Group Assignment: Character Negotiation

This document is a group assignment about character negotiation. It includes scripts for four different members involved in the negotiation process. The document discusses HR policies, union politics, legal implications, and the rights of the employee. The assignment explores the ethical and legal aspects of drug testing, privacy rights, and the responsibilities of the company. It also highlights the role of the union in protecting employee rights. The document provides insights into the challenges faced by the HR manager and the employee, as well as the potential outcomes of the negotiation process.

Running head: GROUP ASSIGNMENT: CHARACTER NEGOTIATION
GROUP ASSIGNMENT: CHARACTER NEGOTIATION

Group Assignment: Character Negotiation1
Table of Contents
Script for Member 1: EAP Representative......................................................................................2
Script for Member 2: Employee......................................................................................................3
Script for Member 3: HR Manager..................................................................................................5
Script for Member 4: Union Representative....................................................................................6
References........................................................................................................................................7

Group Assignment: Character Negotiation2
Script for Member 1: EAP Representative
Sam Smiley from Bundoora Bus Company had asked for my support as the Employee
Assistance Program Representative, considering that an employee had tested positive for
cannabis in a random test for drug testing as per the HR policies of the organisation. Working for
People Matter for 2 years, it has been evident that the Bundoora Bus Company is subject to
several union politics as well as setbacks in terms of operations due to the rising demands of the
union-bound employees. When I went over to the office of Bundoora Bus Company, the accused
employee, Casey Connor, had been made to wait for around 90 minutes, without the prior
information of the ongoing activities. Furthermore, Sam had introduced me to Casey, stating I
was there for support related to the various services that my company offered (financial, marital,
personal issues, and so on). I have noted that as per the EBA introduced in the company's last
bargaining negotiations, considering the random drug testing to ensure the safety of the
passengers and the people on the road (Witzleb, 2018). Additionally, it aids in the maintenance
of a model reputation of the employees.
However, it is to be taken into consideration that due to the conflicts within the
organisation and the union, the organisation had arranged for recruits who are being paid at much
lower hourly rates. Moreover, this was implemented as a ‘take-it-or-leave-it’ strategy against the
union-bound workers for Bundoora Bus Company. Regardless, it is to be noted that the
organisation, along with the HR manager Sam Smiley has designed a number of policies to
resolve union-related issues. This particular case, therefore, may genuinely be a case of non-
conduct and non-compliance on the employee's part. Nevertheless, there is an equal chance of

Group Assignment: Character Negotiation3
the overall situation being a ploy on behalf of Bundoora Bus Company for the eradication or
elimination of threats in the form of unionised employees (Murphy, 2017).
Upon reaching the office, the accused, Casey Connor, is seen waiting for me, while being
uninformed for the situation. Furthermore, Casey remained unaware of being tested positive for
cannabis. It was in my presence that Sam had explained the protocols in case an employee of
Bundoora Bus Company is found guilty of using. Additionally, I had opined against the HR
policies of the company, stating that it is unethical to expect an employee to pay for their own
residential rehabilitation process (Rawling & Schofield-Georgeson, 2018). Furthermore, it can be
negotiated that despite being harassed by the HR and their respective policies governing the
organisation, is subject to the legislation of Australia for Fair Work policies; the company must
be the sum of the additional $10,000 for the treatment of the employee.
It may be stated that as all Australian business enterprises are governed by the
Employment and Labour Law of 2019 as well as the Fair Work Act 2009, the company does not
stand a chance in case both the tests conducted can be tested for authenticity (Fairwork.gov.au,
2019). Furthermore, the company can be charged further on charges of harassment. Additionally,
if the employee is found to be guilty; nevertheless, the organisation must undertake responsibility
for the treatment (O’Rourke & Antioch, 2016). However, Casey, being governed by the union
laws, makes it difficult to argue against his innocence, despite being a model employee.
Regardless, the support from People Mattersis to be extended in case the employee is harassed
by the company and the HR, or even in case he is found guilty, where he will be extended
mental, financial and social support.

Group Assignment: Character Negotiation4
Script for Member 2: Employee
I had initially been seen as someone who had partied hard and used drugs and was under
the influence. However, having worked for Bundoora Bus Company for 8 years, and being clean
and sober for many years now, the incident of testing positive feels like a ploy to remove union-
governed employees of the organisation to diminish their powers. I hope to start a family soon
and have a massive mortgage as a part of the payment for a new residence. Thus, being
responsible is a key factor I am focused on right now. When I was asked to undergo the testing
procedure, it felt like a violation of my privacy rights. According to the Privacy Act of 1988 and
2018, it is imperative that an invasion of privacy cannot take place without my consent
(Fairwork.gov.au, 2019). However, I was made to consent as it was a part of the agreement or
EBA, while the alternative was to be terminated. Being terminated was not an option considering
my financial liabilities for taking care of my family. Regardless, it may be stated that my consent
was coerced, which leaves the company to be prosecuted under the Privacy Act of 1988 and
2018 (Fairwork.gov.au, 2019).
Furthermore, being governed by Labour laws, the business enterprise is liable to protect my
rights. Sam had left me sitting for more than 90 minutes until the arrival of the EAP
representative. I was explained that both the tests conducted had come back positive as well as
the protocol that was to be followed as per the policies of the organisation. Since I was innocent,
I had initially had an aggressive reaction. However, the power of silence seemed like a better
strategy for negotiation. Firstly, Sam declares that I may be terminated on spot, but that would
not happen due to my model employee background. Additionally, it is announced that I would be
placed under residential rehab while being away from my family, and the payment of $10,000 is
to be done by me. Paying such a hefty sum is not possible due to my ongoing liabilities and the

