HRPD 709 Industrial Relations: UAW-GM Negotiation Analysis Report

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the UAW-GM negotiations, as portrayed in the movie 'Final Offer.' It meticulously chronicles the events, highlighting the tensions originating in Canadian General Motors plants and the subsequent strike. The report explores the social, economic, and political contexts influencing the negotiations, including the involvement of politicians and complex work roles. It examines the bargaining agendas of both the union and General Motors, identifying their target and ideal settlement positions. The analysis assesses the relative bargaining power of the two sides, their sanctions, and preparedness to use them. Furthermore, it describes the compromises, internal bargaining within the union, the role of the media, and the qualities of a good negotiator. The report concludes by providing references to support the analysis and insights into the dynamics of industrial relations and negotiation strategies. The document is contributed by a student to be published on the website Desklib, a platform providing AI-based study tools for students.

GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATIONS
Chronology account of events during the UAW-GM negotiations.
The process was triggered by tension that erupted at the General Motors plants located in Canada.
The film commences with music that plays in the background. The rendition says, “I work hard and life
gets harder, I am heading for the road-block.” This dire situation brought about an industrial unrest in the
organization. There were evidences of workers who wanted to opt out of the company, while the
supervisors who were aware of their value did not want them to quit. Most notorious of the sites was the
South plant in oshwal that was the origin of strike motive. In this plant, there were poor relations between
subordinates and managers. The matter was worsened by the mangers who were heading the branches since
they had hard nose managers, who were not ready to listen to the workers.
Concerned parties such as the union committee-men came over to the officer in charge of the
Canadian section but the manger ignored him and asked him out of his presence. This resulted into a strike
notice by the union chairman-Owen Piper through their chief negotiator- Robert white. White was an open-
minded director though needed the Union’s president consent before setting a deadline for the strike. His
relations with the organizations were not smooth sailing. After the announcement of the strike deadline-
October 17th, he attempted to reach a negotiation with the corporation directors in vain and the strike kicked
off.

The political context that influenced the negotiations:
White is not moved and states clearly that he will not be moved fighting for the right of the workers
when he has the Canadian flag behind him. During this time, one of the most powerful North American
trade unions was shaken to its very foundation. Politicians were involved in running the affairs of the
union. For instance, Phil Bernard who was the political kingpin of Oshwal was also the chairperson of the
union master negotiating committee. Simply put, the union leaders are tough politicians elected directly by
the members of the working class.
Another reason that necessitated the negotiations was the complex work roles that limited the
supervisor’s powers to manage workers in the country. On the other hand, when given the powers to
manage human resources, the subordinates felt that the managers were using strategies which were meant
to hurt their personal wellbeing. A case in point, the managers used divide and rule tactics, where some of
the union leaders were made to eat from the managers’ palms. In 1984, the management even tried to
convince the workers that their wellbeing and the wellbeing of the company were the same. This would not
go down well with the employees because after years of distrust, workers become skeptical about the
organizational position-they believed there was no goodwill from the managers. Finally, it was possible to
export American jobs overseas.
The social context that influenced the negotiations:
An employee (Dany) in camera cited several reasons for their dissatisfaction to work in the
company such as, personal issues, financial matters as well as poor relations within the plant. One worker
said, “We don’t see eye-to-eye with the manager.” Secondly, the interviewee stated that, “We work like
prisoners in jail to the District committee man. Workers view managers as their advisories in this company.

Some employees like Dany are never given a listening year even when they have pertinent issues to address
to the managers. Another factor that prevailed upon the union leaders to stand their grounds was the belief
that their careers were in the line with the contract which they were about to sign (Bachkirov & AlAbri,
2016, Rahman & Al-Emad, 2018).
The economic context that influenced the negotiations:
One of the factors that influenced Mr. White to change his mind and settle for a lesser perk than the
union’s demand of 3% was the American experience where 100000 men were laid off when the company
contracted its scale of operation. Besides, the GM could not bring in Americans to work in the Canadian
plant since American labour was regarded as being too expensive. GM had lost a lot of money because of
the strike and did not want to continue losing more money. Actually, both workers and the international
corporation were hard hit by the economic realities of 1980s.
The negotiation took rather a longer path because the Canadian labour force was not fully
unemployed hence not compelled to accept the GM’s conditions to abandon traditional wage increases.
This pitched the Canadian union leaders against their counterparts in the US and the GM leadership as a
whole. The union leaders stood their ground because they were are that GM was making super-normal
profits, so, they wanted to have a share of the surplus.
An evidence of accountability on the union side:
Yes, there is evidence of accountability on the sides of the union as can be seen that after reaching a
deal with the corporation representative, Robert undertakes to explain the reasons for his decision to the
committee members. The same information is addressed to the workers before they go ahead to vote
whether to end the strike or not (Leontev, 2018).

