mistakes they are making during bargaining. Some groups or individuals act inappropriately, some release too much information to their opposition, some teams engage in too much open discussion and disagreement with team members.
In my recent classes, I have used both the D.G. Barnhouse and the Queen City mock bargaining exercises. I use Barnhouse earlier in the semester. At the Queen City exercise debriefing I ask the students to compare and contrast what it was like to bargain in the two cases. I try to get the students to distinguish between differences that arose because Barnhouse was in the private sector and Queen City entailed public sector bargaining. In this way, I try to use the mock bargaining exercises to bring home some of the differences that arise in bargaining in the public and private sectors.


I also ask the students if the Queen City mock bargaining was different because they had already bargained the Barnhouse exercise. Here, I bring out whether they had improved their negotiating technique as a result of what they learned in the Barnhouse exercise. I have often noticed that the students do improve their technique. For example, many students learn that they should not openly discuss negotiating strategy or potential offers in front of the opposing side. Many of the teams do this during Barnhouse but do not act this way in the Queen City exercise.
As in the Barnhouse exercise, I conclude Queen City debriefing by giving the students my impressions regarding how mock bargaining differs from real labor negotiations. I point out that they do not experience the sort of end run or political bargaining and gamesmanship that commonly occurs in the public sector. I remind them that their strike penalty (the ten-page paper) is very different from the impasse resolution techniques that commonly exist in the public sector.
Overall, students gain a lot from mock bargaining. They often find it to be one of the most rewarding parts of the course. I also have found that students do not need much prodding to take the exercise seriously. They are quickly drawn into the exercise and start acting out appropriate roles.


Arbitration Case No. 1

Arbitration Decision

Discussion

An arbitrator's first responsibility is to read and interpret the terms of a contract and to apply the plain and ordinary meaning to its wording. The word "may" followed by the phrase "in their opinion" contained in Article 10 1(d) clearly gives the company the discretion to decide whether anyone on the callback list is qualified to fill a vacant job. In this case, the company decided maintenance mechanics were not qualified for the dual head extruder position because of the complex skills and experience required for this job. Furthermore there is no evidence that the company acted in an arbitrary fashion in reaching this judgment. The company had the right to form its opinion, it did so, and as provided in the contract it then had the discretion to hire a new employee. The quality or subsequent job performance of the new hire is not relevant to the issue in this case.



The Award

The company did not violate the collective bargaining agreement when it hired Mitchell Carey as a dual head/primary extruder operator. The grievance is therefore denied.



Case 1 -- Discussion Questions
1. What is the company's contractual responsibility in this case?
The critical language is in Article 10 1(d), which reads, "the Company may select from the callback list the employee who, in their opinion, is the best qualified for that job; and if, in their opinion, no one is qualified, the Company may hire a new employee."
2. Who has the burden of proof of the current employee's (Mr. Seiss's) ability or inability to perform the vacant job?
The language in Article 10 1(d) gives the company discretion in deciding whether they choose to select from the callback list and deciding who is the best qualified for the job. Thus, the burden falls on the union to establish Mr. Seiss's ability to perform the job.
3. Assume you are the arbitrator. What would you decide?
See the arbitrator's decision above.
4. Assume you were brought in as a human resource consultant to the company and the union following this case. What changes in practices would you recommend to avoid disputes like this in the future?

The company has an interest in having well-trained employees available to fill new highly skilled job openings. The company also would like to keep up the morale of its hourly employees and could do so by providing opportunities for advancement and promotion for these employees. The union also has an interest in the career development of its members. The parties could develop training programs and career development counseling for the hourly work force. Improved information regarding job vacancies and upgrading opportunities would help satisfy the hourly employees and the union, while also serving company interests.





Arbitration Case No. 2

Arbitrator Decision
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10


The database is protected by copyright ©sckool.org 2016
send message

    Main page