Upload
edmond-t-mandioma
View
395
Download
10
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
1.0 BACKGROUND
This Chapter will focus on introducing the subject of wage negotiations and collective
bargaining in general and specifically to the Catering Industry sector of the economy in
Zimbabwean. It is the researcher’s belief that expounding on the subject of collective
bargaining and the wage negotiation process, the wage negotiation process can better be
understood. A background to the study will be provided then followed by statement of the
problem and research objectives and research questions for the study. The chapter will
then conclude by giving a justification as to why it is necessary that this research be
undertaken.
The divide between employers and workers in wage negotiations is continuously
becoming greater and greater, with the gap between workers’ expectations and demands
against employers’ responses to those demands constantly increasing. To a large extent
wage negotiations are confrontational and characterized by extreme inflexibility. They
usually culminate in deadlocks, instead of agreements, whereupon the wage determinants
are arrived at by arbitration or by judicial determination in the Labour Court. The wage
levels sought by labour are generally understandable. This is because the employment
income of most workers does not suffice to service the essential needs of the workers,
their families and their dependants. Although the horrendous hyperinflation of 2008 has
been contained, with inflation levels in Zimbabwe now being less than those prevailing in
most of the countries of Africa, Zimbabwe has not yet experience deflation. Prices have
however not declined but have only stabilized to levels marginally greater than those then
prevailing. The consequences of Zimbabwe having attained the highest levels of inflation
ever endured by any country, throughout recorded history, were horrendous especially for
those that are in the lower income range. Not only were a majority of the populace unable
to pay for the education and health of their families, but they could not even meet the
most basic of needs.
As prices have generally not declined the trials and tribulations of workers, and of those
reliant upon them, have continued unabated. The result of those tragic circumstances is
1
that the workers representatives in general and trade unions in particular, focus wholly on
worker needs with total disregard for the ability or lack thereof of employers to meet their
demands. As a general rule worker representatives are insistent that the minimum wage
should equate the poverty datum line (PDL). However in demanding PDL-related wages,
the worker negotiators disregard two key factors. The first of such is that the PDL relates
to the requirements of families of six and in Zimbabwe, in any such family there are
usually at least two income earners. However one of them maybe operating in the
informal sector instead of being in formal employment. Inevitably, the two income
earners will not be recipients of identical income. More often than not one of them will be
generating about 60% of the family’s income, whilst the other generates only 40%.
Worker negotiators have also developed an insensitive and despicable disregard for the
extent of employer ability to pay wages at the levels demanded for them. On the one
hand, almost all employers are grievously undercapitalized to finance their operations
effectively. The hyperinflation that prevailed in Zimbabwe was of such magnitude that
the organization’s capital resources were decimated and eroded. The illiquidity in the
money market is pronounced, and the limited funding available is exceptionally costly
and only available for very limited periods of time. Similarly, because of the tiny extent
of accessible foreign investment with held because of concerns about the political and
economic stability, it is presently difficult for organizations to access core working capital
and therefore to fund the wages demanded by the employees. The ability of employers to
pay well is also adversely affected by the need to be price competitive internationally. If
production costs are markedly greater than those in other economies, then Zimbabweans
are prone to purchasing imported products instead of those locally produced. As a result,
exports fail to be competitive. This has already severely impacted upon the viability of
Zimbabwean enterprises.
Whilst wages paid are generally much less than what the workers need, it is long overdue
for labour to recognize that inadequate wages are better than total unemployment, with
associated zero incomes. Maybe the wage determination criteria must endure until such
time as Zimbabwe can achieve substantive deflation. There is also a tendency amongst
arbitrators to make wage determinations with retrospective effect, whereby they award
the increases in wages with back pay to the date when negotiations had commenced. For
almost all employers this has ruinous consequences. This is because they cannot increase
their selling prices retrospectively. The goods or services sold prior to the arbitration were
2
sold at prevailing prices at that time, and no customers will accept a subsequent price
increase for the goods or services already purchased. The consequential effects of back
pay awards are massive losses for the organizations subjected to such. In many instances
it results in closure or liquidation of the organization, and the loss of employment for their
workers. Arbitrators who award retrospective back pay are in practice, doing the workers
a grave injustice and worsening their circumstances.
It is in this context that this research has to be understood. Whilst in business, the human
being has often arbitrarily been referred to as the most priced asset, very few
organizations pay credence to this assertion. The implications on failure to handle this
asset have far reaching and greater consequences both for the enterprise itself as well as
the employees. It would be foolhardy for the enterprise to neglect the human beings in
their businesses as mishandling such comes with great costs (economic/productivity) on
the business. Issues of staff morale are central to the productivity of the enterprise and the
national economy at large.
The Zimbabwean economy prior 2012 beginning 2007 was characterized by periods of
hyperinflation where prices of commodities were changing rapidly and at its worst twice
or thrice a day. Payment of wages in the years 2007 and 2008 was converted into other
forms in order to preserve value as the buying power of money had been eroded. Wage
negotiations were now being done every second month. Companies experienced and
continue to experience low capacity utilization, there are huge disparities between
management and workers earnings leading to inflexibility on both parties which has now
become very much prevalent. Furthermore the economy is not improving as had been
expected due to lack of resources to recapitalize the business.
Annual wage negotiations/bargaining have been taking place under this environment. In
almost all Industries these wage negotiations did not yield much result as they all ended
up having to be referred for arbitration as parties failed to agree on new wage minimums
for each year. NEC Catering was also among the NECs that failed to register an
agreement during this period and since the devolution of powers to NECs by the
government. According to Dr. Kanyenze an economist with the ZCTU, limited scope and
role of NEC was a major cause of wage disputes because they focus narrowly on wage
negotiations. Very little is given to discuss the state of the economy, resources,
development issues of productivity and competiveness. Employees often lack information
and more critically, a shared vision of their sectors or firms thereby creating a fertile
3
ground for contestation and inevitably conflict. Absence of a quality database for
information is also another handicap that was sighted by Dr. Kanyeze when his opinion
was sought on the causes of annual wage negotiation deadlocks.
The National Employment Council (NEC) for the Catering Industry is the umbrella body
representing all employers and employees in the Catering Industry. These include hotels,
motels, lodges, fast food outlets, restaurants and bars. The body to which all employers in
the catering industry belong is known as the Catering Employers Association of
Zimbabwe (CEAZ). The CEAZ represents the interests of all employers in this industry.
When negotiating for conditions of employment and annual salary increases the CEAZ
has a secretariat mandated with engaging the trade union on behalf of all its members. On
the other hand the there is the Zimbabwe Catering and Hotel Workers Union (ZCHWU)
as part of the NEC members. The ZCHWU represents the interests of all employees in the
Industry. Membership to both these institutions is voluntary and members who wish to be
affiliated pay annual subscriptions that are meant to assist with the running of these
institutions. The CEAZ and the ZCHWU have thus established a body mandated with
ensuring that the minimum working conditions agreed upon by the two parties (i.e. CEAZ
& ZCHWU) is being observed. This body is known as the National Employment Council
for the Catering Industry (NEC). The National Employment Council then employs
administrators and agents whose responsibility is to ensure there is harmony at the
workplace. To this effect a booklet known as the Collective Bargaining Agreement
(CBA) came into effect in 1991 and has now become known as Statutory Instrument 167
of 1991(SI 167/91). This statutory instrument was promulgated in line with the provisions
of the Labour Relations Act of 1985. The agreement covers among other things some of
the following issues; scope of application of agreement, alteration of agreement,
administration of agreement, trade union representation on the council, registration of
employers, wages, grading and increments, overtime rates of pay, payment of wages and
many other areas of interest.
All conditions of employment by workers in the Catering Industry are set out in Statutory
Instrument 167 of 1991. These conditions have been negotiated between the employers
and employees through their respective bodies, i.e. CEAZ & ZCHWU. The Labour Act in
Zimbabwe stipulates the minimum working conditions that both parties are required to
observe. The parties are however at liberty to better what has been set out in the Labour
Act provided they have reached an agreement regarding those specific aspects.
4
Collectively bargaining in Zimbabwe for most NECs is at the multi-employer level,
meaning that employers come together to negotiate with one trade union responsible for
the Industry. Whilst most conditions of employment conform to those stipulated in the
Labour Act, some companies have adopted individual company policies that better the
Statutory Instrument as well as the Labour Act. Every year all NECs find themselves in a
position they have to set new minimum wages for their respective industries. Different
NECs therefore negotiate for wage increments at varying times throughout the year.
Previously government used to set and then announce minimum wages for Industries until
2002. NECs were then empowered to negotiate and agree on minimum wages for their
respective industries, a position the NEC Catering Industry also find itself in.
Since government empowered NECs to agree on minimum wages for their respective
Industries, very few have been able to agree on new wage levels without having to refer
the issue for arbitration and in some instances strikes taking place. At the time of the
research, this researcher was advised there was already a case pending before the
arbitrator regarding the awarding of salary differentials for grades 10 to 14 in the Catering
Industry. Therefore this aspect of collective bargaining has been very topical year in year
out with all cases having been referred for arbitration since 2002. There is therefore need
to understand what factors are behind this failure by parties to reach an agreement on
wages every year with regard to the Catering Industry.
Almost across all industries in Zimbabwe from private to the public sector, every year
there are always disagreements on wage negotiations which end up in a deadlock. These
wage deadlocks are so widespread to an alarming extent that it has become standard to
end up with arbitration. An independent arbitrator has to be appointed by the parties so
that they can decide on an acceptable or compromise pay rise/increment between the two
parties. In Zimbabwe, the varied employer associations and trade unions represented by
their respective bodies are therefore either involved in collective bargaining for that
specific period they would have agreed or have now referred the issue of wage
negotiations to an arbitrator and now awaiting the outcome. Again as noted in the case of
NEC Catering Industry, there has not been an instance where parties have concluded
wage negotiations without referring the matter to an arbitrator.
The issue of wage negotiations deadlock has been compounded by the fact that the
general outlook of the economy has not been at its best. It is not a secret that since 2007
many companies have been operating at below capacity with some even failing to break
5
even after the introduction of multi-currency in February 2009. Those that have failed to
break even closed shop rendering the workforce jobless. In the Catering Industry several
big names have applied for exemptions to pay for wages below the minimum wage
stipulated by NEC because of their financial situation. It is now a public secret that the
foreign direct investment expected over the years since the Global Political agreement has
wilted and the expected incomes have not materialized. The country has not seen any
meaningful investment despite parties in the GPA assuring the world that Zimbabwe is a
safe destination to do business. Operating costs have been very high to the extent that in
most instances goods from outside the country have been landing cheaper here in
Zimbabwe. The effect again has been to put pressure on the local operators. The labour
laws in Zimbabwe have also not helped much, for companies wishing to retrench in the
unfortunate circumstance that they have failed to stay afloat, it has been a costly exercise.
It is no surprise therefore that some organizations have chosen to go the voluntary
liquidation way.
As already noted, in 2002 the government of Zimbabwe made a decision to do away with
the setting of minimum wages for most industries except for employees under the public
service. The thinking behind was that government was involving itself too much in affairs
that had nothing to do with it leaving no freedom to the private enterprise to allow market
forces to determine supply of labour and how it was going to be priced. It was felt that it
was not the government’s role for setting minimum wages, moreover it had carried
industry long enough for it to be able to now stand on its own feet. From then on
industries were expected to sit down at the negotiating table and agree on new
yearly/periodic wage minimums for the various industries.
The NEC for Catering Industry tops the list of perennial wage negotiation breakdowns
especially in the last five years. It however needs to be noted that generally the world
over the Hospitality Industry ranks among some of the lowest paying Industries and
professions. This situation does not make it any better when parties now seat down at the
negotiation table. To show that this problem of wage negotiation is not only peculiar to
the NEC Catering Industry in Zimbabwe, here are some of the headlines and quotes found
in newspapers in Zimbabwe and South Africa pertaining to the issue of wage negotiations
deadlocks:
6
“Employer and worker representatives in the insurance industry have referred 2012
salary negotiations to arbitration after a deadlock. But they have agreed not to contest
the outcome of an independent mediator’s determination” (The Herald, Wednesday 11
January 2012)
“The wage negotiations between public service unions including SADTU and the
employer have reached a deadlock. The negotiations resumed yesterday (20 May) when
the employer offered a 5.3% increase- a mere 0.1% increase from last week’s 5.2% offer
implemented as from 1 July. This latest offer by the employer is disgraceful”.
(www.sadtu.org.za/node/203)
“Wage negotiations in South Africa’s gold sector came to a deadlock on Wednesday, with
trade unions declaring a dispute with the Chamber of Mines. The National Union of
Mineworkers (NUM) is asking for a 14% increase while solidarity is demanding a 12%
pay rise. (www.miningweekly.com)
“A final dispute meeting today between solidarity and employers in the Grain Bargaining
Council deadlocked after employers offered a final wage offer of between 5% and 7%. An
independent arbitrator last week recommended that all parties return to the negotiating
table today with new mandates” (www.salabournews.co.za)
The above quotes point to the wage negotiation problem across sectors in other countries
outside Zimbabwe and to the south where South Africa is our neighbour. It would be easy
to relate to South Africa being Zimbabwe’s neighbour as they share almost the same
history. Is South Africa however unionism appears to be more vibrant that it is currently
in Zimbabwe. A strong union is therefore more likely to be heard and advance the
interests of its membership.
In the extract in table 1.0 it can be noted that all wage negotiations that took place for the
period January 2005 to September 2011 were all referred for arbitration. The parties (i.e.
ZCHWU & CEAZ) failed to reach a conclusive agreement regarding new wage levels for
each of the periods under review. Table 1.0 table gives the history of wage negotiation
deadlocks in recent years
7
Table 1.0 NEC Catering Wage Negotiation Deadlocks from 2007 to 2011
Period Involved Statutory Instrument Comments
September 2011 No Statutory Instrument was promulgated Ref to Arbitration
February to September 2010 No Statutory Instrument was promulgated Ref to Arbitration
January to December 2009 No Statutory Instrument was promulgated Ref to Arbitration
January to December 2008 No Statutory Instrument was promulgated Ref to Arbitration
January to December 2007 No Statutory Instrument was promulgated Ref to Arbitration
Source: National Employment Council for the Catering Industry
As a result the parties referred all the wage negotiations to an Independent Arbitrator.
During this whole period a lot of negotiations tensions and high, morale is low and
productivity is not spared and there is a lot of anxiety since no one is sure of the outcome.
In some instances when there are deadlock, it often leads to strikes as a last alternative.
In order to illustrate the extent of the problem, below are a few examples taken from the
Ministry of Labour Harare province statistics for the year 2009 on deadlocks wage.
Table 1.1 Wage Deadlocks in 2009, sector by sector referred for Arbitration
Wage Deadlock Date
Declared
1 NSSA vs. Employees 30.03.09
2 Chloride vs. Chloride Workers Committee 23.04.09
3 National Commercial Employers of Zimbabwe vs. Commercial Workers
Union
27.04.09
4 Chamber of Mines Zimbabwe vs. Associated Mine Workers Union of
Zimbabwe
06.07.09
5 Detergents Edible Oils and Fats vs. Trade Union 30.07.09
6 Catering Employers Association (CEAZ) vs. ZCHWU 09.10.09
7 Harare Municipality vs. Harare Municipal Workers Union 10.06.09
8 Leather, Allied Employers Association vs. Workers Union 11.12.09
9 Banking Employers Association of Zimbabwe vs. Zimbabwe Industrial
Banking Workers Union
18..05.09
Source: Ministry of Labour Harare Province 2009
1.1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
8
The Government has left collective negotiation/bargaining for industries with
employment councils to conclude wage negotiations on their own. Since then there has
been continuous deadlock in wage negotiations every year in industry resulting in parties
referring the deadlock to an independent arbitrator. The NEC Catering has also not been
spared. This failure to conclude wage negotiations in time and having an independent
arbitrator make a ruling has not helped the employee-management relations at the
workplace. Productivity has been affected as a result of the low morale of the employees
who are anxious about the outcome of the wage negotiations meaning the continuity of
the enterprise is a t risk because of low productivity. The aim of this study is to identify
the causes of wage negotiation deadlocks so as to assist employees and management
reach amicable solutions and avoid industrial disharmony, improve relations and the
smooth operation of the enterprise. The costs associated with low morale and arbitration
outcomes (in some instances back pays for up to six months) are too huge to bear for the
organization and hence it is in both parties interests to avoid deadlocks
1.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
1. To identify the wage negotiation/bargaining process and how its conducted
2. To establish the underlying causes of wage negotiation deadlocks
3. To identify alternatives to the ways of wage negotiation process
4. To recommend how the negotiation process can be improved to minimize wage
negotiation deadlocks.
1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. How is the wage negotiation process conducted?
2. What are the causes of wage negotiation deadlocks?
3. What alternatives are available to determining wages?
4. How can the wage negotiation process be improved to avoid arbitration?
1.3.1 PROPOSITION
9
Wage negotiation deadlocks are as a result of parties not negotiating in good faith.
1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
It is the researchers’ conviction that the research brought out significant issues in an area
that parties have taken for granted in a long time of negotiating. It is only through
understanding the causes of wage negotiation deadlocks that trade unions and employer
representatives are better equipped to respect the negotiation process and avoid
deadlocks. The parties are then able to appreciate and to tolerate each other’s view point
and hence decision making is improved. When wage negotiation deadlocks are avoided
the employees are motivated and are less likely to bring attitudes at the workplace which
may rub onto guests and affect service delivery. Instead the employees are productive and
give their best as they have no anxieties or worries.
The employers on the other hand are able to better plan their finances and cash flows in
the absence of deadlocks. The costs of deadlock come in the form of low morale, reduced
productivity and high employment costs as a result of back pays that the employer may be
ordered to pay. It therefore means that when there is agreement from the onset the
employer is certain as to what they are going to pay and will not need to face back pays
which would not have been budgeted for. When service is seamless and uninterrupted this
has the effect of attracting more customers in future since they are going to talk good
about the organizations and industry as a whole.
Tourism ranks amongst the top five major income earners for the country. The more
arrivals we have the better for the economy as they bring in money to spend since they
will be satisfied with the service. As a result the economy grows and the country is able to
meet some of its obligations towards its citizens. It is also important in the adjustment of
the balance of payments for the country.
The research benefited the researcher in fulfilling the requirements of the School of
Business Sciences for the attainment of the Master of Science in Strategic Management.
The researcher also benefited from the new knowledge made available of the subject of
collective negotiation/bargaining by undertaking the research and getting first hand
information on the practices in organizations.
1.5 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
10
The research was conducted at the National Employment Council for the Catering
Industry sited at number 87 Selous Avenue, Harare. The NEC Catering is made up of
Catering Employers Association of Zimbabwe (CEAZ) representing all the employers on
the one hand and the Zimbabwe Catering and Hotel Workers Union (ZCHWU) on the
other hand. Therefore the secretariat and administrators at the NEC was asked to give
their opinions by use of questionnaires. The trade union representative and employer
representatives interviewed constituted those who have a direct bearing on the negotiation
process. It is the researcher’s belief that the chosen sample will be a true representation of
the views and opinions of the Industry. The study was conducted over a period of two
months.
1.5.1 LIMITATIONS
Human Resources Management- the study is narrowed to the social sciences domain
and therefore limited to the Industrial Relations at the workplace
Financial constraints - a lot of costs were involved in typing, printing, binding,
internet and travelling during the course of the study.
Confidential information – respondents are always not comfortable in fully disclosing
information in fear of the unknown.
