Verizon has been in talks with the unions for quite some time now. The union members are trying to get verizon to agree on a fair contract that will provide them with benefits and allow verizon employees to be happy at work. Verizon is not as motivated as it should be, so they need more than just verizons best interest in mind when negotiating. Union negotiations have taken place for many years and there are several different approaches you can take when dealing with them.
Current issue at Verizon Wireless Company
Verizon Wireless is a major telecommunication firm in the United States. The company is the market leader in mobile communications. Verizon Wireless is presently involved in a labor dispute. Approximately 45,000 workers who work at Verizon Wireless’ wire lines division and are represented by the union are contemplating striking.
Prices start at $12
Prices start at $11
Prices start at $14
Prices start at $12
The firm is also associated with various trade unions. International Brotherhood Electrical Workers (IBEW) and the Communications Workers of America (CWA) are two examples. An increase in hourly salaries is one of the issues that these unions are pushing for. In addition, the unions are pushing for improved Verizon Wireless employee pensions and healthcare coverage.
Verizon Wireless has seen tremendous growth in its profitability during the past several years. For example, Verizon Wireless profit climbed to $19.1 billion during the previous four years. As a result, top executives at the firm have continuously received larger yearly salary increases and bonuses as a result of these improvements.
Despite the fact that they are the ones who do most of the operational activities that contribute to the business’s profitability, employees at lower levels in Verizon Wireless are not treated similarly to top-level workers. According to Durai (n.d), employers should make certain that unionized staff are fairly compensated and receive increased wage increment and other professional development opportunities.
Verizon Wireless, on the other hand, has not treated its lower-level personnel fairly. Verizon Wireless also fires people in an unfair manner (Campbell, 2011, para. 5). Verizon Wireless fires staff that join the union, for example. In order to discourage workers from joining the employees’ association, Verizon Wireless holds captive audience meetings.
Verizon Wireless is considering influencing non-union employees in order to weaken the strength of employee unions. To do this, Verizon Wireless is discouraging its workers from joining the Union Cards.
In an attempt to discourage its employees from becoming members of the employees’ union, organization management teams should not engage in an unfair recruiting process, according to Durai (n.d, p.538). In addition, firm administration teams must avoid attempting to prevent their employees from forming a trade union unfairly. Verizon Wireless Company, on the other hand, has as its goal to destroy the workers’ association. The poor compensation paid by the business has caused living standards for its staff to decline dramatically. This implies that the company treats its personnel harshly.
The four primary sub-processes of negotiation, as described by Koschmann and Lipsky (2003, p.15), are distributive bargaining, integrative bargaining, intra-organizational bargaining, and attitudinal structuring.
Distributive bargaining tactic
A communication issue arises when contention exists between the employer and employees. According to Kochan and Lipsky (2003, p.15), distributive bargaining entails a negotiation strategy in which the parties are in conflict. The beginning of the negotiation process is marked by a gap between the competing parties.
The sellers have a specific target and resistance point in mind, according to Kohan and Lipsky (2003). These points have an impact on the offers and counteroffers made by the bargainers. The goal point represents each stakeholder’s most attractive objective. The resistant point, on the other hand, depicts the worst possible scenario.
According to Lewicki, Saunders, and Minton (1999), distributive bargaining as a negotiation technique is best suited when one of the participants’ interests is openly opposed. During the bargaining process, the parties involved compete to arrive at an agreement. Existence of a large distance between the two extremes leads to an impasse, according To Kochan and Lipsky (2003, p.16).
This impasse is likely to result in a strike during the negotiations. Verizon Wireless, for example, has a striking employee protest as evidence of an existing gap between employees’ labour demands and the company’s top executive wish. The representatives of the workers walked out of the talks since the management team for the firm was unwilling to grant their demands, despite stating it clearly to them.
The union representatives charged that the company’s executives took a hard line, thus limiting the bargaining process’ effectiveness. According to the union officials, Verizon Wireless was prepared to ignore the firm’s fifty-year-old collective bargaining agreement. In such a case, the union members should consider distributing bargaining. Verizon Wireless has established a contingency plan that aims to minimize disruption to the business operations during the strike.
