The collective agreement bargaining simulation was a success. Factors within our control, such as thorough research and creative strategies, to factors outside our control, such as personalities of opposing members and their knowledge of the issues discussed contributed to the overall success. Frankly, we were amazed at our ability to solve arguments and work under pressure; however, there were some areas where we could have handled better. Overall, the interaction between management and union team was constructive and collectively we reached a common goal.
Before the simulation, we knew this was a distributive bargaining. Therefore, we tried to incorporate interest-based bargaining where we can reduce conflicts by focusing on interests instead of positions and attempt to find a settlement that produces gains for both parties. In order to establish a cooperative relationship, we gave in to their initial demand of 11 paid holidays. The reason behind this was to demonstrate we are knowledgeable of the industry trends and at the same time hoping there may be some momentum built up by settling. Furthermore, because paid holiday is one of the less significant issues. By giving that up, we hoped they would later give in to our other valued demands. However, were disappointed and frustrated as the union team continued with their high demands.
The relationship quickly shifted to accommodation where there was only a moderate amount of respect between the two of us accompanied by limited trust. Although, we would ultimately go back to cooperative relationship, this shift provided evidence to another factor, which was personality of all the members.
There weren¡¦t any authoritarian personality types; people were friendly, trusting and cooperative. No one tired to ...