1.6 DEFINITION OF TERMS
BATNA- Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement
CBA- Collective Bargaining Agreement
CEAZ – Catering Employers Association of Zimbabwe
CUT- Chinhoyi University of Science Technology
ILO- International Labour Organization
NEC- National Employment Council for the Catering Industry
SI- Statutory Instrument
ZCHWU- Zimbabwe Catering and Hotel Workers Union
1.7 RESEARCH OUTLINE
11
This study report is presented in five chapters. Chapter 1 is the Introduction to the
research, Chapter 2 (Literature Review) reviews the literature related to wage
negotiation/bargaining. The reviewed literature will be used in the critical analysis of the
study findings. Chapter 3 (Methodology) presents the methodology on how the study was
conducted. Chapter 4 (Results and Discussion) presents the study findings and discussion
of the study findings. Chapter 5 outlines the conclusions and recommendations of the
study derived directly from the research findings. Furthermore, the chapter presents the
suggested area of further research as shown by the study findings. The next chapter
presents the literature review of the study.
1.8 CHAPTER SUMMARY
A background to the study was provided detailing how the government left NECs to
determine wage negotiations on their own without the involvement of government
anymore. This was then followed by stating what the problem of the study will be focused
on highlighting the costs of failure to reach agreement when negotiating. Research
objectives and questions were then provided to help shape and guide the research
followed by significance of the study. In other words of what importance is this research
to the employee, employers, the economy and nation as a whole? The Chapter then
closed by giving an outline of the structure the dissertation followed.
12
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents a review of related literature. The chapter begins by exploring
literature related to the negotiation theories and models of collective bargaining. The
principled negotiation process and its’ requirements are discussed in greater detail
followed by causes of wage negotiation deadlocks. The approach taken is that negotiation
is a component of collective bargaining, hence to understand wage negotiation reference
should also be paid to collective bargaining. As a follow up, ways to overcome wage
negotiation deadlocks are then discussed enabling parties to understand and appreciate
their short comings so that they do not fall into the same mistakes again. The penultimate
discussion is then on alternatives to the collective negotiation process and new ways of
determining wages without resolving to collective negotiation. The chapter concludes by
looking by summarizing the discussion on wage negotiations.
2.1 THE PRINCIPLED NEGOTIATION PROCESS
2.1.1 NEGOTIATION
(Kersten, Michalowski, Szpakowicz and Koperczak: 1991) argue that negotiation is a
form of decision making with two or more actively involved agents who cannot make
decisions independently, and therefore must make concessions to achieve a compromise.
The effectiveness of negotiation is measured by the degree of achievement of the goals
which were put forward by agents. Negotiation is also a method of conflict resolution,
and as such it is used in modeling of decision processes.
Pilbeam and Corbridge (1997) agree with Kersten et al (2003) in saying that negotiation
is a process whereby two or more interested groups seek to reconcile their differences
through attempts to persuade the other group to move from their initial position, with the
overall aim of reaching agreement.
13
Alvarez and Kennedy (2006) put it more interestingly by saying that negotiation is the art
of letting them have your way. They say your task is to understand and shape your
counterpart’s perceived decisions, so that the counterpart chooses in its own interest
something you also want. Alvarez and Kennedy (2006) further point out that people think
of negotiating power as being determined by resources like wealth, political connections,
physical strength, friends and military might. In fact the relative power of two parties
depends primarily upon how attractive to each the option is of not reaching agreement.
The aim of negotiation is therefore to try and reach agreement by convincing the other
party to see things in the same light as you. Kersten et al (1991), Pilbeam and Cobridge
(1997) and Alvarez and Kennedy (2006) are of the same view.
2.1.2 PRINCIPLED NEGOTIATION- PRE-NEGOTIATION PREPARATIONS
According to Silva (1996) there are various activities that one needs to undertake before
engaging the other party. www.au.af.mil summarizes the pre-negotiation preparations as
follows; A party wishing to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion or arrangement through
collective bargaining should first identify the objectives of the exercise.
“The negotiating team, and the respective roles of the members, should be
determined before the negotiations. Employers would find it useful to include in
the team people from different disciplines. The union’s demand should be
carefully studied. It is a matter of assessment in each situation as to whether the
management should make an initial response in writing to the union before
negotiation commence. Since negotiations may not proceed to take place in the
way a party may plan, party should be able to provide alternative options to wheat
he, or the other party, expects. A party to collective bargaining negotiations has to
formulate a strategy for all stages of the negotiation, including the pre-negotiation
stage”. www.au.af.mil
According to Fisher and Ury (1991), principled negotiation has a great deal in common
with the process of consensus team decision making. There are seven conditions which
are essential if a principled negotiation is to have a successful outcome. In the next
discussion an elaboration of the principled negotiation requirements is now provided for
better understanding of the concept.
14
2.1.3.0 PRINCIPLED NEGOTIATION PROCESS- REQUIREMENTS
Once you have established the necessary condition for negotiations, the process can now
take place. There is no inflexible rule as to who should open negotiations. However it is
not unreasonable for the management to claim that if the union has initiated the
negotiations, it should make it clear at the outset that agreement on any particular issue is
subject to an overall assessment, including its own expectations from the union.
2.1.3.1 PEOPLE: SEPARATE THE PEOPLE FROM THE PROBLEM
Afredson and Cungu (2008) notes that Fisher et al., (1991), argued that parties in a
dispute often forget that the other side consists of people who, just like themselves, are
subject to human frailties such as emotions, potentials for misunderstandings and
mistaken assumptions. A common failing when there is a difference of opinion or goals is
to attack the opposing person while attacking the opposing position, especially if the
attack is demeaning. It will unfairly have negative outcomes in both decisions making and
bargaining. Experienced negotiators separate the people from the problem. Fisher and
Ury (1991) suggest the following ways:
Relationships. Bargaining, even principled bargaining, may involve strong
comments about the substantive issue. It is only human nature that these, on
occasions are taken as personal attacks, generating emotions that block
communication. A good relationship can be a vaccine against communication
blockage.
Perceptions. In the heat of battle, it is easy to view the opponent as a personal
enemy, as opposed to someone who is just doing a job. Effective negotiators must
get inside the heads of their opponent so that they can see the issues as they do.
From inside the opponent’s frame of reference, many things become clearer: why
a given position is held so fiercely, where the vulnerabilities are, where there are
doubts and where there may be blind spots. Perceptions come in many ways.
Colosi (2000) makes a point of the importance of body language and tone as
communication channels that give information, sometimes information of crucial
15
value to the other side, Fisher and Ury (1991) emphasize such things as acting
inconsistently with expectations.
Emotion. Experienced negotiators have long since learned how to manage their
emotions. A part of this is understanding that there are going to be emotions.
Skilful negotiators can turn anger on and turn it off for effect, while at the same
time avoiding the blow and counterblow that gets out of control. If under personal
attack, promise- do not threaten. You may highlight that these are personal attacks
which are not relevant to the substantive issue and for that reason they are unfair.
Communication. The essence of communication is the transmission of meaning.
According to Fisher and Ury (1991), much communication in positional
bargaining fails because meaning is not clearly transmitted, where bargaining is
positional, Colosi (2000) adds that one may want to be cautious about the
direction of communication. The mandate is for active listening, getting the other
person to talk more and thus reveal more. Listening with interests to what the
other negotiator has to say pays dividend, you are getting valuable information
about his/her position and intentions, without giving away your own.
2.1.3.2 INTERESTS: FOCUS ON INTERESTS NOT POSITIONS
According Fisher and Ury (1991), the first step is to identify the interests involved in an
issue as opposed to dealing with positions of the negotiating parties. Lens (2004), argues
that if a positive relationship can be established with the other negotiator, the only
remaining ingredient for principled negotiation is finding shared interests that can serve
as the common ground for generating creative options. Interests are a key issue because
interests are the factors underlying the decisions. Sometimes when principled negotiation
is not possible and harder positional bargaining must be used. When that is the case, it
pays to know if there are divisions in the enemy camp. Colosi (2000), point out that there
probably will be stabilizers who would bargain soft and destabilizes who would bargain
very hard indeed, and it might scuttle the negotiations if they could. A thorough
understanding of the other side’s case is essential for the exploitation of their differences.
16
2.1.3.3 OPTIONS: GENERATE SEVERAL OPTIONS BEFORE DECIDING
WHAT TO DO
Afredson et al., (2008) point out that once parties have begun to build relationships and to
exchange information in order to gain a clearer understanding of the intentions at stake,
the parties should turn to the task of generating options. In negotiations, options are
possible solutions to a problem shared by two or more parties. In integrative bargaining,
options represent possible ways of meeting as many of both parties’ interests as possible.
When using the principled negotiation options for action can often be the hardest to get
partners to participate in. Fisher et al (1991) suggest that there are four particular
obstacles to this: premature judgment, searching for a single answer, assumption of a
fixed pie and thinking that no-one else is able to assist in problem solving. It is here that
negotiators have the best opportunity to expand the pie. As long as options are kept open,
many avenues for creative ideas may appear.
2.1.3.4 ALTERNATIVES
In order to set realistic goals, negotiators must start by considering certain fundamental
questions: where will each side be if no agreement is reached? What alternative solutions
are available for meeting your goals if you cannot count on the cooperation of the other
side? Fisher and Ury (1991), argue that it is critical for both parties to know their BATNA
(Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement) both before and throughout all stages of a
negotiation. A Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement provides negotiators with a
measure of flexibility that is lacking from a bottom line. Unlike bottom lines Best
Alternatives to a Negotiated Agreement’s change when negotiators perceive a change in
their alternatives. Alfredson and Cungu (2008) points out that when negotiations are
viewed in terms of Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreements’, as opposed to positions
or bottom lines, the negotiation can continue even when figures are rejected because
negotiators are freer to continue to explore additional possible solutions. Negotiators who
fail to evaluate their alternatives to an agreement both before and during the process may
therefore also be in danger of rushing to an agreement without having fully considered
their or the other party’s alternatives, leading one side to end up with a deal that should
have been rejected.
17
2.1.3.5 CRITERIA/LEGITIMACY
When bargaining over positions, negotiators create a situation in which one side must
concede his original claim in order for negotiations to succeed. Positional bargaining is
bargaining in which two sides lock into compatible positions. According to Fisher et al.,
(1991), this can lead to a contest of wills, bitterness and deadlock. They maintain that
when negotiations are approached in this way, even when a deal is made, it may come at
high cost. The authors instead argue that there is a better way to approach the negotiation
process. This involves invoking objective criteria as part of the negotiation process.
According to Lens (2004), once options have been generated, the next step is to evaluate
them and to find a fair solution based on merits. It helps to be concrete but flexible- in
other words, to work through the options in detail, but to treat the options as illustrative
rather than fixed. The commitment has to be to address the participants’ interests (not
positions) and, by pushing hard on the interests, partners can stimulate each other’s
creativity in thinking up mutually advantageous solutions. Developing an agreement
should be framed as a joint search for objective or fair criteria and this will promote
reasonableness, fair play and trustworthiness
2.1.3.6 COMMITMENTS
A negotiated settlement is only enduring if all the parties honour the commitments that
they make. Afredson et al., (2008) emphasizes that, of course, those that fail to follow
through on their promises stand to suffer a loss of integrity, be subject to the resentment
of the other side, and risk that their partner in the negotiations (and possibly others
outside of the deal as well if word of their reputation escapes) will refuse to deal with
them in the future. Therefore no party to a negotiation should intentionally create
commitments that they do not intend to honour. Fisher and Ertel (1995), points out that
during negotiation process, parties should think carefully about the kind of commitments
they should be prepared to make? Are they capable of honouring them? How broad
should the commitments be? When will each party be expected to make good on their
promises? One way of building trust is to create a commitment structure that can be
implemented in stages
18
2.1.3.7 COMMUNICATION
Negotiation is only possible through communication. Fisher and Ury (1991), maintain
that the feeling heard is also a key interest for both sides in a negotiation. Good
communication can change attitudes, prevent or overcome deadlock and
misunderstandings and help improve relationships. Moreover, good communication skills
are essential to clearly relay your message, and to thoroughly understand the message of
the other side (Wondwosen, 2006). In addition, integrative approaches stress the
importance of sharing information as a means of uncovering interests and of helping
parties to explore common problems or threats. Still negotiators are frequently hampered
in theories roles by common communicational errors or inefficiencies.
2.2.0 THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS
Most authors on negotiation reference back what Fisher and others have said regarding
the whole concept of negotiation. According to Fisher and Ury (1991), there can be no
doubt that that the process is a contest where each negotiator can take nothing for granted,
and can even relax. Even if it is possible to establish mutual interests and move into the
principled negotiation mode, prudence demands risk analysis and control. The more
consequential the issue, the more important risk management is. Experienced negotiators
say that you should prepare, prepare, prepare. The Air Force Negotiation Centre for
Excellence, USA (2011) outlines the negotiation process as given below.
1) Discover what the other side knows
2) Educate the other side on your position
3) Make the other side advocate for your position
4) Determine enforcement means
5) Enhance implementation through good relationship
2.2.1 DISCOVER WHAT THE OTHER SIDE KNOWS
According to the Air Force Negotiation Centre for Excellence (2011), until the other side
establishes trustworthiness by credible performance, you must learn as much about the
19
other side’s position as possible, while revealing as little as possible about one’s own. It is
important that you should have completed preliminary work, to cope out what the other
side’s position and strategy will be, so you aren’t hearing it in negotiations for the first
time. Secondly you should have selected your team with an eye toward enhancing your
ability to figure out the other side, its strengths and weaknesses.
2.2.2 EDUCATE THE OTHER SIDE ON YOUR POSITION
Lens (2004), reiterates the need to get the other side to lose its confidence in its position
while gaining confidence in yours. This is where education comes in the process of
selectively revealing information that strengthens your case while questioning that of the
other. Lens (2004), says it sounds like a breach of ethics to reveal information selectively
to strengthen your case while weakening your opponent’s. However if trust is established,
negotiation is a contest. You would not use your weak arm to arm-wrestle with a stinger.
Ethics to do in negotiation has to do with being principled and fair, and neither demands
complete disclosure. The decision in negotiation is whether the negotiators agree on, and
can convince their ratifiers to accept it.
2.2.3 MAKE THE OTHER SIDE ADVOCATES FOR YOUR POSITION
According to Fisher et al., (1991) as you educate the other side to see the advantages of
your position, you want to undermine their confidence in their own position. These two
principles, educating the other side on your position and creating doubt about their own
position, are a cyclical process. It is important to make the other side an advocate for your
own position. According to Colosi (2000), neither you nor they will have the power to
decide. That power has been withheld by those who sent you to negotiate for them. So
part of your strategy is to manage the other side’s access to your ratifiers. You don’t want
someone as good as you are to have access to your own decision makers.
2.2.4 DETERMINE ENFORCEMENT MEANS
Glaser (2005), points out that it is important to enhance both enforcement and
implementation by building in objectively verifiable means. Fisher et al., (1991) argues
20
that even with principled negotiation and trust, future doubt or suspicion can be avoided
by including in the agreement some objective means of checking that the agreement is
honoured by both sides, and for enforcing compliance. Sales contracts, for example, have
clauses that address the potential for default. Equally negotiated agreements should be
written how non-compliance would be treated.
2.2.5 ENHANCE IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH GOOD RELATIONSHIP
It is essential to maintain good relationships with the other side. A good relationship
enhances the operation of the preceding principles, and, indeed may be essential to some
of them. Further, according to Fisher et al., (1991) if initiatives towards principled
negotiation get no response from the other side, maintain a good relationship in spite of
all adversity you may produce a change of heart with your opponent. Principled
negotiation can emerge at almost any time, so long as one negotiator has been behaving in
a principled manner all along. Below are steps in negotiation as adapted from
www.examiner.com
1) Agree to negotiate
2) Gather points of view
3) Focus on interests
4) Create win-win options
5) Evaluate options
6) Create an Agreement
Source: www.examiner.com
2.3.0. THEORIES OF NEGOTIATION
Wikipedia underlines the fact that negotiation is a specialized and formal version of
conflict resolution most frequently employed when important issues must be agreed upon.
Accordingly, negotiation is necessary when one party requires the other party’s
agreement to reach its aim. The aim of negotiating is to build a shared environment
leading to long-term trust. Alfredson and Cungu (2008) points out that those negotiation
theories may be prescriptive, descriptive or normative in nature. Additionally theorists
21
and practitioners from various disciplines have developed and utilized a variety of
approaches or levels of analysis to improve their understanding of particular aspects of
negotiations. Alfredson and Cungu (2008) further expatiate by saying, while formal
definitions of negotiation vary, theorists do accept certain basic tenets. Foremost among
them is the assumptions that parties who negotiate agree in at least one fundamental
respect; they share a belief that their respective purposes will be better served by entering
into negotiation with the other party. Implicitly then, negotiating parties have come to the
conclusion, at least for a moment, that they may be able to satisfy their individual goals or
concerns more favourably by coming to an agreed upon solution with the other side, than
by attempting to meet their goals or concerns unilaterally. Schelling (1960) goes on to say
that it is this mutual perception that leads to the onset of negotiations and betrays the
independence that exists (to whatever degree) between negotiating parties. This common
interest in shared agreement is the starting point for the common interest and mutual
dependence that can exist between participants in a conflict.
It may be important at this juncture to say a word here about strategies and tactics and
how they fit into the various schools before focusing on our next discussion on the
various approaches to negotiation. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary (1994) defines a
strategy as a careful plan or method, especially for achieving an end. Whereas the use of
tactics refers to the skill of using available means to reach that end.
According to Alfredson and Cungu (2008), theorists differ on how to categories the main
schools of thought in negotiation. Druckman (1997) describes the main schools of
thought in negotiation theory as corresponding to four approaches to negotiation:
negotiation as a puzzle solving, negotiations as a bargaining game, negotiation as
organizational management and negotiation as diplomatic politics. Alternatively, Raiffa
(1982) puts forward a typology of approaches crafted around dimensions of symmetry-
asymmetry and prescription-description. Zartman (1988) presents five levels of analysis
or core approaches. These are structural, the strategic, the processual (concession-
exchange), the behavioural and integrative approaches. However in practice according to
Afredson et al., (2008) most negotiators use a combination of approaches and borrow
from all kinds of schools of thoughts during a negotiation. The approaches to negotiations
are now discussed below, one after the other.
22
2.3.1 STRUCTURAL APPROACH
These consider negotiated outcomes to be a function of the characteristics or structural
features that define each particular negotiation. These characteristics may include features
such as the number of parties and issues involved in the negotiation and composition or
relative power of the competing parties (Raiffa, 1982; Bacharach and Lawler, 1981).
According to Zartman (1976) structural approaches to negotiation find explanations of
outcomes in patterns of relationships between parties or their goals. They can be
deterministic in that they often view outcomes as a priori once structural factors are
understood. In structural approaches to negotiation theory, analysts tend to define
negotiations as conflict scenarios between opponents who maintain incompatible goals.
Afredson and Cungu (2008) argue that analysts who adopt a structural approach to the
study of negotiations share an emphasis on the means parties bring to a negotiation.
According to Bacharach and Lawler (1981), one of the main theoretical contributions
derived from the structural approach is the theory that power is the central determining
factor in negotiations. In this view relative power of each party affects their ability to
secure their individual goals through negotiations. Structural theories offer varying
definitions of power. For example power is sometimes defined as the ability to win, or
alternatively, as the possession of strength or resources. In trying to understand why
victory in negotiations does not always go to the party who is ostensibly the more
powerful, analyst taking a structural approach have looked at additional structural
properties such as symmetry-asymmetry, the availability of alternatives or the role of
tactics in detail. According the wikipedia structural analysis is easy to criticize because it
predicts that the strongest will always win. This however does not always hold true.