The strategy is to hire a large number of retirees and management personnel who will replace the union workers who walk out. This shows a profound disregard for employee rights. Instead of creating a contingency strategy, Verizon Wireless and the union representatives should concentrate on building a good contract zone. The probability of the parties reaching an agreement is enhanced when a positive contract zone is established (Kochan & Lipsky, 2003, p.16).
Furthermore, there is an increase in the level of interest among the participants in negotiating with one another. There is a good chance that no employee strike will occur if the Verizon Wireless management team builds a continuous dependent relationship with the union executives. This implies that neither the employees nor the business would be harmed because they are reliant on one another.
This negotiation approach is also known as cooperative bargaining. The method entails negotiating in order to realize a mutual benefit. It is the goal of both parties to reach an agreement that will be shared by the two parties involved, according to Guasco and Robinson (2007, p.66). Comprehensive bargaining is only effective if the negotiating parties avoid exploitation at the start of the process.
The negotiators must also accept the anti-competitive notion. If the negotiators are attempting to establish a shared gain, one approach to do so is to develop a mutually satisfactory agreement. This is referred to as a win-win negotiation (Guasco & Robinson, 2007, p.66).
Integrative negotiation is designed to bring about a situation in which both sides get what they want. In order for cooperative agreement to be successful, a substantial amount of patience is required. According to Kochan and Lipsky (2003), in the event of a mixed-motive scenario, negotiations must establish a trade-off that will help assure that both parties are better off after the exchange.
The personnel of Verizon Wireless were compelled to go on strike due to the company’s management team’s poor treatment in a number of ways. For example, while the lower-level workers were poorly compensated, the top-level managers were lavishly rewarded. Furthermore, as part of their contract negotiations with management teams at Verizon Wireless, union officials are also pushing for improved pension and healthcare benefits for employees.
Verizon Wireless, on the other hand, is unwilling to give up its profits because it would result in lowering workers’ financial bonuses. Despite the fact that it is the lower-level employees who have worked hard to keep the business healthy, Verizon Wireless management refuses to boost their earnings. It’s time for Verizon Wireless management to work towards ensuring that lower-level personnel benefit from their efforts.
The aim of this plan is to address internal disputes, such as the labor conflicts in Verizon Wireless Company. It’s designed to bring together employees and management teams around a shared viewpoint. Kochan and Lipsky (2003, pam.18) note that most negotiators do not work independently. They are, nevertheless , the spokesperson for a certain group of people.
The majority of the time, unions are the ones who take part in negotiations throughout organizations. In Verizon Wireless’s example, employees’ interests are represented by trade unions such as CWA and IBEW. Representatives have a duty to communicate with their followers.
As a result of the large number of individuals, there is a high risk of conflict of interest owing to the wide range of opinions. As a result, there will be differences among the union members. The union should resolve any differences with the members of the group before the representative begins negotiations. This implies that an intra-organizational bargaining must take place, which entails negotiation within specific teams. As a result, there is a significant chance of the talks’ succeeding.
Management teams of organizations should not only focus on distributive and integrative bargaining, but they should also consider attitudinal change throughout the negotiation process. According to Lewicki, Saunders, and Barry (2010), the negotiators’ attitude toward each other has an impact on the outcome of the bargaining process.
The negotiators should come up with plans on how to positively influence each other’s viewpoints in order to satisfy their requirements. The end result is the creation of a mutual benefit. Developing confidence between the parties is an aspect of attitudinal change in negotiation. Development of trust aids in excellent conduction of integrative negotiations, according to Lewicki, Saunders and Minton (1999).
According to Kochan and Lipsky (2003, p.18), the negotiation process might result in an increase or a decrease in trust between the parties depending on how the parties are treated. Verizon Wireless employees have developed a negative attitude toward their union members. This is due to the unfair treatment that the business delivers to its workers. This may have long-term consequences for the relationship between the company and its employees.
