Reference no: EM131942080

Assignment -

Learning outcomes -

1. Critically assess models of negotiation and bargaining and utilise these models to analyse and reflect upon negotiation practice.

2. Demonstrate the practical skills necessary to participate in negotiation and bargaining.

3. Critique advocacy practice and the processes of third-party dispute intervention.

4. Assess how contemporary legislative, political and technological contexts affect the processes of negotiation, bargaining and advocacy.

5. Produce well written and argued material in response to assessment tasks set for the unit.

Assessment 1: Critical Review - Critique of online negotiation

Overview - In this unit students are organised into management and union groups that are required to reach agreement on three unresolved issues in enterprise bargaining negotiations. Negotiations are conducted via vUWS. Students use the evidence of the online negotiation in which they were involved to develop a critique which analyses their negotiation and evaluates the extent the Fells' DNA of negotiation is evident.

Details -

What is required? - Individual students are required to submit a 1,500 word critique which analyses the online negotiation in which they participated. The critique should address the following questions: Which components of the Fells' DNA of negotiation were more influential in shaping the corse of your online negotiation? What are the reasons for this argument?

Using your knowledge of negotiation and bargaining, evaluate which components of the DNA negotiation metaphor (reciprocity, trust, power, information exchange, ethics, and outcome) had the most influence on the online negotiation in which you participated. Examine, in particular, the presence of competitive (distributive) and cooperative (integrative) bargaining evident in your negotiation, and assess the impact these styles of negotiation had on emphasising one or more of the components of the DNA negotiation.

How to approach the critique - The preferred way of approaching the critique is to place yourself in the position of being an analyst of the negotiations, rather than a participant. You are analysing the negotiations much in the way analysts in the academic literature assess negotiations they have observed. As per an essay, the language should be that of the third person - thus there should be no instances of, 'We assessed' or We approached management'. This should be expressed as, for example, 'On the issue of hours the union attempted to reposition the demands of management by highlighting industry standards'.

Assess the online negotiations as a whole, not from the point of view of the party you represented during the negotiations.

The most effective way to refer to a particular event of your negotiations is to indicate a specific vUWS message showing the date and time of the message.

In addressing the tasks a useful approach is to:

Present a concise account of the relevant academic literature, for example when discussing features of competitive and cooperative bargaining.

Support your analysis with reference to the academic literature (i.e. unit readings) and to your online negotiations. Your task is to analyse your negotiations, and not describe them.

The style of writing in a critique is very similar to that of an essay. In this assessment you will submit a written essay style response to the two questions. Your critique should contain an introduction, main body and conclusion.

The written critique will be assessed against the criteria and marking guide contained in this learning guide. Please note that the criteria includes a requirement for a minimum of eight (8) references that are relevant to the topic. Lecture materials do not count as a reference. Students are not restricted to references listed in the unit readings.

Essential requirements - Individual critiques will not be assessed unless the unit coordinator is satisfied that the following preliminary requirements have been met:

The student's negotiation group has bargained in 'good faith'. Important to this consideration is whether the negotiation group has consistently engaged in the online negotiation, has responded routinely to communication from their rival negotiation group, and has put forward their own proposals in reply.

All appropriate documentation is available through vUWS.

Assessment 2: Professional Task - Online negotiation

Introduction - The purpose of this assessment is to provide students with the opportunity to gain experience in conducting negotiations. A discussion board facility on vUWS, will be the primary vehicle for these negotiations, although negotiations within each negotiation group can also be held face to face. The assessment components are a written critique of your negotiations (an individual assessment mark), and engagement in the online negotiation (a group assessment mark), not the quality of the agreement that you reach. The actual context of the negotiation concerns negotiations between management and a union in a financial services industry setting. Management and the union are seeking a new federal enterprise agreement. Negotiations are underway and the objective of the current negotiation is to reach agreement on three provisions that still require resolution. In the federal jurisdiction there is no definitive requirement that parties reach an agreement when engaged in negotiations, although there is a requirement to bargain in good faith. For the purposes of this assessment there is a requirement that an agreement be reached by the specified date. Clearly, each party must get the best possible agreement.

Management and union negotiation groups will be established and matched in Week 4 tutorials. There will be a maximum of 3-4 students in each management negotiation group and each union negotiation group. It is highly preferable that members of a negotiating group are drawn from the same tutorial. Once the groups are established, details will be provided of the appropriate vUWS infrastructure for each set of management-union negotiations. Details concerning the use of vUWS will be posted onto the website for this unit. There are no specific roles within each management or union group but if you wish, you may decide what roles you want your negotiating group to have: for example, human resource manager, reward analyst, union state secretary, union organiser.