Negotiators need to be aware that a blind attachment to winning all you can from
negotiation regardless of the resulting satisfaction of other parties, can be a poor long
term strategy if it means that the other side will lose its will, or ability to maintain its side
of the negotiated agreement.
2.3.2 STRATEGIC APPROACH
Random House Dictionary (1993) defines strategy as a plan, method, or series of
manoeuvres for obtaining a specific goal or result. Strategic approaches to negotiation
23
have roots in mathematics, decision theory and rationale choice theory and also benefit
from major contributions from the area of economics, biology and conflict analysis.
Emphasis in strategic models of negotiation is on the ends (goals) in determining
outcomes. Strategic models are also models of rational choice. Negotiators are viewed as
rational decision makers with known alternatives who make choices guided by their
calculation of which option will maximize their ends or gains, frequently described as
payoffs. Actors choose from a choice set of possible actions in order to try and achieve
desired outcomes. According to Raiffa (1982), each actor has unique incentive structure
that is comprised of a set of costs associated with different actions combined with a set of
probabilities that reflect the livelihoods of different actions leading to desired outcomes.
Strategic models tend to be normative in nature because they are grounded in the belief
that there is one best solution to every problem, they seek to represent what ultra smart,
impeccably rational, super people should do in competitive, interactive situations.
Because they look for best solutions from all perspectives of a negotiation, this approach
has been called symmetrically prescriptive (Raiffa: 1982). Snyder and Diesing (1977),
points out that the strategic approach is the foundation for negotiation theories such as
game theory and critical risk theory.
2.3.2.1 COOPERATIVE OR COMPETITIVE: A NEGOTIATORS DILEMMA
According to Alfredson et al., (2008) one of the best known games to treat negotiations is
the Prisoner’s Dilemma Game. The game reflects the following scenario. Two prisoners
are awaiting trial for a crime they committed. Each must decide between the two courses
of action: confess or not. If neither person confesses, in other words, they cooperate with
each other; each prisoner will have to serve a prison term of two years. On the other hand,
if both prisoners chose to defect and turn evidence against one another, both prisoners
will be faced with a four year prison term. If the game ended here cooperation by the two
prisoners would be likely, but in the classic version of the game there is another set of
alternatives. The prisoners learn that if one party cooperates and the other defects the one
who defects will not serve time, leaving the one who refused to testify against his partner
to serve the full five year sentence. Because each player is seeking to maximize his own
outcomes, and neither knows what the other will do, the game demonstrates that the
24
rational player will choose defection every time because he realizes that by choosing to
defect he will fare better in the game, no matter what his opponent does.
Negotiators face a similar challenge in their decision-making as they also have
incomplete information about the other negotiator’s intentions. In bargaining scenarios,
this formulation suggests that agreements are unlikely because each party has an incentive
to defect in order to maximize his own gains. However such an outcome is sub-optimal
because players would be better off if they both cooperated. In real life cooperation does
occur.
2.3.3 BEHAVIOURAL APPROACH
According to Afredson and Cungu (2008) behavioural approaches emphasize the role
negotiators’ personalities or individual characteristics play in determining the course and
outcome of negotiated agreements. Nicholson (1964) further elaborates by pointing out
that behavioural theories may explain negotiations as interactions between personality
types that often take the form of dichotomies, such as shopkeepers and warriors or
hardliners and soft liner where negotiators are portrayed either as ruthlessly battling for
all or diplomatically conceding to another party’s demands for the sake of keeping peace.
The tension that arises between these two approaches forms a paradox that has been
termed the “toughness dilemma’ or the negotiators’ dilemma (Zartman, 1978; Lax and
Sebenius, 1986). The dilemma states that though negotiators who are tough during a
negotiation are more likely to gain more of their demands in a negotiated solution, the
trade off is that in adopting his stance, they are less likely to conclude an agreement at all.
The behavioural approach derives from psychological and experimental traditions but
also from centuries old diplomatic treaties. These traditions share the perspective that
negotiations-whether between nations, employers and unions or neighbours are ultimately
about individuals involved. Approach highlights human tendencies, emotions and skills.
They may emphasize the role played by arts of persuasion, attitudes, trust, perception,
individual motivation and personality in negotiated outcomes. Another important
contribution from the behavioural approach is the work on framing. According to Raiffa
(1982), frames refer to the way a problem is described or perceived. Is the glass half full
or half empty? The way a question is posed can make certain evaluative objectives
significant and thereby influence the outcome. Neale and Bazerman (1985) and
25
Bazerman, et al., (1985) found out how a conflict was framed or presented to negotiators
influenced whether they viewed their task as one of maximizing gains or minimizing
losses. It also influenced the likelihood of reaching a negotiated settlement.
2.3.4 CONCESSION EXCHANGE (PROCESSUAL) APPROACH
According to Zartman (1978), this approach (which Zartman calls the processual
approach) looks at negotiation as a learning process in which the parties react to each
other’s concession behaviour. From the perspective negotiations consist of a series of
concessions. The concessions mark the stages in negotiations. They are used by parties to
both signal their own intentions and to encourage movement in their opponent’s position.
Parties use their bids both to respond to the previous counteroffer and to influence the
next one; the offers themselves become an exercise in power. The risk inherent in this
approach according to Afredson and Cungu (2008) is that participants engaged in
concession-trading may miss opportunities to find new, mutually beneficial solutions to
their shared dilemma and end-up instead in a purely regressive process which leaves both
sides with fewer gains than they could have if they had pursued a more creative approach.
2.3.5 INTEGRATIVE APPROACH
Lewicki et al.,(2003) states that, where as a zero-sum game view sees the goal of
negotiations as an effort to claim one’s share over a fixed amount of pie, integrative
theories and strategies look for ways of creating value or expanding the pie so that there is
more to share between parties as a result of negotiation. Integrative approaches use
objective criteria, look to create conditions of mutual gain and emphasize the importance
of exchanging information between the parties and group problem solving. Because
integrative approaches emphasize problem solving, cooperation, joint decision making
and mutual gains, integrative strategies call for participants to work jointly to create win-
win solutions. They involve uncovering interests, generating options and searching for
commonalities between parties. Negotiators may look for ways to create value, and
develop shared principles as a basis for decision making about how outputs should be
claimed (and who claims them).
26
The integrative approach to negotiations has roots in international relations, political
theory, research on labour disputes and social decision making. Looking at labour,
Walton and McKersie (1965) published a theoretical framework for understanding the
negotiation process which they also applied to exchanges in international relations and
disputes over civil rights. They described integrative bargaining as bargaining in which
negotiators employ problem solving behaviour. Above all it must be noted that
negotiation is a process. As such planning for and negotiating over the process itself are
as critical for the outcome of a negotiation as the negotiation over the substantial issue
themselves. According to Wondwosen (2006) taking time to negotiate the process before
diving into talks is beneficial to all the parties involved. It might be time consuming, but
in the long run (negotiating the process) will not only save time, but will also enable
wiser, more robust and more valuable deals.
Principled negotiation is another phase theory of negotiations that falls in the integrative
school. Fisher and Ury (1981) argue principled negotiation goes beyond the limited
strategic choices of distributive bargaining. They frame negotiations as a three-phase
process whose efficiency depends on how negotiators treat four essential elements:
interests, people, options and criteria. According to Afredson and Cungu (2008), in a later
work, these pillars were refashioned into seven elements of negotiation comprising
interests, relationships, options, legitimacy, alternatives commitments and
communications. In the principled negotiations model, the essential elements serve as
prescriptive components for negotiations modeled on an integrative approach.
2.4.0 CAUSES OF NEGOTIATION DEADLOCKS AND SOLUTIONS
Muthoo (2000) stresses that if the bargaining process is frictionless, i.e. neither party
incurs any costs from haggling, then each player may continuously demand that
agreement be struck on terms that are most favourable to them. In such a circumstance the
negotiations end up in an impasse (or deadlock), since negotiators would have no
incentive to compromise and reach an agreement. If it did not matter when the negotiators
agree, then it would not matter whether they agree at all.
Impasse means the point at which no further progress toward an agreement appears likely
because neither side is making further movement on major unresolved issues. Normally
27
the union does not want to bargain to what could legally be defined as an “impasse”
because then management may be free to stop following the old contract, stop collecting
dues, and unilaterally change wages, hours, and working conditions. In private sector
cases, the union would have to file charges with the National Labour Relations Board if
the employer declared impasse and imposed unilateral changes. In public sector cases, the
state or local agency that oversees labour law enforcement would decide whether impasse
had been reached (www.theworksite.org). The NLRB or other appropriate agency will
ask such questions as
• How many times have the two sides met?
• How firm do they seem to be about their positions?
• Has each side made its last, best, and final offer?
Narlikar’s (2010) analysis is more comprehensive where she defines a negotiation process
as deadlocked if and when the following two conditions are present:
1) An extended situation of non-agreement exists such that parties adopt inconsistent
positions and are unable or unwilling to make concessions sufficient to achieve a
breakthrough on the particular issue; and
2) A landmark moment in negotiation process which may be an action-forcing event
in the shape of a chair’s text or deadline imposed by a negotiator, or may be a
natural landmark endogenous to the negotiation and recognized as such by the
parties involved despite having set up expectation towards a compromise, is
unable to trigger the necessary concessions toward agreement on the particular
issue.
Both conditions must exist for us to identify a situation as one of deadlock. According to
Faure (2005), the first condition captures his idea of a protracted standstill of the
dynamics of the negotiation system. But it clarifies the definition by providing a harder
condition for deadlock: that parties adopt inconsistent positions, and further, that
movement in the form of insufficient concessions does not signify an end to deadlock. To
see the deadlock broken, we would need to see agreement on the particular issue under
negotiation. It also helps us see resolving deadlocks as distinct from the set of tasks
associated with conflict resolution: breaking deadlock involves finding a solution to a
situation of standstill rather than escalatory dynamic.
28
The second condition is important as it ensures that we do not regard each and every
situation of non-agreement, i.e. all stages of the negotiation process until agreement is
reached, as one of deadlock. Deadlock does not begin on day one of every negotiation,
even though the seeds of the deadlock may be sown on day one. We would recognize a
situation of deadlock only after a landmark moment for agreement passes by and non-
agreement persist. A deadlock is a special and narrow case of non-agreement or non-
cooperation (Narlikar, 2010).
Narlikar (2010) acknowledges that deadlocks can be a product of strategic choice.
Negotiators have a range of strategies with the strict distributive strategy forming one end
of the spectrum and a purely integrative strategy the other. According to Narlikar (2010),
the distributive strategy comprises a set of tactics that are functional only for claiming
value from others and defending against such claims when one party’s goals are partly in
conflict with those of others. Examples of strict distributive strategies include: high
opening demands, refusing all concessions, exaggerating one’s minimum needs and
priorities, manipulating information to others’ advantage, taking other issues hostage,
worsening their BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement), issuing threats,
imposing penalties. However, to root explanations for deadlocks primarily in strategy
choice presents more of descriptive than analytic claim. In order to therefore explain the
causes of deadlock, six assumptions have been presented to explain the occurrence of
deadlocks.
Hypothesis 1: Deadlocks occurs because of superior BATNA or occur whenever and as
long as parties believe their alternative to agreement is superior to the deal on offer.
According to Fisher and Ury (1991), standard negotiation analysis suggests that the
deadlock occurs if all the parties believe their BATNA is superior to the proposed
agreement. They argue that, as such they have no incentive to make concessions to reach
an agreement. An alternative argument would be that the zone of agreement has shrunk so
much that it is better to have no agreement at all that the one on the table with its limited
gains and high costs.
According to Fisher and Ury (1991), in other conditions however, when a particular
problem is especially difficult to resolve, it may be possible for negotiators to work
around it through an alternative solution set. For instance if the negotiator perceives his
her BATNA to be superior to the agreement, besides attempting to worsen that BATNA
29
by somehow removing it from the range of options available, the negotiators may try to
delegitimize it by reframing it in terms of unfairness or bring in a third party as a
mediator.
Narlikar (2010) suggests that the way of getting round this, if the principal cause of
deadlock is the availability of a better BATNA, negotiators will have to expand the zone
of agreement such that its gains come to outweigh the BATNA. They might
simultaneously or alternatively pursue a strategy of worsening the BATNA of the parties
and thus bringing them back to the negotiating table.
Hypothesis 2: Deadlocks occur because negotiators bluff and lie.
Bluffing is a common place in most bargaining situations (Schelling, 1960 and Walton
and McKersie, 1965). However not all bluffs result in deadlocks. But when levels of
uncertainty and or distrust are high, deadlock can result. One party may indeed have a
superior BATNA or firmly believe that no deal is better than the one being offered. But if
the negotiator is unable to communicate these bottom lines credibly (partly because they
have a reputation for lying, or because such claims go against all previous behaviour), the
other party may understandably assume that he/she is bluffing and refuse to make any
concessions.
Narlikar (2010) argues that, a solution to the above if the central problem is uncertainty,
negotiators can build in more effective communication mechanisms, which would
facilitate the signalling of positions and interests. Institutions can play a role in this by
establishing better transparency and monitoring mechanism.
Hypothesis 3: Deadlock occurs because of certain types of balances of power.
3a: Deadlock is more likely, the more equal the power distribution
3b: Deadlock is more likely, the more the diverse the culture of the parties that
constitutes the balance of power
Narlikar (2010) posits that power matters crucially in the making and breaking of
deadlocks. Negotiation analysis recognizes this: for instance, it has been pointed out that
deadlocks occur if there is symmetry of power and neither party is able to impose its will
on the other (Faure, 2005; Zartman, 2002). Beriker and Druckman (1996) also reiterate
that deadlocks are more likely when the parties are symmetrically strong, but not when
they are equally weak. According to Vitz and Kite (1970), it has however been found that
30
mild discrepancies in power often leads to stalemate as stronger parties respond to the
weaker party’s demand for equal treatment with escalatory tactics.
According to Faure (2005) balance of power, at first glance can appear to be a structural
constraint and thus one that negotiators might not have much agency over. However,
balance of power can indeed be altered within specific institutional counter measures
(such as rules that alter the relative weights of the participants), but also by the
negotiators themselves through coalition building.
Hypothesis 4: Deadlocks occur because certain institutional structures facilitate or deter
agreement
Bazerman et al (1995), stresses that certain institutional peculiarities can make a system
more deadlocks prone. For instance some would argue that the consensus rule of the
WTO is precisely what makes it prone to deadlock as it gives de facto veto power to all
152 members.
In order to overcome, if the source of deadlock is a particular institutional process,
members of the organization may be able to amend it (depending on the flexibility
allowed by the institution), or at least find some wiggle-room by establishing new norms
and working practices.
Hypothesis 5: Deadlocks occur because fairness and justice matter
According to Narlikar (2010), only a limited amount of previous research has been done
to investigate the impact of fairness considerations on negotiations especially when
fairness is defined in harder terms of going beyond and even against self interest of the
parties. Bazerman and Neale (1995), argue that fairness considerations can lead
negotiators to opt for joint outcomes that leave both parties worse off than they would
have been had fairness considerations been ignored.
If the problem is based on differing conceptions of fairness and legitimacy, then
negotiators and analyst would need to give considerably greater attention to normative
issues than they would have done until now. For instance, notions of victory would have
to be framed carefully so that even the losing party can appear to show that it has won
moral victory. Considerably greater attention would also have to be paid to how demands
for concessions are framed.
31
Hypothesis 6: Deadlocks occur internationally because of certain configurations of
domestic interests
Even when levels of trust are high and negotiation brimming over with good will,
multilateral deadlocks can still occur due to presence of powerful domestic constituencies
that don’t favour agreement. Certain types of negotiations and issue areas are more prone
to the problem than others. For instance, obscure policy areas may not produce the same
level of mobilization and resistance at home than others.
Narlikar (2010) says if the primary source of deadlock lies at the domestic level inter-
state negotiation may be inadequate, short of expanding the zone of agreement
significantly so as to buy the approval of the dissenting constituencies of the negotiating
counterpart. But the range of alternatives available to the state-level negotiator is broader
than that. The negotiator may try to reframe the issue so as to win the domestic
constituencies over, or s/he may expand the negotiating pie so as to trigger the support of
alternative lobbies in favour of the agreement.
For analysts and practitioners interested in analyzing and breaking deadlock, solutions
depend on the cause identified as the main source of the problem. Sometimes, attacking
the particular source of deadlock maybe the only route to a breakthrough. According to
www.worksite.org you can try to avoid impasse by
• Not giving management a firm rejection on proposals you mainly disagree with. Instead,
stress that your position on individual items depends on the total package management is
willing to agree to.
• Continuing to make new proposals on controversial subjects, even if there is not a huge
difference between your new positions and your old ones.
• Insisting that management take the time necessary to prepare detailed information the
union needs in order to bargain intelligently on proposals each side has made.
• Not saying to management, your members, or the news media that you’ve reached the
point where it is clear that management has no intention of settling. (You can say that so
far they have not been willing to negotiate a fair settlement.)
According to www.worksite.org, when little progress is being made and you want to get
negotiations moving toward a settlement, some of the following techniques may be
helpful:
32
• Employ more pressure tactics. Your problem may not be a failure to communicate at
the table but rather a failure to force management to want to settle.
• Trade one or more items for one or more others. “We are willing to consider moving
on X if you are willing to agree to our proposal on Y.” (Be aware that in saying this you
are signalling that X is not a make-or-break issue for you.)
• Group several issues into a package or present an entire proposed contract that
contains some compromises by both sides. “We’ve developed what we think is a fair
package, and we’re willing to accept the compromises in it if you accept the entire
package.”
• Make minor changes to save face for one side or the other. If one team is finding it
hard to admit that it has to change its position on an issue, a relatively unimportant
change in wording may allow them to say, “Well, with that change I think we can accept
it.”
• Suggest resolving an issue through a side letter rather than in the contract itself. A
side letter is an agreement that is added on to the main contract. It is binding and can be
grieved unless you have agreed that it can’t. Whether side letters must be specifically
renewed when they expire depends on the understanding of the two sides during
bargaining.
If management officials are reluctant to break new ground on a controversial issue or to
agree to special provisions for a particular group of workers, they may feel more
comfortable using a side letter format to emphasize that the agreement is unusual or
experimental.
• Bring in a new face, such as a higher-level union official. If management officials are
ready to settle but their relations with local union negotiators have become too strained,
they may find it easier to settle with someone new.
In addition, the presence of someone from higher up may remind management that the
larger union stands behind this local.
If a settlement is reached with the higher official’s help, it is important that the
negotiating team be closely involved in considering and approving the tentative
agreement. Like any settlement, it probably will involve both compromises and victories.
The political heat for those compromises and the credit for those victories should be
shared by a united union leadership. In the long run, members’ confidence in their union
will be damaged if they see political division and jockeying among different levels of the
33
union or if they view the settlement as something higher-level officials negotiated over
the heads of their own negotiators.
• Step up the pace of bargaining. This might mean meeting every day instead of once a
week. Or it might mean using marathon bargaining sessions, in which negotiators agree to
stay in session all day and all night if necessary to reach an agreement.
This approach is supposed to help negotiators get into a rhythm of reaching agreement
that will help them find solutions when they get to the toughest issues. It is also supposed
to wear negotiators down, so that getting bargaining over becomes more important than
the details of the settlement.