The bargaining agendas of the two sides,
Trade union’s agenda General motors agenda
They want the money upfront, that is, they want
to be certain of what they are going to earn.
Directors tries to share the information about
profit sharing and bonuses issues so that
Sees negotiation as a platform to improve their
wellbeing
See negotiation as a platform to alter the labor
relations to suit their plans
Interested in job security Wants the employees’ fate to be determined by
the management
Improve the welfare of the workers Increase the profitability of the organization
The target and ideal settlement positions:
The two sides Target Settlement position
The trade union 1. To get 3% salary increment
2. Yearly salary increment
1. Got 9/4% salary increment
2. A special Canadian increase
General motors 1. To remunerate employees based on
the performance of the organization
2. To reward employees using
bonuses
1. Got 9/4% salary increment
2. A special Canadian increment
Criteria for assessing the relative bargaining power of the two sides:
The first criterion for assessing the bargaining power of an organization is the power differences
between the managers and the directors. A negotiating team that has power to make decisions without

having to ask the directors normally have a stronger bargaining power than the one that needs to consult
other centers of authority (Piotrowski & Wojciszke, 2015). Another criterion for assessing the relative
bargaining power is extent of the relationship between the negotiating parties with respect to resources
allocation.
The sanctions that the two sides had
Firstly, the union wanted a platform for collective bargain so that all employees are given rewards
that are commensurate with their efforts. Secondly, workers and managers who had prior perceived each
other as enemies were to reach a common ground in terms of welfare. Finally, there was need to eradicate
confrontations in the organization for easy co-ordination of work in the organization.
Preparedness of the two sides to use the sanctions:
As soon as the directors at GM realizes that the trade union was right in their pursuit for just
remuneration, Andrews gladly calls Whites and informs him that they are willing to work together for a
better organization.
A description of the compromises and movement that occurred from the opening of negotiations to
the final settlement:
Firstly, the General Motors was willing to offer lesser amount than what white expected as
presented by Mr. Andrew. General Motors decided to continue its operations in the country though had to
incur additional costs to retain the employees. Finally, the union members who had shown the willingness
to fight to the end accepted the little pay rise and called off the strike.

An explanation of why and how internal bargaining takes place with a focus on the internal
bargaining within the union:
Internal bargaining is important in an organization to facilitate coordination and harmonious work
relations. Decisions made in the organization can be ratified only if the entire organization accepts the
strategies as formulated by the management. According to Grubb, Brown, Hall and Bowen (2019), the
process of internal bargaining begins with the formation of a negotiation team. The team conducts research
to get information about the industry best practices.
The role that the media played in these negotiations:
The media played the role of external pressure contributor. It highlighted the plight of the working
people in the organization. The media acts as a source of information to workers, the public and the
organization’s directors (Kelly and Kaminskienė, 2016, Ilodigwe, 2017). In the film, the media was always
present to update people on the advances made during and prior to negotiations.
Qualities of a good negotiator:
Decisive, the movie commentator recognizes that each time the unions came under attack; White
was not ready to make a concession. He liked making his own decisions based on his rational reasoning.
Diplomatic, a good negotiator should be able to use tactical means to have his way in a discussion
(Johnson, Thompson, Hall & Meyer, 2018). To affirm this trait, White was able to differ with the directors
without showing any element of disrespect.

References
Johnson, K. E., Thompson, J., Hall, J. A., & Meyer, C. (2018). Crisis (hostage) negotiators
weigh in: the skills, behaviors, and qualities that characterize an expert crisis negotiator.
Police Practice and Research, 19(5), 472-489.
Grubb, A. R., Brown, S. J., Hall, P., & Bowen, E. (2019). The self-perceived successful hostage
and crisis negotiator profile: a qualitative assessment of negotiator competencies. Police
Practice and Research, 20(4), 321-342.
Bachkirov, A. A., & AlAbri, S. (2016). Islamic values and negotiator behavior. International
Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 9(3), 333-345.
Rahman, I. A., & Al-Emad, N. (2018). Significant Leadership Qualities for Saudi Arabia
Construction Leaders. In MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 203, p. 02003). EDP
Sciences.
Leontev, M. (2018). Influence of construction organization project managers’ personal qualities
on their professional efficiency. In MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 193, p. 05015).
EDP Sciences.
Piotrowski, J., & Wojciszke, B. (2015). Agentic Thinking About Others Makes Them Closer.
Polish Psychological Bulletin, 46(4), 523-534.
Kelly, E. J., & Kaminskienė, N. (2016). Importance of emotional intelligence in negotiation and
mediation. International Comparative Jurisprudence, 2(1), 55-60.

Ilodigwe, D. (2017). Communication and Diplomacy as an Instrument of Good Governance and
Sustainable Economic Development. Journal of Power, Politics and Governance, 5, 1-
28.