Good management or bargaining in bad faith

Good management or bargaining in bad faith       Collective bargaining is a procedure in which the employees organize collectively and bargain with the management regarding the conditions of the workplace. It is a formal process, which consists of negotiation and the consultation between the management and the workers, to accept an agreement that is mutually agreed by all. (International labor organization, n. d)
The city management has employed police officers who come under the civil service system. Since the local government in the above state has collective bargaining in the public sector, the officers in the non-supervisory positions are also represented by PBA (Public Benevolent Association). The city of Sunbelt has a council of five members in its management. The council’s aim is to reduce the budget of the city by bargaining with the unions hard over their salary and fringe benefits. The city management orders the union members i. e.; trash collectors and other public work employees to work for eight hours during the day and not go home even if they finish their work before hand. The department of public works follows a two-tier system in which it protects the salaries, benefits of the currently employed workers but for those who are newly employed, receive a low salary, and they have to pay a high proportion of their health benefit costs.
The case does not reflect any problem in the relationship between the management and the union because the management will obviously want to reduce its costs and increase the benefits. For that, it will want to reduce their payment of salary. The already employed workers have an expertise and therefore it is the responsibility of the management to secure their salary and their needs. As for the newly employed workers, they should be given some incentives to work properly. If they are given a low income at the beginning then they will be boosted to work harder in order to get a higher pay. Such a kind of relationship does not differ from the normal relationships between the management and the union. (Klingner, Nalbandian and Llorens, 2010) In the given case study, the collective bargaining was a combination of three options. They were:
1. Hard bargaining with the PBA,
2. Contract with the country sheriff for police services,
3. Contracting with a private security firm.
The effective in this process was that of hard bargaining with the PBA. Instead of hard bargaining the other two options of contracting with the country sheriff or with a private security firm could have been adopted by the management. Hard bargaining is considered the best strategy in this situation because it involves:
1. Proposing a tired contract offering lower pay and benefits to new officers than current ones,
2. Routinely challenging police officer request for disability retirement and workers compensation for injuries suspected of being caused by outside employment
3. Hiring civilian employees to do office work and putting all sworn officers on the street,
4. Proposing early retirement provisions to reduce lower personnel costs by reducing the number of senior officers.
The two other options could have been considered. They are:
1. Contracting with the sheriff for police services,
2. Contracting with a private security firm.  (Klinger, Nalbandian and Llorens, 2010)
There are different challenges faced during this agreement. The decision was to undertake hard bargaining. It was also mentioned that if hard bargaining was unsuccessful then with the approval of the council, any of the other two options could be pursued. It was found that the PBA had stirred the public against this decision thereby restricting the council’s decision against the proposal and filing a charge for unfair labor practices with the state collective bargaining regulatory agency alleging that the proposal violated the good faith requirement. These challenges are normal because whenever the management takes any decision and it does not favor the labor class then the labor class gets furious and files cases against the management. In day-to-day life, also we can see strikes taking place, which are a result of such disputes between the management and the union. (Klinger, Nalbandian and Llorens, 2010)
There are certain personal and public factors that must be taken into account while determining the course of action. The workers must be given a chance to participate in the collective bargaining process, which will help to reduce the uncertainty and instability in the workplace. It should be seen that the workers are motivated to participate in the process. Instead of managers being dealt with one by one, they should be considered into one and join the process. Adequate wages and work conditions should be ensured to the workers. Both the parties should negotiate and reach a conclusion that is “ in good faith”. (Collective bargaining procedures, December 18, 2009 and International labor organization, n. d)

References:
1. Klingner, D. E., Nalbandian, J., & Llorens, J. (2010). Case study: “ Good management or bargaining in bad faith”. Public Personnel Management (6th Ed.). Pearson; Prentice Hall.
2. International labor organization. (n. d). ilofip. Retrieved on June10, 2010 from: http://www. ilofip. org/GPGs/Collective%20Bargaining. pdf
3. Collective bargaining procedures. (December 18, 2009). ers. dol. govt. Retrieved on June 10, 2010 from: http://www. ers. dol. govt. nz/bargaining/procedures. html