Context of negotiation
There are many different situations that make up the negotiation process. One of these contexts is the connection between parties. The connection between the negotiators has an influence on the outcome of the negotiation, according to Lewicki, Saunders, and Barry (2010). Internal conflicts necessitate that participants evaluate how negotiations will affect their future relationship. Human resource managers must encourage good feelings among the parties in order to manage negotiations effectively. Companies should also ensure that they deal with any issues they are having responsibly and fairly.
An audience, too, forms part of the negotiation process. The audience might be made up of various individuals, such as the team or group members. According to Lewicki et al. (2010), the audience in a negotiation puts additional pressure on negotiators to be more hardline and inflexible.
As a result, the negotiators usually advocate their clients’ position (Asherman & Asherman, 2001, p.207). The union representatives for Verizon Wireless have a duty to represent the company’s workers’ interests in this situation. According to Asherman and Asherman (2001, p.207), there are two main rules that affect negotiators when dealing with an audience: flexibility and acceptance of risk.
On the other side, a win-lose negotiation forces the negotiators to follow the audiences’ standpoint, thus they should not give in too quickly. Verizon Wireless employees are utilizing CWA and IBEW to negotiate with management in an attempt to defend their rights. Agents should also be used during negotiations. The agent is obligated to perform according on the demands of the audience. If the principal makes a concession that is not acceptable, he or she can back out.
Agents can also be used in the negotiation process since they are not emotionally invested in it, according to Asherman and Asherman (2001, p.207). In addition, emotions interfering with the negotiation process is less probable because the agents do not have their ego at stake. Multiparty negotiations, on the other hand, involve a large number of participants each of whom is either focused on achieving his or her own objectives or working toward a group agreement. Coalitions are formed during multiparty negotiations.
Coalitions aid in the strengthening of the weaker members by enabling them to advocate for their needs and prevent any unwise decisions (Harvard Business School Press, 2005, p.59). According to Lewicki et al. (2010), coalitions may be dissolved during negotiation proceedings. Natural coalition and single-issue coalition are two types of coalitions. Natural coalition is made up of allies with a wide variety of common goals.
Employees at Verizon Wireless, for example, are represented by two organizations: the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) and the Communications Workers of America (CWA). The goal of each labor union is to protect workers’ rights in the telecommunication sector. In contrast, a single-issue alliance comprises of two or more parties with different interests that come together on one issue.
Negotiation and culture
The negotiation process is influenced by many factors, including culture. According to Brett (2007), cultural differences may be found throughout the negotiation process. This is due to the fact that the principals and representatives have different priorities, concerns, and viewpoints.
The depth of the description as well as the various factors that influence it originate from social, economic, and political circumstances. Furthermore, the negotiators have a variety of goals that include individualistic, competitive, and cooperative motives.
In the Verizon Wireless scenario, both parties involved in the bargaining process should be fully familiar with existing cultural differences. This will play a major role in ensuring that the discussion is successful. In a sociocultural system, negotiators are inclined to avoid any type of direct conflict or its manifestation, as described by example in a collectivist culture.
When a Japanese is negotiating with an American who isn’t comfortable with the offer, he or she may state that he will look into the situation further. This might be a way of saying no to which the American is unfamiliar (Trevino & Nelson, 2011, p. 406). Later on, when bringing up the subject, the Japanese may be direct and declare no.
In general, the American may consider the negotiation process to be unjust. When attempting to resolve issues, understanding the culture is also important since it helps you decide on the most effective conflict resolution approach. Some societies prefer mediation as a method of conflict resolution, for example.
Negotiation and gender
The connection between gender and negotiating has been investigated in a variety of ways. These investigations were designed to see whether certain demographic characteristics such as age and race impact the negotiation process’s success. This is due to the fact that negotiation is an interpersonal procedure. Gender, as a particular attribute, has a significant impact on the negotiation process, according to Moffitt and Bordone (2005, p.136).
Women, according to Moffitt and Bordone (2005, p.136), are more sensitive and prefer long-term relationships. As a result of this, women who are participating in a negotiation process are more likely to think of the negotiation as a long-term relationship. As a result, they will be more concerned with ensuring that the procedure is equitable.