For these reasons, high-pressure bargaining obviously will help you if management’s
negotiators are the first to feel the effects, and will hurt you if your own team is the first
to wear down or get in the mood of compromise.
If you are going to engage in marathon bargaining, all members of the team who are
going to be present should go into it well rested and without family conflicts that will
make them too eager to reach a settlement.
Nathoo (2000) agrees with the above and summarizes by highlighting the following
points:
Patience during the process of negotiations confers bargaining power, while risk
aversion affects it adversely
A player’s outside option enhances her bargaining power if and only if it is
attractive and therefore credible.
A player’s Bargaining power is higher the larger is her inside option, provided that
all negotiators’ outside options are not attractive enough
If both negotiators’ outside options are sufficiently attractive, then it is likely that
gains from cooperation may exist (and the parties may thus prefer to exercise their
respective outside options)
When both negotiators’ cost of backing down from their initial demands are
sufficiently large, then making such demands may risk leading the negotiations
into a stalemate
A player’s bargaining power is higher the larger is their cost of backing down
from their initial demand
34
When a party does not know something of relevance to the ongoing negotiations
which the other party does, there is a risk of failure of negotiations or of costly
delay till the relevant information is credibly communicated to the uninformed
party.
Knowledge is veritable power in negotiations and enhances the bargaining
strength of the better informed.
The above views are also shared by Fisher and Ury, 1991, Narlikar, 2010, Krevynenyak
2002, Lax and Sebenius 1986, Raiffa 1982, Schelling 1960, Walton and McKersie, 1965
and Zartman, 1978.
2.5.0. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
Silva (1996) posits that collective bargaining is specifically an industrial relations
mechanism or tool and is an aspect of negotiation, applicable to the employment
relationship. As a process, the two are in essence the same and the principles applicable to
negotiations are relevant to collective bargaining as well. However, some differences
need to be noted. He further notes that in collective bargaining the union always has a
collective interest since the negotiations are for the benefit of several employees. Where
collective bargaining is not for one employer but for several, collective interests become a
feature for both parties to the bargaining process. In negotiations in non-employment
situations, collective interests are less, or non-existent, except when state negotiate with
each other. Further, in labour relations, negotiations involve the public interests such as
where negotiations are on wages which can impact the prices (Khabo, 2008, Okene, 2004
and Faruque, 2009)
Narlikar (2010) in collective bargaining certain essential conditions need to be satisfied,
such as the existence of the freedom of association and a labour law system. Further,
since the beneficiaries of collective bargaining are in daily contact with each other,
negotiations take place in the background of a continuing relationship which ultimately
motivates the parties in the specific issues. The nature of the employment relationship
between the parties in collective bargaining distinguishes the negotiations from normal
commercial negotiations in which the buyer may be in a stronger position as he could
take his business elsewhere. In the employment relationship the same employer is in a
35
sense, a buyer of services and the employee the seller, and the latter may have the more
potent sanction in the form of a trade union action.
Silva (1996) points out that the term ‘bargaining’ implies that the process is one of
haggling, which is more appropriate to a one time relationships such as the one-time
purchasers of a claimant to damages. While collective bargaining may take the form of
haggling, ideally it should involve adjusting the respective positions of the parties in a
way that is satisfactory to all.
www.fff.org.ph view collective bargaining as a process of negotiating an agreement
regarding the terms and conditions of employment through a system of shared
responsibility and decision making between labour and management. It has four essential
elements which are: legal in that collective bargaining is a process of negotiating an
agreement, economic in that its contents specify the terms and conditions of employment
(e.g. salary/wage increase, benefits, etc), political in that the agreement is a product of a
negotiation between labour and management and moral in that it involves a system of
shared responsibility (www.ffw.org.ph).
The International Labour Organization (ILO) right to organize and collective bargaining
Convention (No.98), 1949 describes collective bargaining as voluntary negotiation
between employers or employers’ organizations and workers’ organizations, with a view
to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment by collective agreements. They
further argue that collective bargaining could also be defined as negotiations relating to
terms of employment and conditions of work between and employer, a group of
employers or an employers’ organization on the one hand, and representative workers’
organizations on the other, with a view to reaching agreement. The same sentiments are
shared by Lewis et al 2003.
Lewis et al (2003) distinguishes between substantive terms which concern the content of
employment terms, e.g. pay, bonus and hours of work. In other words these are the
aspects of collective agreements that we would most readily recognize. Procedural terms
of collective bargaining on the other hand, set out the rules and procedures to be used by
both parties in regulating the conduct of the employment relationship and the bargaining
arrangement.
36
It can therefore be noted from the last two definitions that the authors agree that for
collective bargaining to take place there is need for labour and management to come
together to discuss and set and agree on conditions of employment. Broadly speaking
therefore, collective bargaining is the umbrella under which the wage negotiation takes
place.
2.5.1 CRITERIA FOR WAGE INCREASES
According to McPhie (2006), the factors which have influenced pay increases through
collective bargaining include enterprise profit, job evaluation, seniority, cost of living,
manpower shortage or surplus, the negotiating strength and skills of the parties. He goes
on to argue that these performance measures such as productivity or profit related to
groups or individuals have not featured prominently in collective bargaining. Further,
though wage rates negotiated through collective bargaining do reflect wage differentials
based on skills, such differentials have not been geared to the encouragement of skills
acquisition and application. Therefore, according to Silva (1996) the major concerns for
employers is the need to negotiate pay systems which are
Strategic in the sense that they achieve strategic objectives
Flexible in the sense that their variable component can absorb downturns in
business and reduce labour costs
Oriented towards better performance in terms of productivity, quality, profit or
whatever performance criteria are agreed upon
Capable of enhancing earnings of employees through improved performance
Capable of reducing the incidence of redundancies during times of recession or
poor enterprise performance through the flexible component of pay
Able to reward good performance without increasing the labour costs as part of
total costs through enhanced productivity
Able to attract and retain competent staff
Able overall to control or stabilize labour costs
2.5.2.0 MODELS OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
37
Good negotiating is not about outsmarting, outmaneuvering or manipulating the other
side. It is not about hitting (the other party) over the head and running off with the
goodies before they know what hit them. It’s not about deception, omission or getting
away with something. Foster (1992), points out that most of the time it’s not about one
side having to give up something it needs in order for the other side to get what it wants.
Nelson Mandela, one of the iconic figures of our time once said he attaches importance to
dialogue, solving problems through negotiation. It is an art which requires a great deal of
vision and strength of character. In the words of John F Kennedy in his inaugural speech
as President of the USA in 1961, he advised that people should never negotiate out of
fear, but let us never fear to negotiate.
Khabo (2005) notes that conflict is inevitable in employment relations, however, what is
important is how it is managed. The ideal situation is for parties to bargain voluntarily
without third party intervention. According to Fisher et al., (1991) negotiations however
sometimes fail. Where negotiations on any terms and conditions of employment have
failed, there must be in place mechanisms to which aggrieved parties can resort to. Hence,
the success of collective bargaining rests on the availability of efficient dispute resolution
systems (Khabo, 2005). These shall be discussed a little bit later in the chapter. Below are
some of the models of collective bargaining. As noted already these are not very different
from the theories of negotiation.
2.5.2.1 DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING
According to Mudyawabika (2003), this is when a win-lose scenario occurs where
objectives of one party are in fundamental and direct conflict to the objectives of the other
party. Resources would be fixed and limited and each party would want to maximize their
share of resources and their success or otherwise will depend on the strategies that they
use. The theory assumes a zero-sum game. Each party takes an extreme position and
stubbornly holds onto it. It is also sometimes referred to as traditional or positional
bargaining. Compromising is considered a sign of weakness. Each side puts forward its
position to the other, then, once the positions are clear, the negotiation becomes a process
of concession-making, whereby each side bargains with the other and compromises as
38
little as possible to keep the negotiations going. A fixed pie approach is adopted. There is
concealment or withholding of information, digging in. Exaggeration, misrepresentation,
use of bluffs, threats manipulation, putdowns and other dirty tactics. The preparations for
negotiations resemble a mobilization for war, differences are heightened, villains
identified, weapons honed and war paint generously applied. Other have argued and said
the result of this kind of negotiation is win-lose or lose-lose.
2.5.2.2 INTEGRATIVE BARGAINING
In this case there is a win-win situation. The bargaining process is collaborative and based
on assumptions that the parties are willing and able to cooperate in defining a common
objective and working toward it. Negotiators look at both their interests as well as those
of the other party. Parties are more concerned with future relationships than maximizing
their positions. Process builds trust and strengthens relationships (Walton and Mckersie:
1991). Fischer, Ury and Patton (1991) talk of principled negotiation. Principled
negotiation they say is premised of four attributes later expanded to seven.
Separate the people from the problem
Focus on interests, not positions
Invent options for mutual gains
Insist on using objective criteria
In principled negotiation, parties get more of what they want the expanded pie approach.
They do so in a collaborative climate, where relationships are established, where needs
are met and where both sides walk away as winners. Negotiators are therefore joint
problem solvers who seek solutions to mutual problems or issue of interest. Relevant
information is shared between the parties.
2.5.2.3 ATTITUDINAL STRUCTURING
Mudyawabika (2003) says that this is premised on the principle that the negotiation
process has a significant impact on the relationship between the parties. Negotiation
39
results in either the maintenance or the restructuring of the attitudes of the parties toward
each other
2.5.2.4 INTRA-ORGANISATIONAL BARGAINING
According to Mudyawabika (2003) these are internal organizational or party deliberations
within an organization or party which are carried out with a view to taking common
positions before engaging the other party in collective bargaining. It’s premised on
recognition that the parties to negotiations often lack the internal consensus about the
concerns, the strategies and/or tactics to be used and the relationship that should be
developed with the other party. We now turn our attention at what levels the bargaining
take place in the whole set up does.
2.5.2.5 BARGAINING LEVELS
According to Gernigon et al., (2000) ILO Recommendation No. 163 provides that
measures adapted to national conditions should be taken, if necessary, so that collective
bargaining is possible at any level whatsoever, including that of the establishment, the
undertaking, the branch of activity, the industry or the regional or national levels (ILO
1996d). Silva (1996) concurs with Gernigon (2000) and Khabo (2008) above and puts it
that collective bargaining may take place at any of the following levels:
a) National
b) Single Employer
c) Multi-Employer/Industry
d) Regional or District
Gennard and Judge (2005) concur with the above when they assert they are a number of
bargaining levels available from which to make a strategic choice i.e. multi-employer
level single employer level, enterprise level and a combination of all three above.
However for purposes of this research a brief detail of the multi-employer level has been
provided since it applicable to the NEC Catering Industry as it is in practice. Their
bargaining is modeled along the same lines. Multi-employer bargaining has
40
conventionally combined two levels- bargaining on the establishment of framework terms
and conditions at Industry level with bargaining on the other matters left to individual
companies. The actual distribution between the two tiers varies between industries and
also changes over time. Company bargaining is where all terms and conditions of
employment are negotiated at the central company level. Bargaining at this level enables
pay and conditions to be related to the economic circumstances of the company as a
whole and provides for standardized conditions across the company for similar jobs.
In no country does it take place exclusively at one level only. According to Silva (1996),
however, in many industrialized countries especially in Europe, the existence of strong
employers’ organizations and trade unions have resulted in many important agreements
being concluded at the national or industry level, supplemented by some enterprise level
bargaining. In the USA, however, bargaining at the enterprise level has been the more
usual practice, other than in specific sectors such as coal, steel, trucking and construction.
Salomon (2000) defines multi-employer agreements as those being negotiated between
Trade Unions and Employer Associations and covering employees of a given description
in a specified industry or sub-industry. Until recently, national multi-employer bargaining
was the dominant model in the UK and continental Europe. It affords both management
and union’s significant advantages (Lewis et al 2003, and Silva 1996).
The advantages to the employer include:
More concerted response to trade union organization
Reduces chances of employers competing with one another by wage and salary
costs
Smaller employers do not have to spend time negotiating as it is done by experts
Reduces trade union role at the workplace
The advantages that accrue to Trade Unions include:
Enhances bargaining strength
The negotiation of acceptable minimum standards for an industry’s employees
Increases chances of gaining recognition from new employers
Rationalization of resources
Demonstrable relevance to Industry employees thereby enhancing recruitment
prospects.
This is the model that is currently in application in Zimbabwe as provided for by the
Labour Act (Chapter 28:01) as well as Statutory Instrument 167of 1991.
41
2.5.3.0 CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESSFUL COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
2.5.3.1 PLURALISM AND FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION
Silva (1996), points out that a pluralistic outlook involves the acceptance within a
political system of pressure groups (e.g. religious groups, unions, business associations,
political parties) within specific interests with which a government has dialogue, with a
view to effecting compromises by making concessions. Pluralism implies a process of
bargaining between these groups, and between one or more of them on the one hand and
the government on the other hand. It therefore recognizes these groups as the checks and
balances which guarantee democracy (Okene, 2004 and Khabo, 2008)
2.5.3.2 TRADE UNION RECOGNITION
According to Okene (2004), the existence of the freedom of association does not
necessarily mean that there would automatically be recognition of unions for bargaining
purposes. Especially in systems where there is a multiplicity of trade unions, there should
be pre-determined objective criteria operative within the industrial relations system to
decide when and how a union should be recognized for collective bargaining purposes.
Silva (1996) notes then, that the accepted principle is to recognize the most representative
union, but what criteria is used to decide it and by whom may differ from system to
system. In some systems the issue would be determined by requiring the union to have
not less than a stipulated percentage of the workers in the enterprise or category in its
membership (Gernigon et.,al 2000). This is the case in Zimbabwe
2.5.3.3 OBSERVANCE OF AGREEMENTS
Gernigon et al., (2000), notes that in developing countries, unions are sometimes unable
to secure observance of agreements by their members. Silva (1996) emphasizes that,
where there is frequent non observance of agreements or understandings reached through
collective bargaining process, the party not in default would lose faith in the process.
42
2.5.3.4 SUPPORT OF LABOUR ADMINISTRATION AUTHORITIES
Faruque (2009) and Okene (2004) argue that support by the administration labour
authorities is necessary for successful collective bargaining. They say this implies that
they will:
i) provide the necessary climate for it. For instance they should provide effective
conciliation services in the event of a breakdown in the process, and even
provide the necessary legal framework for it to operate in where necessary,
e.g. provision for the registration of agreements
ii) will not support a party in breach of agreements concluded consequent to
collective bargaining
iii) as far as is practicable, secure observance of collective bargaining agreements
iv) provide methods for the settlement of disputes arising out of collective
bargaining if the parties themselves have not so provided.
2.5.3.5 GOOD FAITH
According to www.au.af.mil mutual trust comes from experience, either with the
negotiation process or from previous contact. If it does not exist, it must be built.
Collective bargaining is workable only if the parties bargain on good faith. If not, there
will be only the process of bargaining without a result. According to ILO (1996) good
faith is more likely where certain attitudes are shared among employers, workers and their
organization, e.g. a belief and faith in the value of compromise through dialogue, in the
process of collective bargaining and in the productive nature of the relationship collective
bargaining requires and develops. Gernigon et al., (2000) points out that in preparatory
work for Convention No. 154, it was recognized that collective bargaining could only
function effectively if it was concluded in good faith by both parties; but as good faith
cannot be imposed by law, it could only be achieved as a result of the voluntary and
persistent efforts of both parties (ILO, 1981).
2.5.3.6 PROPER INTERNAL COMMUNICATION
43
ILO (1996) stresses that both management and unions should keep their managers and
members respectively well informed, as lack of proper communication and information
can lead to misunderstandings and even strikes. Sometimes managers and supervisors
who are ill-informed may inadvertently mislead workers who work under them about the
current state of negotiations, the management’s objectives and so on.
2.6.0 LEGAL STATUS OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
Collective bargaining agreements have a unique status in the UK in that they are not
legally binding on the parties who have signed them. If either the union or management
acts contrary to the agreement, the other party cannot enforce its rights outlined in the
agreement via Courts (Gennard and Judge: 1999). According to Towers (2003) between
1979 and 1997 successive conservative governments sought to reduce the collective
rights of trade unions. Provisions to allow trade unions to claim recognition from
employers were repealed, legal support for the closed shop removed and taking industrial
action lawfully was made more difficult. However the election of the Labour government
in 1997 marked a fresh approach to collective arrangements involving Trade Unions.
In Zimbabwe however the situation is different. There are two main trade unions namely
The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions and The Zimbabwe Federation of Trade
Unions. Employees are free to choose where they want to belong. All collective
agreements reached and gazetted are enforceable via courts. The Labour Act (Chapter
28:01) recognizes collective bargaining at the workplace. Some of the sections of support
of the above include Part II of the Act on Fundamental Rights of Employees on
employees’ entitlement to membership of trade unions and workers committees. Section 6
of the act provides for protection of employees right to fair labour standards as well as
section 7 where it’s advocating for protection of employees’ right to democracy at the
workplace.
Part 5 of the Labour Act on section 19 provides for advisory councils whilst section 20
empowers the Minister to stipulate minimum wages through statutory instrument. The
Minister may, either on his own initiative or on the recommendation of any employer or
employee of any association representing employers or employees, appoint advisory
councils consisting of such persons as the Minister may deem fit, to investigate and make
recommendations to him or her as to one or more of the following
44
a) In connection with wages, salaries or benefits-
i) the fixing of minimum wages and benefits for employees or,
ii) any other matters to which minimum wage notices may relate
b) The making of regulations in terms of section 17 or section 26,
c) the compilation of a list of arbitrators in terms of section 98
Most of part 6 of the Labour Act is also in support of collective bargaining. The relevant
sections are section 23, 24, 25, 25A, 28, 29 and 31. Section 25 of the Labour Act talks of
the effects of collective bargaining agreements negotiated by workers committees. It
clearly states that
1) every collective bargaining agreement which has been negotiated by a
workers committee shall be referred by the workers committee to the
employees and the trade union concerned, and if, approved by the trade union
and by more than fifty per centum of the employees, shall become binding on
the employer and the employees concerned. Provided that where there is any
conflict between the terms and conditions of any such collective bargaining
agreement and the collective bargaining agreement negotiated by an
appropriate trade union, the latter shall prevail
2) where a collective bargaining agreement which has been negotiated by a
workers committee contains any provision which is, or has become-
a) inconsistent with this Act or any other enactment; or
b) unreasonable or unfair, having regard to the respective rights of parties;
the Minister may direct the parties to the agreement to negotiate, within such
specified period as he may specify , an amendment to the agreement to
negotiate in such extent as he may specify and he may give such other
directions relating to the operation of the agreement pending its amendment
as he may deem fit, and such direction shall be binding on the parties.
3) Where the Minister has made such a direction in terms of subsection (2), it
shall be the duty of the parties to the collective bargaining agreement
concerned to negotiate an amendment to the agreement in good faith, and
report back to the Minister within the period specified in the direction the
extent to which they have been able or unable to agree in amending the
agreement.
45
4) A collective bargaining agreement negotiated in terms of this section shall not
be
affected by-
a) Where the employer is a corporate body, a change in membership of the
management or ownership of the employer
b) a change in membership of the workers committee or the employees
concerned; or
c) a transfer of the undertaking or industry in which the employees
concerned are employed.