Group Assignment: Character Negotiation5
fact that I am innocent. I silently contemplated how it was possible to test positive for cannabis
when I had been clean for years. However, I see Lee Levine, the Union Rep and decide to
confide my innocence to him, considering that the unions are responsible for addressing the
employee rights (Bogg, Dukes & Novitz, 2017).
Script for Member 3: HR Manager
The test for ‘Emit Screen Test Kit' is often known to be correct, despite being often unreliable.
Furthermore, the second test conducted is the confirmatory test involving GC/MS or Gas
Chromatograph/ Mass Spectrometer. Furthermore, it is ensured that the sample is not left
unattended, which may implicate a ploy on behalf of the company to incriminate an employee
(Kundu & Gahlawat, 2016). The professional courier service company owned by my uncle
transports the sample to the laboratory. However, upon the arrival of Jamie, the EAP consultant
for the firm, certain contradictions arise, such as the wait time. I justify my actions since the
reports from the lab had arrived shortly before Jamie’s arrival, thus, I mentioned waiting to
disclose the information in Jamie’s presence to ensure that the employee is comforted
appropriately and that the organisation cannot be incriminated on charges of being biased and
lacking professionalism (Fairwork.gov, 2019).
Another implication noted by Jaime is that in case of being found guilty, the employee cannot be
expected to pay the hefty sum of $10,000. To complicate matters further, the union
representative, Lee, comes in demanding an explanation. The dilemma remains since the policies
had been formulated in the presence of Fair Work Australia. However, their involvement in the
matter would contradict my reputation as the HR manager for 8 years. On the other hand, though
I sympathise with Casey, and I understand the consequences of my actions related to the

Group Assignment: Character Negotiation6
payment of $10,000 by the employee for a residential treatment facility, I am left contemplating
my choices. I have ensured that the company does not get implicated as I have arranged for the
paid leave during the time at the residential care. However, according to the Union and Fair
Work, the monthly remuneration does not cover the treatment as well as the responsibility of the
family (Moore, 2015). However, I consider options to prevent the involvement of further Union
members and members of Fair Work Australia.
Script for Member 4: Union Representative
Though Casey had a reputation of being a user and partying hard, he had been clean he
has been married. Furthermore, Casey has been extensively shouldering the responsibilities of
his family by purchasing a home. He also has a mortgage and expects to start a family soon.
However, with specific financial liabilities overhead and considering that he is innocent, the
payment is invalid. Casey had been a model employee for years, and it is unfair to expect him to
pay $10,000 even if he is guilty. Considering the labour laws of Australia, as well as the Fair
Work policies, this may be regarded as discrimination (Fairwork.gov.au, 2019). Furthermore,
considering that Casey has been humiliated even through the process of sample collection can be
used against the company to file a petition or a lawsuit, demanding a financial reimbursement for
the same (Moore, 2015). Moreover, I am well aware of the laws guiding the labour activities,
which may prove beneficial for Casey’s case, as opposed to the knowledge that Sam has in the
matter.

Group Assignment: Character Negotiation7
References
Bogg, A., Dukes, R., & Novitz, T. (2017). Introduction: Contemporary Issues in Collective
Labour Law. Industrial Law Journal, 46(1), 1-5.
Fairwork.gov (2019). Welcome to the Fair Work Ombudsman website. Retrieved from
https://www.fairwork.gov.au/about-us/legislation
Kundu, S. C., & Gahlawat, N. (2016). Effects of socially responsible HR practices on employees'
work attitudes. International Journal of Human Resources Development and
Management, 16(3-4), 140-160.
Moore, M. T. (2015). Comment: Bridging the Gap Between Labour Law and Company Law.
Industrial Law Journal, 44(3), 425-429.
Murphy, R. S. (2017). Property rights in personal information: An economic defense of privacy.
In Privacy, 43-79. Routledge.
O’Rourke, A., & Antioch, S. K. (2016). Workplace bullying laws in Australia: Placebo or
panacea?. Common Law World Review, 45(1), 3-26.
Rawling, M., & Schofield-Georgeson, E. (2018). Industrial legislation in Australia in 2017.
Journal of Industrial Relations, 60(3), 378-396.
Witzleb, N. (2018). Determinations Under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) As a Privacy Remedy.