Finally, men are more individualistic than women. They also believe that the negotiation process is a one-time occurrence with no subsequent ramifications for future interactions. Moffitt and Bordone (2005, p.137) think that women are less aggressive because they do not feel entitled to the same pay as male coworkers.
According to studies, women are inclined to take lower salaries. They also have less confidence in the bargaining process. Men, on the other hand, are more aggressive, which helps them get what they want. However, when women negotiate for the behalf of others, they are more successful than if they negotiate for their own interests. In order to secure a deal with Verizon Wireless management, the labor union should ensure that both genders are considered while picking negotiators.
Individual differences; personality and abilities
According to Griffin and Moorhead (2009, p. 395), authoritarianism, self-esteem, Machiavellianism, tolerance for ambiguity, risk taking, and locus of control were all linked with the negotiation process. According to Griffin and Moorhead (2009, p.395), the parties involved in a dispute should choose competent negotiators.
The performance of Verizon Wireless workers in bargaining for rights is contingent on the quality of those who are chosen to represent the employees. Griffin and Moorhead (2009, p.395) maintain that choosing a negotiator with the proper personality is essential to the negotiation process. This stems from the fact that the negotiating process is both personal and interactive.
Managing negotiation difficulties
Different factors might cause negotiations to fail, according to Lewicki and Saunders (2010). Verizon Wireless’ management team failed to alter its initial offer regarding workers’ demands for a fair employment contract, which caused the discussions to stall. Because the company’s executives were ignoring their demands, employees decided to take action rather than continuing to negotiate. According to Lewicki, Saunders, and Barry (2010), integrative bargaining may fail if the negotiators do not establish a viable alternative solution.
Furthermore, if one of the parties to the dispute has utilized an integrative negotiation approach while the other has used a distributive strategy, discussions may fail. Failed negotiations can result in significant expenses for both sides. The parties must develop effective tactics for avoiding a deadlock in order to have their negotiations succeed. Another method for them to do so is by ensuring that the negotiators have effective dialogue. It’s critical for Verizon Wireless management and union representatives to ensure there is good communication between the parties.
Verizon Wireless employees’ strike may have a detrimental influence on the company’s profitability. As a consequence, it is critical for management to provide appealing incentives. Furthermore, negotiators should strive to establish a consensus. To deal with negotiation difficulties, both parties must make effective preparations ahead of time.
The study shows the significance of negotiations in resolving internal disputes within organizations. Verizon Wireless is having an inter-departmental disagreement while operating. The current dispute between Verizon Wireless’ management team and staff concerns employment rights. The employees’ union is seeking improved employment terms, but the management team isn’t willing to consider them.
There are numerous bargaining procedures that negotiators may utilize to attempt to reach a resolution to the labor conflict. The use of any particular negotiation process, on the other hand, is determined by the existing conditions. Distributive bargaining, integrative bargaining, intra-organizational bargaining, and attitudinal change are some examples of negotiation processes.
The study also examines the many situations that make up the negotiation process. These include the negotiation’s various connections, agents, audiences, coalitions, and constituents. The negotiation process might be made up of a variety of parties. During the negotiation, you must have a thorough grasp on the existing cultural differences. Other things to consider include gender, personality, and talents. This is because these variables have an impact on the outcome of the negotiation.
The study also notes that there are a number of impediments that may prevent the negotiation process from being successful. As a result, to guarantee that negotiations do not fail, efficient methods should be employed. Establishing a common ground and effective planning are two other techniques for ensuring that negotiations succeed.
Today, workers at Verizon are preparing to strike if their employers do not come to the negotiating table. More than 39,000 Verizon employees, members of the Communications Workers of America (CWA) and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), are ready to take to the streets in protest.
Verizon came to the table with a lengthy list of demands in 2011, which would have undone decades of hard-won progress if accepted. Working people at Verizon eventually negotiated a long-term contract after a two-week strike and 16 months of escalating mobilization by workers and allies like Jobs With Justice.
Verizon’s initial offer last year, which was eerily similar to the one Amazon submitted just a few weeks later, indicated that the telecommunication company has a long-term goal of reducing employment that supports families and lowering its services menu in numerous of our communities.