5) Any person who is aggrieved by any determination or direction in terms of
Subsection (2) or any amendment of a collective bargaining agreement in
terms of subsection (4) may appeal to the Labour Court
The statutory instrument for the Catering Industry is known as the CBA 167/1991 and
further supports the enactments of the Labour Act. This borrows from the principal
document which is the Labour Act the minimum conditions of employment that
organizations are expected to observe. The CBA on page 2 states:
In accordance with the provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1985, this agreement is
made and entered into between the Catering Employers Association of Zimbabwe
(hereinafter referred to as the “employer” or “employers’ organization”) of the one part
and the Zimbabwe Catering and Hotel Workers Union (hereinafter referred to as the
“employees” or the “trade union”, of the other part, being parties to the National
Employment Council for the Catering Industry.
The procedural terms are then outlined followed by the substantive terms of the
agreement. The most important Section 10 of the CBA for this study, compels every
employer to place each employee in the grade appropriate to his occupation, and to pay
wages to such employees of at least the amount prescribed hereunder for the employee’s
grade and class and that no employee shall accept wages amounting to less than the
amount prescribed for him.
2.7.0 THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PROCESS
46
The collective bargaining process comprises five core steps according to
www.industrialrelations.naukrihub.com, which are now discussed below. It needs to be
noted that the negotiation process and the collective bargaining process are one and the
same. In collective bargaining the scope is wider however, whilst in wage negotiation, it
is one of the issues that can be discussed separately when bargaining.
1. Prepare: This involves composition of a negotiation team. The negotiation team
should consist of representatives of both the parties with adequate knowledge and
skills for negotiation. In this phase both the employer’s representatives and the
union examine their own situation in order to develop the issues that they believe
will be most important. The first thing to be done is to determine whether there is
actually any reason to negotiate at all. A correct understanding of the main issues
to be covered and intimate knowledge of operations, working conditions,
production norms and other relevant conditions is required.
2. Discuss: The parties decide the ground rules that will guide the negotiations. A
process well begun is half done and this is no less true in case of collective
bargaining. An environment of mutual trust and understanding is also created so
that the collective bargaining agreement would be reached.
3. Propose: This phase involves the initial opening statements and the possible
options that exist to resolve them. In a word, this phase could be described as
‘brainstorming’. The exchange of messages takes place and opinion of both the
parties is sought.
4. Bargain: Negotiations are easy if a problem solving attitude is adopted. This stage
comprises the time when ‘what ifs’ and ‘supposals’ are set forth and the drafting
of agreements take place.
5. Settlement: Once the parties are through with the bargaining process, a
consensual agreement is reached upon wherein both the parties agree to a common
decision regarding the problem or the issue. This stage is described as consisting
of effective joint implementation of the agreement through shared visions,
strategic planning and negotiated change.
According to Faraque (2008), a trade union is legally entitled to raise labour disputes
on behalf of the workers and to bargain collectively with the employers on the issues
of disputes. When an industrial dispute arises or is apprehended, the trade union or the
47
employer(s) of the establishment is required to communicate their respective views in
writing to the other. After communicating their respective views, both the trade union
and the employer(s) sit across the table and negotiate for arriving at a settlement.
Negotiations have to be completed within 21 days after the official demand. If a
settlement is arrived through collective bargaining, a memorandum of settlement is
recorded in writing and signed by both parties and a copy thereof is forwarded to the
appropriate government authority.
Below is the diagrammatic presentation of the Wage Negotiation Process
Figure 2.1 The Collective Bargaining Process
Source: http://industrialrelations.naukrihub.com/process.html
Faruque (2008), outline the collective bargaining process in Bangladesh below which is
alike to the Zimbabwean system of wage negotiation.
He goes on to say if parties fail to arrive at a memorandum of settlement through
collective bargaining, any of the parties, either the trade union or the employer, can refer
the dispute to the conciliator in writing with a request to conciliate. Upon such request it
becomes obligatory on the part of the conciliator to start the process of conciliation. At
plant level the trade union which is elected can raise a dispute in writing and place it
before management for collective bargaining. Similarly the employers can also raise a
dispute and place it before the trade union for negotiation (Faraque: 2008)
The Zimbabwean scenario is along the same lines as conducted in Bangladesh the only
difference being that parties in Zimbabwe do not usually waste time referring the matter
48
for conciliation but once deadlock is declared the matter is automatically referred for
arbitration.
2.8.0 ALTERNATIVE WAGE DETERMINATION MECHANISM
According to Nelson (2006) while the basic wage or pay is the main component of
compensation, fringe benefits and cash and non-cash benefits influence the level of wages
or pay because the employer is concerned more about labour costs than the wage rates per
se. McPhie (2006), notes that the tendency is towards an increasing mix of benefits,
which therefore have an important impact on pay levels. Pay determination may have one
or more objectives, which may often be in conflict with each other. Silva (1996),
classifies the objectives of pay under four headings.
Equity- income distribution through narrowing of inequalities, increasing wages
of the lowest paid employees, protecting real wages, the concept of equal pay for
equal work
Efficiency – attempts to link a part of wages to productivity or profit, group or
individual performance, acquisition and application of skills etc
Macro-economic stability- through high employment levels and low inflation, for
instance.
Efficient allocation of labour in the labour market
He goes on to say traditionally wages and pay have been determined through government
regulation, minimum wage determination, negotiation with unions, decisions of
arbitration or labour courts and the individual contract of employment. The factors which
have influenced wages and wage increases include profit (generally unrelated to
individual or group performance), job evaluation, seniority, cost of living, manpower
shortage or surplus, negotiating strength of the parties and skills. Nelson (2006), notes
that performance measure such as productivity or profit related to performance of a group
have been of less importance in determining pay increases. Though skills have been
reflected in pay differentials, pay systems have been seldom geared to the encouragement
of skills acquisition and application.
The Encyclopedia of Business, 2nd edition points out that traditionally pay systems for no-
executive staff have generally been characterized by standardization across and within
sectors (e.g. government, particular industries) and within enterprises. So long as
49
employers were competing mainly in domestic markets which were protected from
foreign competition in some cases leading to monopolies- the effects of standardization
on considerations such as performance, recruitment and retention of good staff etc, were
less felt. Indeed standardization, while being equitable from the point of view of
employees, benefited employers as well by reducing competition based on labour costs.
Silva (1996), notes that in the area of industrial relations, collective bargaining outside the
enterprise is seen by employers as achieving distributive justice in the sense of equality,
with outcomes often being based on the bargaining strength of the parties. It is
increasingly viewed as contributing little to productivity and performance. The outcomes
often leave employers with little or no capacity to make further payments on account of
performance under a scheme. The movement toward decentralization of collective
bargaining has been the result of the need to address efficiency and performance issues at
enterprise level. Increased earnings were secured and performance rewarded partly
through promotions. With limitations on higher positions in the context of organizations
becoming less hierarchical in the future, relating part of pay increases to performance
would be a way of rewarding performance other than through promotions (Nelson, Crum,
Ferentinos and Tsugawa, 2006).
Nelson et al., (2006) and Silva (1996) point out that pay systems are increasingly forming
part of human resource management initiatives to achieve enterprise level objectives and
strategies, with more attention being paid to how they fit into the overall human resource
management policies of organizations. Pay increases need to be more than matched by
productivity increases if competitiveness is to be achieved or maintained.
2.8.1.1 SCHEMES
Silva (1996) and McPhie (2006), posit that the types of schemes which fall within the
description of performance pay are varied. The schemes are designed to share or
distribute the financial results of the enterprise performance with or to employees. In
essence performance pay is based on paying the worker for his or her value, rather than
the value of the job. The schemes fall into four broad categories below:
individual- based or based on individual performance, such as incentive schemes
and sales commissions
50
profit- sharing, which applies to all or most of the employees
gain-sharing measured by a pre-determined performance formula, applicable to all
or groups of employees. The performance measure may be profit or some other
objective such as productivity
employee share ownerships schemes
Nelson et al., (2006), caution by saying that the success or failure of performance pay is
affected by a variety of circumstances which vary from country to country. That is why
transplanting such systems without the necessary modifications is unlikely to meet the
objectives. They go on further to say that success or failure will generally be influenced
by circumstances such as: the tradition of collective bargaining, attitude of unions,
cultural factors, a human resources management system which uses pay to reinforce
larger business strategies and whether the overall climate in the enterprise is favourable to
performance and productivity.
2.8.1.2 SKILL-BASED PAY
According to Nelson et al., (2006) skill based pay refers to a pay system in which pay
increases are linked to the number of depth of skills an employee acquires and applies and
it is a means of developing broader and deeper skills among the workforce. Such
increases are in addition to, and not in lieu of, general pay increases employees may
receive (Silva, 1996, Encyclopedia for Business 2nd Edition). Pay increases are usually
tied to three types of skills:
horizontal skills, which involve a broadening of skills in terms of the range of
tasks
vertical skills, which involve acquiring skills of higher level
depth skills, which involve a high level of skills in specialized areas relating to the
same job
Silva (1996), points out that skill-based pay differs in the following respects from
traditional pay systems which reflect skills differences in a structure consisting of rates of
pay for unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled workers:
51
skill-based pay is person-based and not a job-based, system. It rewards a person
for what he/she is worth, rather than the job, is worth. Job worth is reflected in a
basic rate of pay for minimum skills, but pay progression is directly linked to
skills acquisition (rather than to general pay increases applicable to all)
it rewards (and therefore emphasizes) a broad range of skills which makes the
employee multi-skilled and therefore flexible
it positively encourages skills development
a skill based pay may not necessarily reflect how well the skill is used, as this falls
within the performance component of pay.
The system needs to be underpinned by opportunities for training which is critical
to the success of the system.
Skills provide employees with a measure of protection against unemployment, as well as
opportunities for higher earnings. At the same time, skills provide employers with an
important means of achieving competitiveness. Skill based pay systems are appropriate to
organizations which depend on a high level of skills and in which labour costs represent a
relatively small portion of total costs, unlike in labour intensive industries.
2.9.0 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION MECHANISMS
Khabo (2008), says that on the context of collective bargaining and labour disputes
resolution, alternative disputes resolution (ADR) mechanisms contribute to the promotion
of collective bargaining through the resolution of labour disputes within the framework of
conciliation and/or arbitration processes in which parties to the collective bargaining
agreement participate. The situation is envisaged by article 6 of the Collective Bargaining
Convention, 1981 (No.154). Khabo (2008) observes that most of SADC countries subject
disputes related to collective bargaining agreements to conciliation and arbitration
mechanisms. The general trend is now to move towards the adoption of alternative
dispute resolution mechanisms (ADR) which embrace the voluntary, informal accessible
and speedy resolution of disputes. The Voluntary Conciliation and Arbitration
Recommendation, 1951 (No. 92) encourages parties who have consented to conciliation
and arbitration to desist from engaging in strikes while conciliation and arbitration
52
processes are in progress and indicates that none of its provisions may be interpreted as
limiting, in any way whatsoever, the right to strike.
2.9.1 ARBITRATION
One of the several functions of collective bargaining is the settlement of disputes by
laying down a rule making process. According to Okene (2004), the major interest of
trade unions is winning wage concessions from employers through collective action.
Where the employer fails to accede to the demands of the workers this could lead to strike
action. Thus collective bargaining provides the mechanism for dispute settlement by
negotiation on working conditions and terms of employment. There are instance when
parties fail to agree unfortunately, these cases have to be referred for conciliation and then
arbitration.
According to Gernigon (2000), one of the most radical forms of intervention in collective
bargaining, under the terms of the law or as a result of an administrative decision, is the
imposition of compulsory arbitration when parties do not reach agreement, or when a
certain number of days of strike action have elapsed. Compulsory arbitration may also be
sought by one of the parties, but always conflicts with the voluntary nature of negotiation,
since the solution which is imposed is not derived from the will of both parties, but from a
third party to whom they have not had recourse jointly. It is also acceptable where it is
provided for in the collective agreement as a mechanism for the settlement of disputes.
Furthermore it is also acceptable, as the Committee on Freedom of Association, following
the committee of Experts, has recently indicated in cases where, after protracted and
fruitless negotiations, as it is obvious that the deadlock in bargaining will not be broken
without some initiative in the part of the authorities (ILO, 1995c, Case No 1768
(Iceland)).
2.10 CHAPTER SUMMARY
This chapter presented literature on the wage negotiation process and collective
bargaining. Essentially annual wage negotiations are a component of the broader scheme
of the collective bargaining process. The theories of negotiations were discussed and
53
these include structural, strategic, behavioural, concession exchange and integrative. On
collective bargaining, models of collective bargaining were discussed and their link to
negotiations. In the next chapter focus will now be on presenting the study methodology
and justification as to why it was chosen.
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.0 INTRODUCTION
This chapter focuses on providing information regarding the modus operandi of the study.
It is dedicated to the discussion of the research design and the various methodologies used
54
in this study. Furthermore a great deal of discussion centered on how to conduct the
research in order to collect reliable and valid data for the research questions as well as the
overall objective of the study. A discussion of the sampling techniques used and the
different types of data will be provided as well as an introduction and discussion of
development of research instruments and how data will be processed, analyzed and
presented. The reasons and justification for adopting such strategies are also presented.
The research will then discuss the results of the analysis. The chapter will wind up by
concluding giving an overview whether literature conforms to the findings of the study.
3.1 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY
A research philosophy refers to the belief about the way in which data regarding a
phenomenon should be collected, analyzed, interpreted and used. The objectives of
research include the quest to broaden knowledge in the researched field and to solve
practical problems (Girden: 2001). The philosophical direction of any research is
important for a number of reasons as it helps to clarify the research design, it helps to
recognize which designs will work and which will fail and it explains the researcher’s
identity and even create new designs that may be outside his experience (Easterby-Smith
et al 2002). According to Sunders and Thornhill (2000), research philosophy adopted by a
researcher depends on the researcher’s view on the developments of knowledge. In this
study the researcher sought to investigate the causes of wage negotiation deadlocks at the
NEC Catering Industry. This is a practical inquiry, thus an applied research as opposed to
basic research is appropriate. An applied research seeks to provide solutions to the
challenges identified in a certain community (Nunan: 1992).
Smith and Dainty (1991) wrote that there are different approaches to research based on
the inquirer’s values, assumptions and beliefs about the world. More importantly, the
researcher ought to understand the strengths and weaknesses of each of these
assumptions. There are two major categories of the research philosophy, i.e. positivism
and phenomenology. Galliers (1991) echoes the same sentiments by Saunders et al (2003)
and those of White (2000), that there are two main areas in research namely qualitative
and quantitative research. Quantitative (positivist) research involves the objective way of
studying things whilst qualitative (phenomenological) research is the subjective way of
studying things.
55
3.1.1 POSITIVISM
When positivism is adopted, it is because it supports the sharing of knowledge though
communication. The positivists approach assumes that things can be studied as facts and
relationships between the facts can be established as scientific laws. According to
Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (1996), positivism seeks to explain and predict what
happens in the business world by searching for irregularities and causal relationships
between variables. Other reasons for choosing the positivists approach include:
Clear theoretical focus for the research
Easily comparable data
Research control of the research process and
Economical collection of data from respondents.
According to Creswell (2003), the methodology of a positivist research follows the
assumptions of an empiricist paradigm. In a positivistic research the researcher is
independent from the research and data is used objectively to measure reality. Positivism
has its roots in science and most research methodology in both the natural and social
science subscribes to what has been termed the scientific methods (Allison et al: 2003).
The positivist approach assumes an external world determining behaviour, strives for
explanation, prediction, and control by dividing into parts, and isolating them,
mechanistic processes for explaining social behaviour, researcher is objective, and value-
free, truth has to be confined with empirical evidence, it is deductive and normally uses
quantitative data (Saunders et al, 1997). The positivist paradigm argues that one should be
able to explain phenomena in terms of what causes the behaviour observed. The cause
and effect relationship underpins the positivist methodology. Positivism prefers ‘working
with an observable social reality and that the end product of such research can be law-like
generalizations similar to those produced by the physical and natural scientists’(Bless &
Higson-Smith: 1995). They further claim that in this paradigm, the researcher is
independent of and neither affects nor is affected by the subject of the research.
3.1.2 PHENOMENOLOGY
56
Phenomenology is a research approach where social reality is multiple, divergent and
interrelated, analyses from the actor’s own perspective, human behaviour is how people
define their own world and reality is the meaning attributed to experience and is not the
same for everyone, (Finn, White and Walton: 2000). Phenomenology focuses on the
social process and how individuals shape and give meaning to the social world.
Understanding and interpreting these meanings underpins the phenomenological
methodology (Converse & Presser: 1986). The phenomenological approach emanates
from a key criticism of the positivist philosophy and asserts that the positivists approach
is irrelevant in business and management studies according to Saunders et al (2000).
Phenomenologist’s are of the view that the social world of business and management is
far too complex to rely on theorizing by definitive ‘laws’ as it is the case with physical
sciences. The business world and management are complex and unique. The business
environment is constantly changing and thus generalizations less valuable.
By adopting a phenomenological stance, a researcher can potentially dig deeper to
explore the taken for granted assumptions of the social world (Smith: 1998). This notion
is given credence by the gestalt principle which states that the whole is more than the sum
of its parts, meaning that there is more to reality of the matter than its individual members
can portray (Kriel:2006). It has been stated that the greatest strength of phenomenological
philosophy lies in its ability to help discovering underlying assumptions influencing
certain behaviours, which assumptions the group members will be unaware of (Saunders
et al: 2000).
3.1.3 PHILOSOPHICAL APPROACH
There is no philosophy that is superior to the other. The type of research will determine
the most suitable philosophy. Sunders et al (2000) argue that business and management
research is often a mixture of positivism and phenomenology philosophies with more
emphasis being on the phenomenological approach.
This research is premised on the phenomenology philosophy which requires the capturing
of complexities of social research. Wage negotiation/bargaining are a social interaction
57
between two parties that represent two different constituencies. It’s important to note that
in this set up elements such as personalities, motives, power and politics are real and the
underlying determinants to the parties’ ultimate outcomes. Consequently it becomes
critical to interpret the parties actions in order to determine motives and respective goals
and to interpret the behaviour of the parties (Russel: 1994) and hence reliance on
phenomenology. Nevertheless aspects of positivism inform the study through the use of
positivist’s instruments such as the questionnaire.
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN
Social research needs a design or a structure before data collection or analysis
commences. The function of a research design is to ensure that evidence obtained enables
the researcher to answer initial question as unambiguously as possible. Obtaining relevant
evidence entails specifying the type of evidence needed to answer the research question,
to test theory, to evaluate a programme, or to accurately describe some phenomenon
(Yin:1988).
This is the blue print for the collection, measurement and analysis of data (Cooper and
Schindler: 1998). White (2000) noted that it is a general term that covers a number of
separate but related issues associated with research study. It also refers to the organization
of data and its analysis to obtain information. Zikmund (2003) has supported the above
views by defining research design as a master plan specifying the methods and
procedures to be used for collecting and analyzing the needed information. Jankomicz
(2002) views a research design as a systematic approach taken towards the collection of
data so that information can be obtained from those data. A research design refers to a
series of advance decisions that, taken together, comprise a model of how the
investigation to answer research questions was conducted (Bryman: 1988). It can be
considered as a blueprint to guide the data collection, data processing and information
transmission and analysis.
In this study both qualitative and quantitative research designs were adopted in the
context of a cases study. The researcher undertook an analysis of the literature on wage
negotiation. This constituted the qualitative part. Thereafter data capturing was conducted
58
through the application of questionnaires and interviews. These approaches were critical
to ensure that all the research questions were adequately answered.
