Collective bargaining

According to Donald et al. (2009), collective bargaining entails a set of techniques in which employees are engaged in the negotiation and the administration of their conditions in their jobs. The context for State and federal law determine how collective bargaining dispute resolution formed to deal with issues pertaining to labour.

In this case, study on the Sunbelt city, the relationship between the management and the union was not in good terms. This is exhibited through the defeat of three council members and their place taken by the newcomers. These new comers managed to win the seat on the platform of keeping taxes down and ensuring that government operations run smoothly. In addition, the movement of business owners and some of the retirees from Sunbelt city to south for search of good economic conditions where they will be able to pay low taxes demonstrate this bad relationship. The reason for the differences emanated from failure to engage the unions in the collective bargaining of the employee’s salry and benefits. This relationship to some extend differed to that of management and union in the public sector since the management bargained hard in this collective bargaining, a different situation in the private sectors. Public sector requires that the process of collective bargaining be referenced from the constitution and statutory foundation that allow employees to collectively negotiate their terms with the management, their public and even the legislators. The collective bargaining should take place in a standardized procedure and employees need to demonstrate their relative powers through things like sanctions process over employment practice and policy through ritual.

In this case, the bargaining process was at times smooth while at time conflict marred with differences emerging between the management and the union representative especially to the Police Benevolent Association (PBA). The management successfully managed to bargain hard in reducing the city budget. It used a threat of privatizing and outsourcing as an avenue to compel or renegotiate contracts for the solid waste and public waste, which went through. This saw, under the new contract, working hours of trash collectors extended to eight hours while public works employed resorted to adjustment of their salary and benefits. On the other hand, PBA was against the decision of the management as not acting in bargaining in good faith, a position that was refuted by the hearer of the case. The process in one way was effective in the sense that it was the least risky step that could be taken to ensure that budget expenses are reduced and that the level of taxes leveled on the residents is reduced to ensure that businesses thrived. To quell these disagreements between the management and the unions, the process of collective bargaining should have been done in an open manner with both sides expressing their point of view rather than the management alone being seen to impose the decision in the affairs of the employees without necessarily seeking their views. Furthermore, the process could have also incorporated the requirements of the law so that public interests be considered in the negotiations. In this situation, hard bargaining although not fully supported, for this situation, it was good since it was aimed at reducing the unnecessary costs that are paid to the employees outside its mandate. For instance, injuries caused by outside employment should not be the burden of the city to cater for. In addition, the proposal of early retirement provisions to reduce personnel costs could help in ensuring that expenses are reduced. Yes, other options could be considered like contracting the services with the county sheriff’s office and private security companies. However, these alternative options could not be supported by the public due to the corruption allegations and fear of their safety respectively.

In any negotiations, it is imperative that in one way or another differences emerge as an amicable solution is searched (Fowler, 1986). This case was not an exceptional as it faced some challenges in reaching their decisions. One of the challenges faced was from the PBA which accused the management of failing to uphold to good faith bargaining. To them, the proposal by the management was invalid as they were unfair labour practice since their service and employment was under the statutory law and therefore needed to follow the statutory law in collective bargaining. However, the hearer who supported the management nullified this allegation by the PBA that indeed the decision was in good faith. Furthermore, two council members were forced to come out of the negotiation portion by the PBA, which was not in support of the views of the management. In addition, the department of Sherriff came under harsh criticism from the office of the attorney for perpetrating bribery and protecting drug dealers and gamblers in the county. Therefore, these challenges are normal in any collective bargaining venture as there must be winners and loser and therefore, every side works hard to ensure that they emerge the winners.
In determining the course of action to take, both personal and public factors play a role. Public factors include abiding to the process of law and ritual. The scope of bargaining referring to certain law permits requires to be negotiated during the collective bargaining should be identified and the scope be respected and abided. For instance, the prices should be consistence with the constitutional provision in that it should enable the employees to negotiate their demands with other arms of government and the public. Standardized procedures should be followed and employees are allowed to demonstrate their power through sanctions (Salamon, 1987). Agreement reached in the collective bargaining is binding to all parties and should be adhered to. When it comes to the personal factors, the decisions made should be in tandem with the interest of the public and should be done in good faith without any malice.

References

Donald, K., John N., & Jared L. (2009). Public personnel management, 6^th edition. Longman publishers.

Fowler, A. (1986). Effective Negotiation. Institute of Personnel Management, London.

Salamon, M. (1987). Industrial Relations Theory and Practice, Prentice Hall, London.