Agreement on Ground Rules

This allegation represents an attempt by the Commission to increase its power and oversight of the parties and negotiations. Fortunately, the attempt failed. If a violation had been found, negotiations for employers and unions would have become less imaginative and longer. Parties may be reluctant to establish ground rules for fear that they will later be sued against them. Or, perhaps worse, the ground rules would become more detailed and legalistic, which would only help solve the real problems of the negotiations. The rules can be written or transmitted orally. When the parties work together over a longer period of time, especially when trust is low, they often use written ground rules. If the parties have already established a positive employment relationship or plan to meet only once or twice, they are more likely to apply oral ground rules. [13] The parties have commenced negotiations. Financial issues were a major stumbling block to an agreement.

The employer, citing economically difficult times, refused to increase the financial costs of the contract. The union, for its part, demanded additional wages and benefits, including general wage increases for each contract year. The employer responded „unwaveringly“ that there would be no such wage increases. The employer repeatedly rejected the wage-related proposals. As the employer did not want to increase wages, it did not make any financial proposals. Other points that the union often proposes as part of the ground rules are: At the beginning of negotiations, the employer and the union established certain ground rules. One of these ground rules was: Often, the moderator or mediator should help the parties develop rules that guide the group members` interactions with the press. This includes guidelines on who speaks to the press, who is responsible for writing press releases, how often reports are published, and what kind of information should be provided. Participants may also agree not to disclose the content of a likely settlement until all parties involved have agreed to it. [7] Rules of procedure may also define the role of observers, determine the closed or open nature of meetings, and establish means of dealing with the news media. The basic rules of mediation generally require that the conversation that takes place in the meeting room be confidential, unless an explicit agreement is reached to disclose certain information.

In many cases, the parties agree not to characterize another party`s position in public statements or in conversations with the press, even if that party withdraws from the negotiations. [5] When participants negotiate on public policy issues, it is important that the process be accountable and verifiable. However, overly public negotiation can reduce creativity by increasing participants` reluctance to present new ideas and openly discuss issues. [6] These issues should be taken into account when establishing the ground rules. Ground rules are usually one of the first points that the parties negotiate when the negotiation process begins. The purpose of the basic rules is to speed up and facilitate the negotiation process. They should never become an obstacle or cause of delay in the process. They can (and perhaps should) be agreed in a short time, at the first session. Written or oral ground rules Depending on the history and culture of the bargaining unit and the relationship of the parties involved, written or oral ground rules may be appropriate. It is not necessary to always have basic rules in writing. Here`s a typical list of standard ground rules: Management Preferences It`s not uncommon for management to come up with a list of ground rules that hinder the process, give them undue control over the bargaining table, or minimize the role of members.

In addition, an excessive amount of time can be wasted if management insists on its version of the basic rules. Your points might look like this: The ground rules are agreements about expected behavior in meetings. The purpose of the ground rules is to make the group`s standards explicit about the interaction of team members, thereby preventing or reducing misunderstandings and disagreements. The ground rules can vary greatly by department, committee or group, but they should always help the group work together effectively. As the saying goes, sometimes the rules are supposed to be broken. This seems to be one of those cases. Different rules apply to processes and procedures. For example, the basic rules of procedure for mediation could stipulate that people are expected to arrive on time for meetings, that alternate representatives must be approved before the meeting, and that observers are allowed (or not). Rules for managing co-management may also be introduced.

For example, should participants raise their hands and wait for someone to call them, or should they speak freely? [3] Other process rules relate to how draft documents are distributed and reviewed, and how meetings can be postponed if necessary. [4] Recently, we have seen very well-paid business consultants/anti-union lawyers specialize in this inferior behavior. Their goal is to sow the seeds of frustration early around the ground rules, rather than trying to reach an agreement. This is a disservice to both parties and an abuse of the process. No one should fall into the trap of this disgusting tactic. Instead, it should be used to educate members and motivate them to act. For example, the behavioral basis for negotiation or mediation may be that people should speak one after the other, listen carefully to their opponents` statements, or treat each other with dignity and respect. As a general rule, the parties agree that no one is allowed to dominate a discussion or claim special privileges unless the entire group agrees to grant them. Derogatory language or attacks on the values or culture of others are generally not allowed. [2] The case is interesting because, in its analysis, it prompted the ALJ to articulate the realities of the negotiations. It was clear that the ALJ did not believe in the employer`s reasoning, but was not willing to characterize the proposal as a violation of the law, let alone a violation of the ground rules.

The ALJ analysis provides a good basis for understanding the interaction between ground rules and actual negotiations. Parties that agree on basic rules almost always use them to advance their position. Therefore, the „inspiration“ identified by the ALJ is what motivates the negotiations and makes it an inherently fascinating process. For example, parties often present non-economic as economic proposals, based on an imaginative description, as this helps to move the parties to reach an agreement. Trying to make the process rigid through such a claim would only dampen imagination and could make it more difficult to reach an agreement. Background: The previous collective agreement Almost all types of dispute resolution procedures are based on some form of ground rules. The basic rules are the standards of conduct for mediation, arbitration and consensus-building. Although they are often tacit, they are also generally used in direct negotiation processes. In general, the parties should discuss the ground rules together and develop a package on which they all agree. The rules should be adopted by the group at the first or second meeting, and any questions or concerns regarding the basic rules should be addressed at an early stage.

It is crucial that all parties accept the ground rules and agree to apply them. The first confirmation of a rule violation can be formulated as a reminder. If there are other violations, reminders can become more haunting: „You have violated the basic rule that prohibits personal attacks. I ask you to refrain from making such comments. The Chairperson may ask the participant to leave the meeting if the violation persists. This is important because if even a person refuses to adhere to them, they become meaningless. If the moderators do not set the tone for strict adherence to the points at the beginning of the process, it may become impossible to apply them later. .