3.2.1 CASE STUDY APPROACH
The researcher used the case study approach in dealing with the research topic- the case
of NEC Catering. Yin (1994) defines a case study as an “empirical inquiry that
investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real life context” using a variety of
sources of evidence. Another strong advocate of the case study approach to research is
Stake. According to Stake (1995) a case study is intended to catch the complexity of a
single case. Saunders (2003) argues that a case study enriches the understanding of the
context of research and the processes being enacted whilst Ben-basat (1987) considers a
case study to be important for the following three reasons which are:
It is necessary to study the phenomenon in its natural setting.
The researcher can ask questions relating to how and why so as to understand the
nature and complexity of the process taking place,
Research is being conducted in an area where few, if any previous studies have
been undertaken.
It has been argues that case studies are difficult to generalize because they are based on
qualitative, subjective data and generalize to a particular extent only. The researcher used
a case study approach, using self administered questionnaires and personal interviews to
gather data because of the specialized or sophisticated nature of the industry and the
complexity of the phenomenon under study.
3.3 POPULATION OF THE STUDY
Population can be referred to as the aggregate of the individual units of the analysis from
which a survey sample will be derived (Wagner & Babbie: 1983). This means that the
population is the entire country as represented by the National Employment Council.
According to Fraenkel and Wallen (1996), population refers to the entire group the
researcher is interested in, which he/she wishes to describe or draw conclusion about.
Jankowicz (2000) concurs by saying that population refers to a collection of items of
59
interest in research. The population represents a group that the researcher wishes to
generalize the research too. Populations are often defined in terms of demography,
occupation and time. In order to make any generalizations, about a population, a sample
that is meant to be representative of the population is often studied. For each population
there are many possible samples. They divide the population into two categories: the
target population and the study population. The target population is the actual population
to which the researcher would optimally wish to generalize the research findings, whilst
study population is that population in which that researcher is practically able to
generalize these findings.
In this study the target population was composed of 90 members from CEAZ and
ZCHWU as well as NEC in Zimbabwe. The study population was the NEC Catering
Industry. It is the researcher’s view that the wage negotiation practices at NEC would
generally portray the practices of the companies in the Catering Industry since the
governing instruments to wage negotiation are common, although there maybe variations
due to localized peculiarities of the companies in the Industry. However generalizations
of the findings could be made to the Industry and thus the results for NEC would
relatively represent the situation in the companies in the Industry. Defining the population
is important because it helps the researcher in selecting a sample for study (Labovitz and
Hagedorn: 1976).
3.4 SAMPLING AND SAMPLING TECHNIQUES
Sampling is necessary when the size of the population is large and if the cost and time
required in obtaining information from the whole population is high. Dealing with large
population can negatively impact of the idea of making quick decisions if a large sample
is to be investigated.
Ferber (1974) defined a sample as a small part of anything designed to show the style,
quality and nature of the whole. The purpose of a sample is to approximate the
measurement of the whole population well enough, within acceptable limits. Allison et al
(2001) asserts that a sample is a group of subjects from whom the researcher collected
information. According to Saunders et al (2003) a sample is a subset of the whole
population which is actually investigated by a researcher and whose characteristics will
be generalized to the entire population. Holstein and Gabrium (1995) contend that
60
sampling is closely linked to external validity or generalisability of the findings in a
study, the extent to which what has been found in a particular situation at a particular time
applies more generally.
In this study a mixture of stratified and random sampling procedure (a probability and
non probability sampling method) was adopted for drawing the sample. This was done in
order to reduce expenses and save time. According to Kotler (1997) a target population of
less than 1% of the population can provide for good and reliable results. The research
selected 30 respondents for the questionnaire. The target population and samples was as
given below in the table.
Table 3.1 Population and Samples of the Study
Strata Population Sample
NEC 10 5
CEAZ 50 15
ZCHWU 30 10
TOTAL 90 30
There are two methods of coming up with a sample. Saunders et al (1997) reports that
random (probability) sampling ensures that the probability of each case being selected
from the population is known and is usually equal for all cases. On the other hand, non-
random (non-probability) sampling is such that the probability of each case being selected
from the total population is unknown and cannot answer questions that require statistical
inferences about the population’s characteristics. Simple random selection is based on
purely random (chance) basis from the population. Each element of the population has an
equal chance of being selected. This method is most appropriate when there is an
assumption that the population is relatively homogenous with respect to random variable
under study. This research adopted the stratified random sampling method and this is
explained below.
3.4.1 STRATIFIED SAMPLING
61
Stratified sampling involves dividing the population into a number of groups or strata,
where members of a group share a particular characteristic(s) De Vaus (1990). There is
then random sampling within the strata. Sampling theory shows that in some instances,
stratified sampling can be more efficient than simple random sampling. This is because
for a given sample size, the means of stratified samples are likely to be closer to the
population mean (Marsh, 1992). This occurs when there is a relatively small amount of
variability in whatever characteristic being measured within the stratum, compared to
variability across strata.
Allison et al (2001) point out that stratified random sampling involves dividing the
population into strata with each stratum having relatively homogenous elements. Once the
strata have been identified, a simple random sample is selected from each stratum
separately. Stratified random sampling is used when the population is thought to consist
of a number of smaller subgroups or sub populations such as male/female, different age,
ethnicity, interest groups, which are thought to have an effect on the data to be collected
(Allison et al: 2001). This method was used in this study.
The researcher divided the respondents into different strata namely NEC Administrators,
CEAZ Council and ZCHWU Agents a total of thirty five respondents representing forty
percent of the target population were considered adequate to give the level of accuracy
desired in the survey results. The choice of the sample size was guided by Hoinville et
al.., (1978) as cited in Saunders et al.., (2007) who argued that there are a number of
competing influences in choosing the sample size. Hence it is not surprising that the final
sample size is almost a matter of judgment rather than calculation.
According to Dillion et al (1990) and Saunders et al (1997) a well-planned and
administered sample provides a perfect alternative to collecting data from the entire
population.
3.5 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS
3.5.1 QUESTIONNAIRES
The research gathered data using structured questionnaires. This method was used in
order to capture the desired information and consequently, to produce quality results.
Questionnaires were used as data collection instruments because of their applicability to
the survey research design (Zikmund: 1997). A set of questions were developed for the
62
respondents. These were solicit their opinions and understanding on the causes of wage
negotiation deadlocks and how it can be overcome.
Saunders et al (2003) notes that the questionnaire is a technique of data collection in
which each person is asked to respond to a same set of questions in a predetermined
order. Bell and Openheim (2000) as cited in Saunders et al (2003) contends that it is far
harder to come up with a good questionnaire and therefore a combination of interviews
and questionnaires was used as a way of trying to overcome the shortcomings of each
instrument.
A questionnaire has advantages that it can be administered to large numbers of people at
the same time. Respondents will respond to the same questions which will improve
precision of the results. They are an efficient way of collecting responses from a large
sample and they maintain uniformity, are convenient and cost effective to use and give
respondents an opportunity of anonymity. By this virtue, questionnaires were adopted as
the core data collection instrument in this study as they suit the nature of the problem
under discussion. As a way of improving quality of the questionnaires, pre-testing of
questionnaires was done on five respondents at company level. Through the use of the
questionnaires this researcher was able to reach out to a larger sample and collect data
which was quick as compared to interviews that require the presence of the researcher.
Campbell and Katona (2005) stated that it is this capacity for wide application and broad
coverage which gives the survey technique its great usefulness.” The researcher resorted
to the use of telephones where clarifications were needed or required.
3.5.2 INTERVIEWS
Interviews solicit primary data responses through direct questioning (Wegner: 1993). This
researcher used personal interviews for purposes of this research study. Keogh (1999)
defines personal interviews as when the interviewer asks questions face to face with the
interviewee. For this study an interview was conducted with the Chief Designated Agent
at NEC Mr. Nunurai Bore only although the intention had been to also have interviews
with the Secretary General of the ZCHWU and President of the CEAZ. Efforts to set up
63
meeting were unsuccessful as most of the time they were never in the office and the times
they were in the office their schedules were not accommodating. Notable advantages of
the interview technique are their ability to expand on the areas of interest. They give non
verbal cues that could be very useful in bringing deeper information. Interviews are also
directed at the target population and clarity can be sought. The researcher can probe
further questions
According to McCracken (1988) the desire for depth of insight and relatively few prior
themes or questions suggested that depth interviews would be the most appropriate data
collection technique. Similar qualitative methods have been used by other researchers
examining consumer behaviours related to corporate social responsibility (Carrigan and
Attalla: 2001; Essoussi & Zahaf: 2008; Mohr et al: 2001) jus to mention a few. A total of
3 in-depth personal interviews were conducted with the Secretary General of ZCHWU,
President of CEAZ and Chief Designated Officer of NEC. A semi-structured interview
guide (see the Appendix) was employed and follow-up questions were used to allow the
participants to both elaborate on initial answers and to provide detail. The use of a semi-
structured interview guide allowed for the participants to discuss their views openly in
their own words and allowed the researcher to probe for deeper responses where
necessary (Miller and Crabtree: 1992). Interviews setbacks that may affect the flow of the
research are that they consume a lot of time and given the nature of this research this
could be a major setback. Interviews can also limit the research to a few people and are
costly as one needs to travel long distances and costly in terms of time spend in
conducting the interview.
The structured questionnaire with non disguised questions used for collecting data was
considered to be the best instrument for this study due to its versatility, simplicity and its
provision for a list of possible answers from which the respondents could choose. The
study also recognized the fact that data obtained from the administered non disguised
questionnaires is easier to tabulate and interpret. A structured interview was used to
solicit responses from the one respondent to help the researcher to bring out the required
information while keeping the line of questioning relevant and flexible. The telephone
network used by the researcher provided convenient and quick sources of information
where people were either busy or unavailable. The telephone method also helped in the
clarification of gaps and for consistency checking.
64
3.6 DATA COLLECTION METHODS
There are two main types of data found in research and these are primary & secondary
data. According to Bryman (1989) and Saunders et al (2003) data can be classified as
documentary, secondary data which is often used in projects that also use primary data
collection methods. Secondary data can also be found in forms of notices,
correspondences, and minutes of meetings, business plans, websites, company
documents, and reports to shareholders and other public records. Survey based secondary
data refers to data collected by questionnaires which have been already been analyzed for
the original purpose (Cook, 1982). Secondary data provides a useful source of data from
which to answer research questions. In this study however very little use was made of
secondary data especially in Chapter One.
On the other hand, primary data according to Merriam (1998) is one that is collected
specifically for a research project. Parasuraman (1991) argues the data is expensive to
collect, but it is easy to formulate structured and unstructured questions that focus on the
study topic. This forms the core and crux of this research project as it constituted the
central nerve of the problem diagnosis, the analysis and findings. In this study, primary
data was collected using questionnaires and interviews on the target population thereby
allowing for triangulation.
Within the three strata’s the researcher gained access to the database and collected names
and positions of the target population. The names were exported to the excel spreadsheet
were the names were assigned unique codes in relation to the origin of i.e. by NEC
Administrators, CEAZ and ZCHWU separately. Names were picked at random by the
computer and indicated 30 (thirty) to whom questionnaires were sent. This study was
conducted at the National Employment Council Offices in Harare. The distribution of
respondents is indicated below:
Table 3.2 Respondents of the Study
Strata Number of Respondents
NEC 5
CEAZ 15
ZCHWU 10
Total 30
65
3.7 RELIABILITY
In developing the research instruments, validity, reliability and objectivity of the
information obtained from the instruments were considered.
According to Sekaran (2003) reliability refers to the degree of reproducibility or variation
of outcomes of an experiment carried out in different settings, with different operators,
and over different applications ( reliability is a measure of precision), while validity refers
to how well an instrument measures the particular concept it is intended to measure. A
reliable instrument is one that gives consistent results (Bellenger and Greenberg: 1978).
The consistency gives the researcher confidence that the results actually represent what
he/she intended to study. Reliable instruments ought to obtain similar responses when
administered to different respondents.
3.8 VALIDITY
Labovitz and Hagedorn (1976) define validity as the ability of an instrument to measure
what it is supposed to measure. However, Fraenkel and Wallen (1996) view this
definition as old fashioned and instead, they argue that a more accurate definition of
validity revolves around the defensibility of the inferences researchers make from the data
collected through the use of an instrument. Moreover, they argue that validity of the
instruments must always be considered within the context inferences, the researcher
makes regarding particular areas or topics. In other words, the researcher needed
instruments that would permit him to obtain valid conclusions about the characteristics
(perceptions, attitudes, interests, politics etc) of the individuals under study.
Validity and reliability are crucial aspects of any research. It is important to understand
clearly the distinction between reliability and validity. Kjaer (2005) described validity as
follows: The validity of an experiment is the degree to which it measures the theoretical
construct under investigation. The economic literature refers predominantly to three types
of validity (described by the American Psychological Association in 1974): content
validity, criterion validity and construct validity. Content validity refers to all aspects of
66
the experimental design, such as choice of attributes, attribute levels, ordering of
attributes, and framing. According to Kjaer (2005) this validity is difficult to assess
because it depends on the intuition and experience of the researcher. Auger et al (2003)
carefully selected the attributes in previous studies in 2003, 2005, and 2006; these are
supported in the reviewed literature.
Criterion validity, also named external validity, refers to the extent to which the measure
of the construct can be compared with another measure which may be regarded as a
criterion. Construct validity refers to the extent to which a particular measure relates to
other measures and is consistent with the theoretically-derived hypotheses that relate to
the concept under measurement. Construct validity is concerned with whether the
measure is correlated with other measures of the same theoretical constructs, termed
convergent validity. Construct validity is also concerned with whether the findings
conform to the theoretical foundation of the research (Kjaer: 2005). In reference to the
internal validity Adamowicz et al (1998) stated, “The repeated question nature allows for
internal validity tests and provides a response surface which may yield important
information about the consistency of individual responses.” Considerable evidence exists
that preferences or values inferred from the research are similar to those inferred from
behaviour in the real market. According to Louviere (2001), “previous studies show fairly
consistent results that stated and actual preferences seem to correspond closely in many
cases”.
Fraenkel and Wallen (1996) argue that the issue of objectivity refers to the absence of
subjective judgments. It is important in research to try to eliminate subjectivity from the
judgments made concerning the subjects under study. Unfortunately, objectivity is never
probably attained completely. The questionnaire was pre-tested before administering
them at. The aim of doing this was to reveal the ambiguities, poor worded questions,
unclear choices and also to indicate whether the instructions to the respondents were clear
(Fowler: 1984)
According to Fowler (1984) attention should be paid to the length and clarity of the
questions when preparing research instruments. Both close-ended and open-ended
questions were used in the questionnaire. The close-ended questions allowed the research
to cover a wide range of areas regarding wage negotiation disputes. Respondents prefer
close-ended questions to open-ended questions since they are simple to answer (Fraenkel
and Wallen: 1996). However, close-ended questions have limited breath of responses, are
67
harder to construct and require more questions to cover the research topic than the open-
ended type (Babbie: 1973).
Open-ended questions were included to allow respondents to express their views
independently. The advantages of these questions were that they allowed more freedom
of response, were easier to construct and permitted follow-up by the interviewer.
However, the disadvantages were that the responses tended to be inconsistent in length
and content across respondents, which made them susceptible to misinterpretation and
were more difficult to process (Fowler: 1984). Validity was the key issue and that was the
reason the pre-testing of the instruments was conducted.
3.9 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
The respondents’ privacy was respected and they were assured that the information
obtained was going to be used for academic purposes only. Respondents were asked to
participate willingly and those that did not want to were not forced and were part of the
questionnaires that were not returned.
3.10 DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURE
Data processing consists of questionnaire coding, data entry and data cleaning. Initially,
the questionnaires were given unique codes for all responses and all badly completed
questionnaires were not considered for analysis. Data entry was done using Microsoft
Excel and data was also analyzed using Microsoft Excel. In data analysis and
interpretation, frequencies, percentages and means were used. The information was
presented using tables, graphs, and charts to enable easy comparison and clear projection
of the situation. These findings are presented in chapter four, together with their detailed
discussion.
Data for this research study was extracted from the original records i.e. the
questionnaires. The use of graphs and tables was made to show the findings of the
research. Conclusions were then drawn from the findings in the field. The researcher
identified emerging trends and issues which could be areas for further research in future.
Saunders et al (2003) and White (2000) noted that there exist two types of quantitative
data which are categorical and quantifiable. They noted the following; for continuous
68
data, it is recommended to use histograms. Tables, frequency distribution, bar charts, are
also recommended for this kind of data. For data that shows trend use of line graphs, bar
charts, or histograms is recommended. To compare trends it is recommended to use
multiple line graphs or multiple bar charts. Raw data in its numeric form from the
research was first of all coded and then grouped into the relevant groups or frames in
order to facilitate its analysis. Qualitative descriptions and data were first coded using
open coding into numerical data and then presented on the appropriate graphs or charts to
group and present them for a comprehensive and ease of analysis.
Wegner (2003) notes that statistics or numerical findings are only effective and of great
value to management if tables, graphs or charts were used to establish relationships
between data and the pie charts used to highlight the proportionate representations of the
data variables. The produced descriptive statistics were then compared and contrasted
with relevant research objectives to come up with interpretations and conclusions.
3.11 CHAPTER CONCLUSION
This chapter has discussed the research design used in the study and the reasons for
choosing the design. The chapter also discussed how research instruments were
developed, methods of data collection, data entry, data processing and analysis. It
presents and discusses the research findings.
CHAPTER 4
DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
4.0 INTRODUCTION
This was a study of causes of wage negotiation deadlocks and how parties can overcome
and or avoid deadlock situations. The study also sought to establish the negotiation
69
process and alternative ways of determining wages with recommendations of how the
process can be improved. In this chapter, the researcher presents and discusses the study
results. This is done in relation to the objectives of the study.
4.1 QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE RATE
The instrument used for data collection was the questionnaire. A total number of 30
questionnaires 30 were sent out to NEC Catering Industry, Zimbabwe Catering and
Hospitality Workers Union and Catering Employers Association of Zimbabwe and 25
were successfully completed and one being spoilt or rather no data was given giving a
response rate of 83.3%. The response rate was therefore good enough to proceed with
analysing the results. According to Kotler (1997) a target population of less than 1% of
the population can provide for good and reliable results
4.2 DEMOGRAPHIC RESULTS
4.2.1: GENDER DISTRIBUTION
Figure 4.1 indicates that 36% of the respondents were female whilst 64% were male. It
can therefore be noted conclude that the majority of the respondents in the study were
male, whilst women in the study constituted almost half of the respondents. In order to
help illustrate the sample demographics use of diagrams was made as in the diagram
below.
The table below provides an analysis of the gender distribution of the respondents.
70
Figure 4.1: Gender Distribution of Respondents
64%
36%
Male Female
4.2.2: AGE GROUP OF RESPONDENTS
The diagram below illustrates the respondent’s age distribution
Figure 4.2: Age Distribution of Respondents
Less than 30 years 31-35 years 36-40 years 41-45 years Above 46 years0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
20%
32%
24%
8%
16%
The results in figure 4.2 above shows that 20% of the respondents are below the age of 30
years, with the highest number of respondents falling into the age category of 31-35 years
which registered 32%. The second highest of 24% was registered on the age group 36- 40
years. The number of respondents decreases to 8% for the age group 41-45 years before
71
rising to 16% for the age group of those above 46 years. Majority of respondents is
therefore middle-aged as can be observed from the diagram above.
