Student’s Name:

Instructor’s Name:

Course Code and Name:

University:

Date the assignment is due:

Contents

Question 2: examine the process of negotiation. Is negotiation an ethical practice or is it all about winning? Evaluate. 2

Question 4: Trade unions are a negative influence on work practices. They are an anachronism from another era and do not belong in today’s work environment. Discuss. 6

References. 10

Leisink, Peter, 1999, Globalization and labor relations, Edward Elgar, Massachusetts. 10

Question 2: examine the process of negotiation. Is negotiation an ethical practice or is it all about winning? Evaluate.

            In everyday life, people negotiate. People negotiate in the workplace, at home, in social settings, and in business. In order for decisions to be made, people have to enter into negotiations with the people who are going to be influenced by the decisions made. It is difficult to imagine a world of business where negotiations do not exist. Negotiation is an ethical practice. It is not merely about winning; it is about given and take.

ORDER NOW

Negotiation is a decision-making model that has been explained using different theoretical frameworks. One of these approaches is the concession/convergence approach. In this approach, negotiation is perceived as an ethical practice. The only problem with this approach is that problems of determinism, power, and symmetry arise. The theory fails to consider the process of negotiation as it is practically experienced by the negotiating parties.

            Zartman (1977 p.625) says that a good starting point for all negotiators is the creation of a formula that is jointly agreeable. The formula forms a point of reference for all the parties. It creates a notion of justice that everyone who is involved associates with. It defines a common perception through which the details being implemented are based. Power is needed in order for the values that support the negotiation process to stick together until a solution arrives at the end of the negotiation process.

            It is unfortunate that even in the most well-organized negotiations, whereas some parties are comfortable negotiating, others are afraid that ‘the case may be lost’ long before the declaration is made in the form of the outcome of the negotiations. This may arise as a result of problems with representation, the balance of power, and the intricate details of how the terms of negotiations are being discussed.

            Although negotiation is an ethical undertaking, not everyone is a great negotiator.  In normal cases, a negotiator represents the interests of a larger group. However, one’s individual interests may form the basis of negotiations. A good example is a situation in which two owners of sole proprietorship businesses are negotiating about a business merger.

                        Lall (1966,  p. 287) notes that in cases where a negotiator represents the interests of a larger social, political, or religious group, it is important to send the best negotiator into the negotiating table. A good negotiator understands his strengths and weaknesses as far as negotiation skills are concerned. This is the only way that they can manage to create workable strategies and argue for the best possible deals. In other words, for negotiations to be considered a truly ethical undertaking and to be perceived as such by all parties, one needs to develop the best strategies, techniques, and principles.

            Nadler (2003, p. 536) indicates that negotiations are not based on any set law, policy or regulation. The only principle that binds negotiators is trust and a sense of oneness of purpose. In such circumstances, ethics plays an important role in preventing the negotiations from collapsing before an agreement is reached. Negotiators ought to be good communicators who understand the nature of human interaction. They also need to be knowledgeable so that they are able to understand all the issues that arise during the negotiation process. When some of the negotiators lack the requisite knowledge on the matter under discussion, the negotiations cannot be said to be founded on an ethical platform.

            There is a way in which a typical negotiation process is structured. An understanding of this process is very important. Sometimes, negotiations are done on competitive grounds. In this case, predictability of the outcomes is very important since it enables a negotiator to raise concerns in the course of the deliberations in order to ensure that the predicted outcome seems to be an attractive one. Additionally, competitive negotiations are also characterized by sending and receiving of signals that are conveyed strategically. Every negotiator needs to know how to be part of this intricately covert communication process.

            Competitive negotiation is thought to be more about winning rather than ethics. In a way, this may appear to be the case. However, some situations are such that no other measure seems plausible other than a competitive environment. However, the best negotiators can still work out an ethical plan that brings ethical considerations to the forefront even during the competition.

Negotiators employ tactics too. Some of these tactics may be thought to be very unethical. The best negotiators know how to use counter-tactics in order to level out the negotiation playground. When some negotiators are unable to notice and respond to tactics in a beneficial manner, the negotiation process may be said to be unethical since the notion of justice becomes eroded.

ORDER NOW

The ethical basis of negations has been explored in great by scholars of communication theory, negotiation theory, game theory, and conflict resolution theory. There are many disciplines that explore the art of negotiation in great detail, including psychology, linguistics, and sociology

According to Guasco (2007, p. 94) negotiators should be able to look at the bigger picture in the issue about which negotiations are being made. Effective negotiating starts with certain fundamental truths relating to each of the negotiator’s situation. The main problems with many negotiation processes begin with a lack of understanding of the common grounds that are held by all the negotiators. This situation arises whenever the negotiators are held hostage by the negotiation process instead of being in control of it.

In order for a negotiation process to be considered to be ethical, two important aspects have to be considered: the substance and the process. The substance entails the issue, item or situation that is the basis of the negotiation process. Knowledge of the substance of every negotiation enables each negotiates to know when the deal that is about to be reached is a good one or a bad one. Ignorance of the substance of the negotiation creates mistrust and feelings of betrayal among negotiators. Ethical negotiators must postpone negotiations until everyone on the negotiating table understand the meaning, implications and social-political underpinnings of the matter under discussion.

The negotiation process is about the steps that everyone agrees should be followed in order for an agreement to be said to have been reached. When everyone understands the process, an air of certainty about an outcome being reached at some point rents the air. The process of negotiation should entail the timeframe, the meaning of satisfaction for all the parties and the need for consistency throughout the negotiation process.

Question 4: Trade unions are a negative influence on work practices. They are an anachronism from another era and do not belong in today’s work environment. Discuss.