Last August, the contracts of Verizon workers expired, and an overwhelming majority of CWA and IBEW members voted to authorize a strike in the event that labor and management could not reach fair agreements. It’s critical that we have their backs as the teams of working people at Verizon stand together. If Verizon gets its way, we’ll allow Verizon’s CEO to rewrite the rules in their favor rather than ensuring that more of our friends and neighbors have jobs that pay us well enough so they can support themselves.
Here are five reasons to support Verizon employees in their talks with the telecommunications giant, as you hear about the strike on television or hear it talked about in your community:
1. Verizon makes billions each year, yet they still expect people to do more with less.
In 2014, Verizon made $9.6 billion in profit, $39 billion over the previous three years – and $1.8 billion a month in earnings during the first three months of 2016. And from 2010 to 2014, Verizon top executives received over $249 million in compensation. Apparently, Verizon corporate CEOs are dissatisfied with their large profit margins and want to see working people accomplish more with less.
Verizon is asking its dedicated workforce for huge cuts to retirement security and benefits for individuals injured on the job, higher employee health-care costs, and elimination of job security. In addition, the firm wants to relocate technicians away from home for as long as two months without seeing or caring for their families who rely on them. These are tremendous changes for Verizon employees just trying to pay their bills and provide a brighter future for their children.
2. Verizon plays dirty.
Verizon has prepared 15,000 employees to take over in the event of a labor dispute instead of bargaining for reasonable terms. Verizon also offers its non-union staff an Employee Monitoring App that allows them to spy on and capture geotagged photographs of union representatives while negotiations are underway. In other words, it’s a tattletale app intended solely to frighten people away from unionizing at work.
3. Verizon wants to get rid of good union jobs and outsource instead.
Union members at Verizon have worked hard to improve their own and future working conditions. However, like in 2011, Verizon wants its employees to give them a thumbs up to outsource work, substituting good, home-grown employment with low-cost labor. Since 2005, the proportion of Verizon workers who are unionized has decreased from nearly 70% to less than 30%.
4. Verizon refuses to expand FiOS.
The demand for high-speed Internet is at an all-time high. In exchange for extending FiOS, Verizon’s high-speed Internet, phone and video connection, throughout the Northeast several years ago, the company received tax breaks and rate hikes. However, in 2012, Verizon announced that it would cease expandingFiOS service across the country, leaving many customers without access to fast Internet.
Why would a business want to keep its customer base static when its famous service is becoming increasingly popular? Some claim that Verizon isn’t investing in the staff who maintain and install FiOS because it doesn’t want to hire new employees.
The corporation has also been accused of redlining low-income and minority communities. The FiOS expansion was concentrated in affluent city suburbs in New York, while poor, urban areas were neglected. Other regions that have been left out of the FiOS expansion include Bethlehem, Pa., Baltimore, Md., and Roanoke, N.C. Verizon is now trying to get out of the landline business altogether, which will result in decreased service and even fewer alternatives for many consumers , particularly in low-income and rural regions that are already on the wrong side of the digital divide.
The union has been fighting for a fair contract that protects workers and provides reliable, high-speed internet for all residents in the region. “On one hand, Verizon refuses to expand its fast FiOS network into lower-income areas. And on the other, they are systematically ignoring landline network maintenance demands, leaving customers at the mercy of a cable monopoly or facing worse service while executives and shareholders amass billions,” said Ed Mooney, vice president for CWA District 2-13 in Pennsylvania to Virginia.
5. Verizon has a long history of ripping off taxpayers through tax evasion.
Verizon isn’t only attempting to reduce expenses by cutting perks and eliminating jobs; one of the country’s most successful firms is also taking money from taxpayers. From 2008 to 2013, Verizon got a tax refund of $732 million from the IRS, resulting in a corporate income tax rate of minus two percent. That’s correct: a negative income tax rate! Verizon is also to blame for hiding money overseas to avoid paying taxes. In 2012, Verizon kept $1.8 billion offshore in tax shelters.