4.2.3: HIGHEST LEVEL OF EDUCATION
The majority of the respondent’s amounting to 64% indicated they had either had a
degree or a diploma as the two have 32% each as indicated in the diagram. Therefore
32% have degrees and a further 32% have Diplomas as their highest qualification. It can
also be observed that 20% of the respondents have a Masters degree and 16% have O &
A level as their highest qualification. It can be concluded that reading and understanding
of the questionnaire was therefore not likely to have been an issue taking into account the
level of literacy.
The diagram below shows the highest level of education of the respondents
Figure 4.3: Highest Level of Education
16%
32%
32%
20%
O and A LevelCertificateDiplomaDegreeMasters
4.2.4: LENGTH OF SERVICE
In figure 4.4 8% of the respondents had served their current organization for less than a
year whilst 40% had served their current organization for between 1 and 5 years. Another
20% had served their organization for 6-10 years.
72
Figure 4.4: Length of Service with Organization
0- 12 months 1- 5 years 6 -10 years 11-15 years Above 15 years0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
8%
40%
20%
12%
20%
In the 11-15 years there was a total of 12% whilst those who had served in their current
organization for more than 15 years were 20%. We may imply that those who may have
served their organizations for a number of years are likely to have understood the wage
negotiation process better and hence would by now be aware of the weaknesses and
strengths of the system.
4.2.5: AFFILIATION
In the diagram 4.5 below, the respondent’s affiliation is illustrated as shown
Figure 4.5: Affiliations of Respondents
NEC ZCHWU CEAZ0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
16%
28%
56%
73
The diagram above shows the affiliation of respondents i.e., the organizations they
represent during the wage negotiations. The figure shows that 16% of the respondents are
members of the National Employment Council (NEC), these are the administrators whilst
28% are members of the Zimbabwe Hotel and Catering Workers Union (ZCHWU)
representing the employees on the one hand and 56% of the respondents are members of
the Catering Employers Association of Zimbabwe (CEAZ) representing the employers on
the other hand. As already noted each party comes to the negotiation table with their own
beliefs and values which influence how they will bargain. Silva (1996) points out that
these people do not have the final say but carry the mandate of their ‘ratifiers’ on behalf
of whom they negotiate and hence will have to go back for endorsement on whatever
they would have agreed on.
4.3 THE WAGE NEGOTIATION PROCESS
From the research, it was established that 100% clearly understood the wage negotiations
process as conducted at NEC. They indicated that towards the time for negotiation, both
parties i.e. ZHCWU and CEAZ prepare their position papers in preparation for the
negotiations. The parties then submit their papers detailing their offers with justifications
for each. The negotiation process kicks off under the guidance of an independent
chairman. The aim will be to try and find common ground so as to reach agreement.
Where parties fail to agree then the parties declare a dispute/deadlock and will now have
to refer the matter for compulsory arbitration. Faraque (2008) outlined the wage
negotiation process in Bangladesh which process is almost the same as the situation
prevailing in Zimbabwe. It can therefore be concluded that both parties have a sound
understanding of the wage negotiation process.
4.3.1: SUCCESS OF WAGE NEGOTIATION
In the table below, respondents were asked to rate the overall picture of how they view
the success of the whole negotiation process and this was their response.
In table 4.1 it can be observed that 16 % indicated good whilst 84% indicated poor in
terms of the success of the wage negotiation process.
74
Table 4.1 Success of the Wage Negotiation Process
Good 16%
Poor 84%
The views of respondents on how their perception of the whole negotiation process can be
represented diagrammatically as shown below where 16% indicated good, whilst 84%
indicated poor.
Figure 4.6: Success of Wage Negotiation Process
Good Poor0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
16%
84%
The majority of the respondents were not satisfied with what the wage negotiation
process has managed to achieve to date. It therefore means that CEAZ and ZCHWU
continue to engage each other year in year out despite both parties not being satisfied with
the wage negotiation process. This set up is part of the established system by government
in terms of how the wage negotiation process is supposed to be conducted throughout all
National Employment Councils. It should therefore follow that when the parties are
dissatisfied there are just conducting the process as fulfilment of the law but they are not
fully committed to the process. It may suggest that may be it is about time that a rethink
of the whole process is required and ways of improving the system can be considered to
encompass the concerns of all so that ultimately they are able to reach agreement without
dwelling too much on impasse.
75
According to Zartman (1976) the wage negotiation process conducted at NEC above can
be said to border between concession exchange to being and integrative. It has elements
of give and take as well as cooperating to seek a lasting solution to a common problem.
Bazerman et al (1995), stresses that certain institutional peculiarities can make a system
more deadlocks prone. It is the researcher view that certain institutional peculiarities
inherent with the NEC may be rendering agreement impossible hence members may need
to agree on amending these.
Whilst still at the wage negotiation process, the researcher also sought to establish
whether the respondents were happy with the arbitration process as a sub-process of the
whole negotiation process. The respondents were therefore asked to rate whether the
negotiation process had been successful or not and the table below provides a summary of
their responses.
Table 4.2 Success of the Arbitration Process
Disagree 60%
Agree 40%
The above table can be presented diagrammatically as shown below.
Figure 4.7: Success of Arbitration Process
Disagree Agree0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
60%
40%
76
The diagram below presents the responses of participants in the survey on how they view
the success of the arbitration process as a component of the wage negotiation process as
conducted yearly. In figure 4.7 below, 60% of the respondents disagreed whilst 40%
agreed that the arbitration process had been successful. It can be noted that the majority
respondents of the respondents were not satisfied with the wage negotiation process and
in particular the dispute resolution mechanism that is in place in the event of deadlock.
Again this brings us back to the issue of the system as observed earlier. The arbitration
process is part of the established system by government on how labour disputes should be
resolved. If the users of the system are not happy, chances of getting a meaningful result
are very minimal. It therefore make fertile ground for the parties to chat a new way
forward in realization of the fact that the system can no longer serve their needs
adequately.
Okene (2004), notes that the major interests of trade unions are winning wage
concessions from employers through collective action. Where the employer fails to
accede to the demands of the workers this could lead to strike action. There are instance
when parties fail to agree unfortunately, these cases have to be referred for conciliation
and then arbitration. When arbitration has failed therefore strikes are inevitable as a last
resort. The effects of strike harmful to both parties’ interests that and relations and as such
must be avoided at all costs.
The table 4.3 below summarises the respondents’ views when asked whether there was
any need of continuing that wage negotiation process considering the first two earlier
sentiments in their responses in figure 4.6 and figure 4.7 indicating that the process had
not yielded any tangible results neither had it been successful in quickly resolving wage
negotiation disputes in the event parties were deadlocked. The responses are given in the
summarised table 4.3 below.
Table 4.3 Continuation of Wage Negotiation Process
Disagree 68%
Agree 32%
When asked whether the wage negotiation process should continue in the same way it has
operated, the respondents’ views are as indicated diagrammatically below.
77
Figure 4.8: Continuation of Negotiation Process
Disagree Agree0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
68%
32%
In figure 4.8 above 68% disagreed whilst 32% agreed that the wage negotiation process
should continue in the same way as it has operated over the years.
On the overall it can be noted that NEC and ZCHWU are no longer in favour of the way
the wage negotiation process has been conducted over the years and it maybe about time
that some change is incorporated into the whole process or even abandon as it has failed
to serve the need of the people it is meant to benefit. When one has no faith in the system
but are forced to use it they will do so but with reservations. Therefore chances of
reaching agreement are greatly compromised.
According to Narlikar (2010) inn order to overcome, if the source of deadlock is a
particular institutional process, members of the organization may be able to amend it
(depending on the flexibility allowed by the institution), or at least find some wiggle-
room by establishing new norms and working practices.
The diagrams above figure 4.6, figure 4.7 and figure 4.8 sum up the parties views on the
wage negotiation process. If one closely follows it is easy to observe that the parties are
saying the wage negotiation process has not brought forth any meaningful results, neither
has the dispute resolution mechanism. In the end it is in both parties’ interests to
discontinue the process because it has failed to serve their needs in terms of reaching
agreement for fixing annual wage increases in the Catering Industry in Zimbabwe.
78
4.4: CAUSES OF WAGE NEGOTIATION DEADLOCKS
The table below provides a summary of the responses when respondents were asked to
give their personal views on what could be causing wage negotiation deadlocks.
Table 4.4 Causes of Wage Negotiation Deadlocks
Cause Rating
Good Faith 40%
Productivity 32%
Training 16%
Legal Framework 8%
Economic Fundamentals 4%
It is always a mudslinging exercise as parties accuse each other of being insensitive to the
needs of each other. The number of respondents who indicated that lack of good faith was
an issue amounted to 40%, whilst 32% indicated low productivity as a cause of wage
negotiation Another issue raised was that of untrained negotiators and the lack of
negotiation skills which had 16%, legal framework 8% and lack of appreciation of
economic fundamentals had 4%.
Gernigon et al., (2000) points out that in preparatory work for Convention No. 154, it was
recognized that collective bargaining could only function effectively if it was concluded
in good faith by both parties; but as good faith cannot be imposed by law, it could only be
achieved as a result of the voluntary and persistent efforts of both parties (ILO, 1981).
Negotiating in good faith is therefore one of the conditions for successful collective
bargaining and as such it is imperative that all parties practice it.
The situation where parties find themselves stuck with untrained negotiators who have
poor negotiation skills can be resolved during the preparation stage. This involves
composition of a negotiation team. The negotiation team should consist of representatives
of both the parties with adequate knowledge and skills for negotiation. Those lacking may
need to go for training or be omitted from the team altogether. In this phase both the
employer’s representatives and the union examine their own situation in order to develop
79
the issues that they believe will be most important. The first thing to be done is to
determine whether there is actually any reason to negotiate at all. A correct understanding
of the main issues to be covered and intimate knowledge of operations, working
conditions, production norms and other relevant conditions is required.
Silva (1996), notes that performance measures such as productivity or profit related to
performance of a group have been of less importance in determining pay increases. Hence
it is about time that parties to wage negotiation start seriously paying attention to
productivity. Companies are generally operating below their normal production capacities
due to several factors. This makes it difficult for them to then be able to generate enough
revenue to cater for the high salaries demanded by the employees.
The table 4.4 below provides a summary of the rating on factors suggested as causing
wage negotiation deadlocks by Fisher et al (1991) and Narlikar (2010).
Table 4.5 Causes of Wage Negotiation Deadlocks
Cause Agree Disagree
Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement 76% 24%
Need to Maintain Balance of Power 76% 24%
Bluffs and Lies 44% 56%
System which Deters Agreement 52% 48%
Concern for Fairness and Justice 44% 56%
In the diagram figure 4.9 above, 76% agreed and 24% disagreed that wage negotiation
deadlocks were a result of parties having a BATNA. Another 76% agreed whilst the other
24% disagreed that wage negotiations were caused by the parties fighting over balance of
power. Further, 44% agreed whilst 56% disagreed that wage negotiations were caused by
bluffs and lies. On system peculiarities causing deadlock, 52% agreed and 48% disagreed,
whilst 44% agreed whilst 56% disagreed that concern for fairness and justice was a major
cause of deadlocks.
The diagram 4.9 provides a summary of the respondents’ rating on the factors suggested
by earlier authors.
80
Figure 4.9 Causes of Wage Negotiation Deadlocks
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
76% 76%44% 52% 44%
24% 24%56% 48% 56%
DisagreeAgree
As can be observed from the diagram above, BATNA and the need to maintain balance of
power are the most influential in causing wage negotiation deadlocks at NEC. The third
most influential factor is the system which deters agreement. Bluffs and lies as well as
concern for fairness and justice are not that very much influential. The parties i.e. CEAZ
and ZCHWU strongly believe that their BATNAs are better off than reaching an
agreement as well as maintaining their balance of power. A situation likes this as it
prevails in the Catering Industry will not likely yield agreement and deadlocks are likely
to take place every time in the foreseeable future if these are not addressed. Again as part
of the wage negotiation process put up by the government in order to allow market forces
to determine the price of labour, the wage negotiation process appears to have failed to
achieve the intended objectives.
It can be concluded that overall the respondents were in agreement with Hypothesis 1
according to Narlikar (2010). According to Fisher and Ury (1991), standard negotiation
analysis suggests that the deadlock occurs if all the parties believe their BATNA is
superior to the proposed agreement. They argue that, as such they have no incentive to
make concessions to reach an agreement. An alternative argument would be that the zone
of agreement has shrunk so much that it is better to have no agreement at all that the one
81
on the table with its limited gains and high costs. The above findings appear to conform
to the hypothesis.
As noted by Narlikar (2010), power matters crucially in the making and breaking of
deadlocks. Negotiation analysis recognizes this: for instance, it has been pointed out that
deadlocks occur if there is symmetry of power and neither party is able to impose its will
on the other (Faure, 2005; Zartman, 2002). The results of the study therefore appear to
conform to the hypothesis as both parties acknowledged the importance of power in the
negotiation process as evidenced by the 76% who were in agreement. Since the parties at
NEC Catering cannot reach agreement, the matter then has to be referred for compulsory
arbitration in order to resolve the impasse as both sides believe strongly in their positions.
Bluffing is a common place in most bargaining situations (Schelling, 1960 and Walton
and McKersie, 1965). However not all bluffs result in deadlocks. But when levels of
uncertainty and or distrust are high, deadlock can result (Narlikar, 2010). The responses
above however do not appear to sufficiently justify that bluffs and lies are an issue in the
Industry as evidenced by the 44% contribution against the 56% against.
Bazerman et al (1995), stresses that certain institutional peculiarities can make a system
more deadlocks prone.
The results of the study appear to confirm the hypothesis which says deadlocks occur
because of the long established system which deters agreement in this instance. The
parties at NEC are cognisant of the fact that should they be unable for whatever reason to
reach agreement, there is always compulsory arbitration as a last resort, may in itself deter
agreement. It may be about time that parties learn the hard way that arbitration is not the
panacea to their woes, and hence measures may need to be introduced that compel the
parties to resolve issue amicably without the intervention of a third party. According to
Narlikar (2010), in order to overcome, if the source of deadlock is a particular
institutional process, members of the organization may be able to amend it (depending on
the flexibility allowed by the institution), or at least find some wiggle-room by
establishing new norms and working practices.
Bazerman and Neale (1995), argue that fairness considerations can lead negotiators to opt
for joint outcomes that leave both parties worse off than they would have been had
fairness considerations been ignored. According to Narlikar (2010), only a limited
amount of previous research has been done to investigate the impact of fairness
considerations on negotiations especially when fairness is defined in harder terms of
82
going beyond and even against self interest of the parties. It can therefore be observed
that the hypothesis 5 does not hold true in this study as a combined total of 56% rejected
the hypothesis when they strongly disagreed as well as disagreed that deadlocks occur
because the two parties are more concerned with fairness and justice. In other words
fairness and justice are not really an issue as far as wage negotiations deadlocks are
concerned according to the results of this study.
Another area that has contributed to deadlocks has been the employers’ demands that
need to be incorporated into a wage before they can settle. These will now be discussed
below.
Table 4.5 below provides a summary of the results when respondents were asked to rate
the importance of each factor in causing wage negotiation deadlocks.
Table 4.6 Considerations for Wage Increments by Employers
Description Disagree Agree
Strategic 20% 80%Flexible 16% 84%Performance Driven 44% 56%Enhanced Earnings 56% 44%Reduce Redundancies 36% 64%Enhanced Productivity 44% 56%Attract & Retain Staff 48% 52%Control & Stabilise Costs 16% 84%
From the figure 4.13 it can be observed that 80% agreed whilst 20% disagreed that pay
systems need to be strategic, 84% agreed whilst 16% disagreed on flexibility, another
64% agreed whilst 36% disagreed with wages that reduce redundancies, another 84%
agreed and16% disagreeing on wages that control and stabilise costs.
In reality employees are particularly concerned or rather ensure that these considerations
have been factored in all wage increments before putting pen to paper. These are some of
the potential problem areas for failure by the trade unions to acknowledge these is a sure
recipe for deadlock. Whilst the employers want to ensure their agenda for a wage that is
reflective of the components mentioned above, the trade union pays little regard to these
issues in most instances. Since the two parties do not share the same views about this
delicate matter, inevitably deadlock is bound to arise.
83
In the diagram below, the respondents’ views on the above are now presented
Figure 4.10: Determinants of Wage Increases
Strate
gic
Flexib
le
Perform
ance
Driven
Enhan
ced Ea
rnings
Reduce
Redundan
cies
Enhan
ced Pro
ductivit
y
Attract &
Retain St
aff
Control &
Stab
ilise C
osts0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
20% 16%
44%
56%
36%44% 48%
16%
80% 84%
56%
44%
64%56% 52%
84%
DisagreeAgree
As can be observed the respondents ranked the need to have wages: that are sstrategic, in
the sense that they achieve strategic objectives, flexible in the sense that their variable
component can absorb downturns in business and reduce labour costs, capable of
reducing the incidence of redundancies during times of recession or poor enterprise
performance through the flexible component of pay and able overall to control or stabilize
labour costs as the top most four considerations.
Although wage rates negotiated through collective bargaining do reflect wage
differentials based on skills, such differentials have not been geared to the encouragement
of skills acquisition and application. As observed by Silva (1996) the major concern for
employers therefore is the need to negotiate wages and wage increments which reflective
of these seven elements above.
4.5 ALTERNATIVES TO NEC WAGE NEGOTIATIONS
As an alternative to the NEC national wage negotiation process, 40% of the respondents
indicated that the other alternative would be to agree on wage increases at business or
company level, another 40% indicated that wages should be based on productivity and
84
performance of the organization as a whole whilst 20% indicated that government should
reintroduce announcing the minimum wage levels yearly like in the past.
Whilst advocating for negotiations at plant level instead of at national level it does not
remove the likelihood that deadlocks may still be encountered. However the thinking
behind moving away from the national level to the business unit is that it appears more
realistic as parties have first hand information on the organisation’s performance and
ability to pay. It therefore means that partly are unlikely to ask for unreasonable wages
since they are privy to the operations of the entity. This removes the need to take
everyone on board used in the blanket approach by the negotiations that take place at
national level. Some institutions are unable to meet the salary demands negotiated at NEC
as they in most instances do not consider their individual situations.
The only feasible way out appears to be negotiation of salaries that take care of the
organization’s ability to pay through performance and productivity. When an organization
registers profits, it is only fair that they also be shared with the workers who would have
produced. In other countries and organizations, employees have a fixed salary and a paid
and incentive performance bonus for their contribution on helping the organization
achieve its targets. The company will then fix production targets that are agreed upon by
the employees and once those have been met the employees will be paid an agreed
percentage for achieving the target and another percentage for everything above the
target. A few organizations in Zimbabwe have adopted this approach and one such
example is Innscor Africa which operates a number of fast food outlets throughout the
country. Silva (1996), notes that the movement toward decentralization of collective
bargaining has been the result of the need to address efficiency and performance issues at
enterprise level. Increased earnings were secured and performance rewarded partly
through promotions.
Other respondents also felt maybe it was about time that the government re-introduced
the announcement of minimum wages like they used to in the past. This has advantages
and disadvantages but may not be the best way forward as it tends to ignore market
forces. The system may be prone to populist ideologies and ignore productivity. In the
next discussion focus shall be paid to what has been suggested by other authors on
resolving the wages impasse.
85
In the table below, respondents were asked whether collective wage negotiations was the
only way of fixing wages in industry and this was their response below.