            Trade unions of today are being formed in an era of globalization. In such an environment, the concept of a universal union has been proposed, either overtly or covertly. Trade unions are viewed by some people as an anachronism from another era. However, they continue to play an important role in today’s world of labor relations. They are therefore as relevant in today’s globalized workplace as they were when unionism movements were started.

            According to Leisink (1999,p. 112), for the spirit of unionism to work, many people seem to agree that ‘imagined solidarities’ are necessary. Workers have to generate a sense of unity in order to push for a common agenda in oneness. Such a sense of oneness sometimes seems to be fictitious, illusory, imaginary and sometimes, even unattainable. The trade-union solidarity as it exists today has not changed much compared to its traditional conception. Therefore, if the concept of imagined solidarities seems to be unsuccessful today, it is not because the society has changed; rather, it is because something was wrong with this whole idea right from its inception.

            For trade-union solidarity to work in today’s world, the ‘imagined communities’ comprising members of trade union have to be able to generate enough force in order to ensure that the powerful sentiments that are raised result in favorable changed in the workplace. In the past, trade unions have been successful in bringing about better terms for workers. Today, nothing much has changed. Therefore, it seems incorrect to associate trade unionism with the past more than with the present.

            Today, trade unionists come together in order to accomplish certain shared goals. However, sometimes, divergent views arise, a situation that forces unionist leaders to adopt a ‘mechanical solidarity’ approach to the leadership of these unions. This is how the phrase ‘solidarity forever’ was coined. This phrase was traditionally popular with members of the working class who were fighting for better terms of employment. Today, this phrase remains as popular as ever. Whenever members of a union go on strike over the poor working conditions, the element of ‘mechanical solidarity’ is invoked through chants of ‘solidarity forever’. Although such actions by trade union members and leaders are reminiscent of the past, they are an integral part of the present.

            Globalization has brought about socio-economic transformations that seem to have altered the construction of solidarity in the sense that was conceived by trade unionists. Does this mean that trade union has become a relic of the past? According to Lewin (1988, p. 374), the historical mission of trade unionists can be traced to the revolutionary theories of Carl Marx. Traditionally, trade-union activists drew on the wisdom of Marxism in order to unite the working class.

            Today, one of the main reasons why unionism seems to thrive is the tendency by employers to play divisive and diversionary politics by highlighting irrelevant issues while paying no attention to those issues that are of integral importance as far as the welfare of workers is concerned. Employees will always need a voice in order to cushion themselves against disruptive changes and uncomfortable changes that make the workplace a bad place to work in.

            In other words, trade unions are important agencies that play the role of aggregating the interests involving distribution and redistribution of gains and losses. They play an important role in defining the relationship between workers and employers as well as among themselves as providers of labor. Traditionally, the distribution of power among the members of the working class has been shaped by trade unionism. In the absence of trade unions, this power tended to be exploited by employers for their own benefits and obviously, the impoverishment of workers.

            Today, there is a working-class in every society. As long as globalization does not lead to the elimination of this class, trade unions will remain a strong force through which the working class gets a bargaining power on the negotiating table with their employers.  However, trade unions have also traditionally faced a problem of misrepresentation. It is not always the case that the demands made by unionist leaders are representative of the members of the unions. Nineteenth-century Britain, says Gallie, (1996, p. 34), unionism provides a good example, whereby craft unions that represented only a small fraction of the country’s labor force with relative advantages were widely perceived to be representatives of the general world of labor.

            Howell (2005, p. 241) observes that in many European countries, coal miners of the first half of the twentieth century adopted the status of proletarians and were even influential in matters of inspiring discourse and activities relating to collective struggle and collective solidarity. This scenario presents an early manifestation of trade-union crises that were occasioned by mechanical solidarity and lack of proper representation of all working-class members.

            Over the past decade, scholars have concerned themselves with what they refer to as ‘the crisis of trade unionism’ nevertheless, it is better to think of such crises as solvable rather than as representations of past failures that are needlessly being dragged into the contemporary world of labor and industrial relations.

            Today, the most serious problems faced in the task of bringing about better labor relations through trade unions include increasing heterogeneity in the labor force, self-aggregation and a decentralized system of employment regulation to workplace and company levels. This latter problem leads to a scenario where workers are at a crisis when it comes to a matter of pledging their loyalty to their unions.

                        In conclusion, as globalization continues to make the labor market more unstable and segmented, trade unions are perceived to be encouraging more and more negative practices within the workplace. As product markets continue to be more competitive in a globalized world, trade unions are viewed as being unresponsive to the harsh realities of today’s labor relations. For this reason, trade unionists should change their approach to the way in which they seek to represent the workers who belong to these unions. Rather than resist the idea of the existence of a crisis in trade unionism, they should rise to the occasion and modernize trade unions in order to empower them with the task of addressing employees’ needs in today’s globalized workplace.

References

Guasco, M, 2007, Principles of negotiation: strategies, tactics, techniques to reach agreements, Entrepreneur Media, Inc., New York

Gallie, D, 1996, Trade unionism in recession, Oxford University Press, Oxford

Howell, C, 2005, Trade unions and the state: the construction of industrial relations institutions in Britain, Princeton University Press, Princeton

Lall, A, 1966, Modern international negotiation, Columbia University Press, New York

Leisink, Peter, 1999, Globalization and labor relations, Edward Elgar, Massachusetts

Lewin, D,1988, Public sector labor relations: analysis and readings, Routledge, London.

Nadler, J, 2003, ‘Learning Negotiation Skills: Four Models of Knowledge Creation and Transfer’Management Science, Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 529-540.

Zartman, W, 1977, ‘Negotiation as a Joint Decision-Making Process’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 619-638.