Table 4.7 Alternatives to NEC Wage Negotiations
Disagree 56%
Agree 44%
Figure 4.14 shows the diagrammatic presentation of the table above
Figure 4.11: Alternatives to Collective Wage Negotiation
56%
44%
DisagreeAgree
In figure 4.14 above, 56 % disagreed whilst 44% agreed that the only feasible way to fix
wages remained as the collective wage negotiations.
It can be noted that on the overall, the majority recognises that annual wage negotiations
is not the only way of fixing wages in industry. There are other ways available by which
wages in organizations can be determined. These initiatives have mainly been from the
organization. As already noted by Silva (1996), traditionally wages and pay have been
determined through government regulation, minimum wage determination, negotiation
with unions, decisions of arbitration or labour courts and the individual contract of
employment. The factors which have influenced wages and wage increases include profit
(generally unrelated to individual or group performance), job evaluation, seniority, cost of
86
living, manpower shortage or surplus, negotiating strength of the parties and skills. Silva
(1996), notes that performance measures such as productivity or profit related to
performance of a group have been of less importance in determining pay increases.
Though skills have been reflected in pay differentials, pay systems have been seldom
geared to the encouragement of skills acquisition and application.
In the table 4.7 below respondents were asked whether performance and skill based pay
were becoming relevant and this was their response.
Table 4.8 Performance and Skill based Pay
Disagree 42%Agree 58%
Figure 4.15 below depicts the results of the respondents in a diagram form.
Figure 4.12: Performance and Skill based pay
Disagree Agree0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
42%
58%
In the discussion above, the researcher sought to establish first whether the respondents
understood that the NEC Wage negotiation process was not the only way of fixing wages
in Industry. In figure 4.14 the respondents indicated that they were aware that there were
other ways to fix wages. Their responses are corroborated in 4.5 above when they gave
their personal opinions. In figure 4.15 the suggested ways are performance and skill based
pay.
87
4.6 IMPROVING THE WAGE NEGOTIATION PROCESS
When asked how the negotiation process can be improved, 62% indicated that
negotiations should be based around productivity, 28% indicated that good faith needed
to be upheld whilst the remaining 10% indicated the need to train negotiators.
The ability of organizations to pay demanded wages levels based on productivity and
business performance cannot be over-emphasized. For an organization to pay certain
wage levels it has to be productive and profitable. The majority of the respondents views
therefore are that negotiations should incorporate issues of productivity is agreement is to
be struck quickly as it is central to the issue of wage negotiations.
Whilst parties to the negotiation process are required to negotiate in good faith,
unfortunately this cannot be imposed or forced upon someone. Parties felt that in order
for the wage negotiations to be successful there was need to negotiate in good faith.
It was also felt that maybe there was need for competent trained negotiator is the process
is to succeed. Indeed it is true to have negotiators who are trained and competent and are
able to handle and analyse issues with a clear mind. It does not help anyone to rely on
untrained vociferous negotiators as their value addition is zero. In order to forge ahead it
is important to prepare and plan.
Some of the suggested ways of improving negotiations are discussed below. In table
below respondents were asked their opinions on whether these four suggested ways can
indeed help improve the negotiation process and this was their response.
Table 4.9 Improving Negotiation Process
Disagree Agree
Separate People from Problem 48% 52%
Focus on Interests not Positions 22% 78%
Generate Several Options 16% 84%
Results based on Objectivity 12% 88%
When asked whether these four suggested ways could improve the wage negotiation
process, the respondents indicated as shown below in the diagram 4.16 in terms of
ranking from lowest to highest.
88
Figure 4.13: Improving the Negotiation Process
0%20%40%60%80% 48%
22% 16% 12%
52%
78% 84% 88%
DisagreeAgree
In the diagram above figure 4.16, 48% disagreed whilst 52% agreed that separating the
people from the problem can improve the negotiation process, another 22% disagreed
whilst 78% agreed that focusing on interests and not positions was important, further 16%
disagreed whilst 84% agreed that generating options played a part and lastly 12%
disagreed whilst 88% agreed that results based on objectivity is crucial to shaping
negotiations.
It can therefore be observed that the respondents valued results based on objectivity more
than anything else. Generation of several options before settling on a decision was second
highest followed by focussing on interests and not positions. The least though it still had
the majority of the votes was separating people from the problem. It can therefore be
noted that the results appear to conform to what other studies have observed before on
improving wage negotiations.
As observed in literature, Fisher et al (1991) noted that parties in a dispute often forget
that the other side consists of people who, just like themselves, are subject to human
frailties such as emotions, potentials for misunderstandings and mistaken assumptions.
They go on to say that a common failing when there is a difference of opinion or goals is
to attack the opposing person while attacking the opposing position, especially if the
attack is demeaning. It will unfairly have negative outcomes in both decisions making and
bargaining. Experienced negotiators separate the people from the problem. In this study
however the opinion did not quite get the majority vote though signaling that participants
89
have different views. An appreciation of the above will greatly improve negotiations and
lead parties on to an agreement path and avoid deadlocks.
As far as interests are concerned, according to Fisher at al., (1991) and Lens (2004) the
most important step is to identify the interests involved in an issue as opposed to dealing
with positions of the negotiating parties. They argue that if a positive relationship can be
established with the other negotiators, then the only remaining ingredient for principled
negotiation is finding shared interests that can serve as the common ground for generating
creative options. In this integrative approach parties are likely to struck agreement
quicker.
Afredson et al (2010) points out that in negotiations, options are possible solutions to a
problem shared by two or more parties. In integrative bargaining, options represent
possible ways of meeting as many of both parties’ interests as possible. When using the
principled negotiation options for action can often be the hardest to get partners to
participate in.
Positional bargaining is bargaining in which two sides lock into compatible positions.
According to Fisher et al., (1991), this can lead to a contest of wills, bitterness and
deadlock. When negotiations are approached in this way, even when a deal is made, it
may come at high cost. They however argue that there is a better way to approach the
negotiation process. This involves invoking objective criteria as part of the negotiation
process. It is easier to reach agreement when objectivity is a component of the whole
negotiation process.
4.8 CHAPTER SUMMARY
In this chapter, the researcher presented and discussed the research findings. This was
done in relation to the objectives of the study. Generally speaking, the parties to the
negotiation wage process at NEC are dissatisfied with the wage negotiation process
because of its many inadequacies and short comings. The major causes of wage
negotiation deadlock were found to be the need to maintain a balance of power from each
side as well as presence of a BATNA. On the other hand generation of several options
before settling and results based on objectivity were found to be the major ways of
improving wage negotiations. The following chapter has a more comprehensive
discussion on the conclusions and recommendations of the study.
90
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.0 INTRODUCTION
In the previous chapter data was presented and analysed in terms of the patterns
emerging. This chapter now presents the conclusions and recommendations from the
study conducted.
The government left wage negotiations and specifically collective bargaining on wages
for industries with employment councils to conclude wage negotiations on their own. In
Zimbabwe wage negotiations are therefore loosely referred to as collective bargaining.
The failure to conclude wage negotiations in time resulting in the matter being referred
for arbitration has not helped the employee-management relations at the workplace. The
study sought to investigate the causes of annual wage negotiation deadlocks and how the
process can be improved so that parties reach agreement at NEC.
The major finding of the study was that wage negotiation deadlocks occur because of lack
of good faith on the part of the negotiators. Both CEAZ and ZCHWU are engaging each
other just to fulfil the legal provisions of the wage negotiation process but they are not
fully committed to the process.
5.1 CONCLUSIONS
Neither party (i.e. CEAZ and ZCHWU) are satisfied with the wage negotiation
process.
Negotiations have failed to reach agreement as a result of parties negotiating in
bad faith
The negotiators fail to reach agreement because of their belief in a Best
Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement
Administrative authorities have been lacking in support towards the wage
negotiation process.
91
Negotiators are lacking in competency and therefore require training.
The failure to reach agreement in time during wage negotiations has a negative
bearing employees morale and service delivery
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare invite
submission from the various NECs on how the current legal framework on wage
negotiations can be improved so that it is tabled before parliament for
consideration.
It is recommended that the Ministry of Labour considers the introduction of a
detailed Certificate/Diploma programme on Negotiations in conjunction with an
institution of Higher learning in order to address the negotiation process
The NECs must address the issue of negotiating in bad faith by its members
through imposition of deterrent penalties on parties for no-disclosure of material
facts during negotiations.
It is further recommended that NECs ensure that all negotiators are competent by
initiating a negotiation course that incorporates the areas covered by wage
negotiations and only those with valid certificates are allowed to sit for wage
negotiations.
5.3 AREAS OF FURTHER STUDY
The researcher proposes that further studies be carried out into why there is lack of good
faith amongst negotiators.
92
REFERENCES
Babineaux M.F (2004), Negotiating after Deadlock: Moving from Confrontation to
Collaboration, Even after They’ve Said NO! 89th Annual International Supply Chain
Management Conference, April 2004
Bazerman Max, H and Margaret A Neale (1997), Negotiating Rationally, First Free
Press Paperback Edition, Library of Congress Cataloguing-in-Publication Data, USA
Bless C. and Higson-Smith, C. (1995) Fundamentals of Social Research Methods,
Lansdowne, Juta Education.
Bloom D.E (1988), Arbitrator Behaviour in Public Sector Wage Disputes, When Public
Sector Workers Unionize, University of Chicago Press (pages 107-128)
Booysen L (2009), Guidelines for the MBL 3 Research Report: 2009, Graduate School of
Business Leadership, UNISA
Bryman N. (1988) Using Data/Getting Results, Northwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon
Publishers
Bulmer D. A (1986) Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York,
John Wiley & Sons.
De Vaus T. (1990) Applied Business Statistics, Juta and Co. Ltd
Encyclopaedia of Business, 2nd Edition
Faraque A (2009), Current Status and Evolution of Industrial Relations System in
Bangladesh, International Labour Organizations Publications
Ferber R. (1974) Handbook of Marketing Research, New York: McGraw-Hill
Ferber S. B (1974) Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education, San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fisher and Ury (1983), Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In, New
York, Penguin Books
Fowler, F. F. (1984) Survey Research Methods. Beverly Hills: Sage
Fraenkel, J. R. and Wallen, N.E. (1996) How to design and evaluate research in
education. 3rd Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill
Gennard J and Graham G (2005), Employee Relations, 4th Edition, Chartered Institute
of Personnel Development (pages 216 – 230)
Gennard J and Judge G (1999), People and Organizations, Employee Relations, 2nd
Edition, Chartered Institute of personnel Development, (pages 32-39)
Glen H Synder and Paul Diesing (1985), Conflict Among Nations, Princeton University
93
Judd K, Smith E and Kidder P (2001) How to Conduct a Survey, Statistics Department,
University of Zimbabwe, Harare.
Labour Act, Chapter 28.01
Labovitz D. J. and Hagedorn R. S. (1976) Marketing Research 7th ed., New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall
Leedy P. D (1997) Practical Research: Planning and Design, New Jersey, Prentice Hall
Lewis P, Thornhill A and Saunders (2003), Employee Relations: Understanding the
Employment Relationship, Prentice Hall Financial Times Pearson Education (pages 212-
220)
Marsh, G. T. (1992) Practical Sampling. In: Applied Social Research Methods Series.
Vol.21, Newbury Park. CA: Sage
Narlikar A (2010), Deadlocks in Multi-lateral Negotiations: Causes and Solutions,
Cambridge University Press
Raiffa Howard (1982), The Art and Science of Negotiation, How To Resolve Conflicts
and Get The Best Out Of Bargaining
Random House Dictionary 1993
Saunders M, Lewis P. and Thornhill A. (1997) Research Methods for Business
Students, London, Pitman.
Sparrow P.R and Cooper C.L (2003), The Employment Relationship, Key Challenges
for Human Resources, Butterworth Heinemann
Statutory Instrument 167 of 1991
Towers B (2003), The Handbook of Employment Relations, Law and Practice, 4th
Edition, Kogan Page, London
William Ury (1993), Getting Past NO, Negotiating in Difficult Situations, Library of
Congress Catalogue, USA & Canada
Zartman Ira William (1999), International Multilateral Negotiations, Approaches to the
Managment Complexity, John Hopkins University
Zikmund W. G (1997) Exploring Market Research, Fort Worth, Texas, The Dryden
Press
Alfredson T, and Cungu A (2008), Negotiation Theory and Practice, A Review of the
Literature, FAO learning Programme, Conceptual and Technical Material, EasyPol
Module 179 (pages 1-32)
94
Dean H. (2012), Supplement to Labour Relations Information Service, Paper No. 1
Frey A.H (1947), The Logic of Collective Bargaining and Arbitration. Law and
Contemporary Problems, Volume12, No.2, Labour Dispute Settlement, Duke University
of Law
Gernigon B, Odero A, and Guido H (2000), ILO Principles Concerning Collective
Bargaining, International Labour Review, Volume 139, No. 1(pages 33-54)
Kersten G.E, Michalowski W, Szpakowicz and Koperczak (1991), Restructurable
Representations of Negotiations, Institute of Operations Management Science, Volume
37, No 10, (pages 1269- 1290)
Khabo F.M (2008), Collective Bargaining and Labour Disputes Resolution: is SADC
Meeting the Challenge, Issue Paper No. 30, (pages 1- 31)
Makings G (2012), Update on Collective Bargaining and Wage Awards, George
Makings Annual Labour Briefing April 2012
McPhie Neil A.G, Barbara J Spain, Steve Nelson ,John Crum, Cynthia H.
Ferentinos and James J Tsugawa (2006), Designing An Effective Pay For Performance
Compensations System, A Report to the President and the Congress of the United States
by the US Merit Systems Protection Board, Washington DC
Muthoo A (2000), A Non-technical Introduction to Bargaining Theory, World
Economics Volume 1, No. 2 (pages 145-166)
Nguwi Memory (2011), Are Zimbabwean Employees Underpaid? An Analysis of Salary
Trends, Industrial Psychology Consultants
Okene O.V.C (2004), Collective Bargaining, Strikes and the Quest for Industrial Peace in
Nigeria, University of Essex
Rehman S (2003), Collective Bargaining and Wage Determination in Pakistan,
University of Karachi
Silva S (1996), Collective Bargaining Negotiations, International Labour Organization
ACT/EMP Publications, Bureau for Employers’ Activities (pages 1- 16)
Silver S (2004), An Introduction to Performance and Skill-based pay Systems,
International Labour Organization ACT/ EMP Publications, Bureau for Employer’s
Activities
Stevens C (1958), On the theory of Negotiation, The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
Volume 72, No.1 pages (77-97)
95
http://www.au.af.mil.au.awc
http://www.cmalearning.com
http://www.dol.govt.nz/publications/research/contemporary-mediation-practice/page-
07.asp
http://www.emeraldinsight.com
http://www.epress.anu.edu.au
http://www.ffw.org.ph/TRAINING
http://www.jstor.org
http://www.mediate.com/articles/grant/sftm
http://www.negotiation.atwork.network.com
http://www.paralegaladvice.org.za
http://www.referenceforbusiness.com
http://www.wikipedia.org
96
APPENDICES
INTRODUCTORY LETTER
…………………………………..
…………………………………..
………………………………….
………………………………….
20 April 2012
National Employment Council
Catering Industry
Harare
Dear Sir/Madam
RE: QUESTIONNAIRE COMPLETION ON CAUSES OF WAGE NEGOTIATION
DEADLOCKS
My name is Mandioma Edmond and I kindly ask for your assistance in the completion of my
questionnaire. I am a Chinhoyi University of Technology (C.U.T) student. As part of the
requirements of the institution for the completion of the Master of Science in Strategic
Management program, I am carrying out a research entitled; An investigation into the causes of
Annual Wage Negotiation Deadlock: The Case of NEC Catering. It is against this background
that I kindly seek your opinions by completing the attached questionnaire.
Please feel free to say out your honest opinion and I assure you that all the information you
provide will be treated in strict confidence. For any clarifications, please contact me on the details
provided above.
Yours sincerely
Mandioma Edmond T
C.U.T STUDENT
97
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING QUESTIONNAIRE1. Please kindly respond to all Questions2. Indicate your response by ticking in the box where applicable3. There is no right or wrong answer hence tick the response that is closest to your opinion4. All your responses will be treated with strict confidentiality and the study will be used for academic purposes onlyKEY
Agree - ADisagree -D
SECTION A- DEMOGRAPHYFemale Male
1. Please indicate your gender
< 30yrs 31 - 35yrs 36-40yrs41-45yrs > 46yrs
2. Indicate age group to which you belong. O & A Level Certificate Diploma Degree Masters
3. Please indicate your highest level of
education 0-12 months 1-5 yrs 6-10 yrs11-15 yrs < 15yrs
4. How long have you worked for your current Organization. NEC ZCHWU CEAZ5. Please indicate the organization which you are affiliated to during wage negotiations.
SECTION B- WAGE NEGOTIATION PROCESS6. Please briefly explain your understanding of the wage negotiation process as conducted at NEC.________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________7. How would you rate the success of the annual wage negotiation princess since Good Poor 2007 to date? 8. In your opinion, in the event of deadlocks the arbitration process has been very A Deffective 9. The current wage negotiation process should be continued in the way it has operated.
SECTION C- CAUSES OF WAGE NEGOTIATION DEADLOCKS10. In your opinion what are the causes of the annual wage negotiation deadlocks at NEC Catering?________________________________________________________________________________________________
98
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________11.In your opinion wage negotiation deadlocks occur because the parties A Dbelieve their alternative to agreement is superior to the deal on offer
12. The wage negotiation deadlocks occur the two parties want to maintain A SAbalance of power on their side.
13. Wage negotiation deadlocks occur because negotiators pretend and deceive A SAeach other. 14. Wage negotiation deadlocks occur because of the long established whichdeters agreement
15.Wage negotiation deadlocks occur because the two parties are more concerned with fairness and justice
16. A major concern for employers is the need to negotiate wage increases which are:a). Strategic in the sense that they achieve strategic goal of the Organization
b). Flexible in that their variable component can absorb dowturns in business and reduce labour costs
c). Oriented towards better performance in terms of productivity, quality and efficienyd). Capable of enhancing the earnings of employees through improved performance
e). Capable of reducing the incidents of redundancies during times of recession or poor enterprise performance
f). Able to reward good performance without increasing labour costs as part of the total costs through enhanced productivity
g). Able to attract and retain competent staff h). Able to control or stabilise labour costs.
SECTION D - ALTERNATIVES TO WAGE NEGOTIATION17. In your opinion, what are the other ways of determining wages without resorting to annual collectivewage negotiations that currently take place at NEC?_________________________________________________
99
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________18. Collective wage negotiations remain the only feasible way of fixing wages A D
19. Performance and skill based pay are soon becoming the new way of fixingwages. 20. In your opinion how can the annual wage negotiation process be improved to avoid arbitration?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________21. The wage negotiation process can be improved by: A Da). separating people from the problem. b). focussing on interests and not positions c). generating several options before settling on a decision d). Insisting that results be based on objective criteria
100
INTERVIEW GUIDE
1. History of Wage Negotiations and Government their role?
2. What had been the challenges faced by government in announcing wages?
3. When and why was Industrial Collective Bargaining introduced?
4. What have been the challenges facing NEC Catering regarding wage negotiations?
5. In your opinion what would you say have been the successes registered by the Collective wage negotiations at NEC Catering?
6. What has been the major causes of wage negotiations deadlocks in the Industry?
7. How can wage negotiation deadlocks be overcome at NEC catering?
8. What would be your overall assessment of the wage negotiations to dates?
101