Background information is provided in this learning guide and specific management and union briefing notes will be provided to the management and union negotiating groups. In developing an exercise such as this it is not possible to cover every eventuality but it should not be necessary to add or make up further background or contextual material. Remember that the main object of this exercise is to develop negotiation skills, and an ability to analyse negotiation, so creating further contextual information to gain an advantage might serve to destabilise the process and so defeat its purpose as an assessment exercise. Students are encouraged to research the issues that require resolution in this negotiation and to bring to the negotiations the results of this research. This may include, for example, clauses from other workplace agreements. These can be accessed through the agreements tab on the Fair Work Commission site. A number of relevant agreements are provided on the unit's vUWS site.

Standard of communication - It is expected that you will act in a professional way during this exercise. The language used in the online forums should be appropriate and inoffensive. You should be aware that your lecturer and tutor will have access to the bulletin board. There are University protocols concerning the standard of communication in electronic discussion boards and these apply to this unit. These protocols will be posted on the vUWS site.

Timing of the negotiation - You can start to negotiate as soon as the appropriate vUWS infrastructure has been established and following the organisation of negotiating groups (end of week 3, beginning of week 4). Ideally each management and each union negotiation group should meet online to discuss their tactics and their approach to the unresolved industrial issues that require agreement. In your group you will need to consider your approach to the unresolved issues and also your strategies towards the other negotiating group (i.e., 'the other side'). There should also be an agreed protocol within the negotiating groups for the distribution of information within the group. There are no rules as to who opens the negotiations. It may be either the management or union side that approaches 'the other side' with a claim, a proposal, a framework. You must complete your negotiation and submit your individual critique by Week 10 (specifically 6.00pm Friday, 11 May 2018).

Context - The negotiation is based on a banking services workplace (Trustco Bank Pty Ltd) that has a number of banking operations throughout Australia. The bank has been in operation for more than 50 years and sees itself as a significant figure in the sector; in terms of its operation it rivals a medium to large financial services organisations. Trustco Bank Pty Ltd competes with other financial organisations in terms of securing and retaining skilled labour. The agreement will cover all of its Australian workplaces. Trustco Bank Pty Ltd is generally viewed as being a 'good employer' but at the same time is aware of the pressures of the market place.

The bank has historically paid in excess of the award rate and will continue to pay rates in excess of the modernised award rate, as determined by the Fair Work Commission. Its rates of pay need to be sufficiently attractive to ensure the retention of employees but in these negotiations the employer is also seeking to ensure that any wage increases contained in the agreement involve a link to performance. There is one major union involved (Finance Union of Australia) which represents all the employees, with the exception of senior managers. This union is one of the larger unions in the country and represents a wide range of financial services sector workers. It has enough resources (financial and organisational) to 'take on' an employer but has the reputation for adopting a pragmatic stance. The employer has respect for this union, seeing it as fairly representing its members' interests in a constructive manner and in any event the employer is aware of the provisions of the Fair Work Act which concern bargaining in good faith (s.228).

This agreement to be negotiated is an enterprise agreement (s.172). It is not a greenfields agreement. There is an option for the union to take protected industrial action (s.409) although there are a number of substantial procedural prerequisites to the taking of industrial action including the requirement for a ballot. There is not a history of individual agreements at the workplace and in any event negotiating AWAs is now precluded by federal legislation. The organisation has had agreements with the union for the last twenty five years, and its preferred strategy is to continue that relationship. Moving towards negotiating with bargaining representatives, other than the union, is not on the bank's agenda. There will be no attempts by either party to introduce unlawful content (s.194) into the enterprise agreement and so compromise the lodging of the agreement with Fair Work Commission. Both parties are also aware that Fair Work Commission will not approve the agreement if it does not meet the 'better off overall test' (see s.186, s.187).

For its part, the union recognises the bank's commitment and values it. However, both management and union negotiators know that the best bargaining position is to bargain from a position of strength and ensure that the needs of their respective constituencies are met.

There are about 4,000 employees to be covered by the agreement. Women comprise sixty five per cent (65%) of the workforce. Twenty per cent (20%) of the workforce is employed on a permanent part-time basis. Somewhat unusually the bank's use of casual employment is low for the sector (about 15%). There are no plans to contract out work. Union membership is close on forty per cent (40%). There are employees in different roles (customer service officers, loans officers, major accounts officers). The key points about banking services are as one would expect - there are peaks and troughs in the working week and throughout the month.

Background to these negotiations - The bank is profitable but there is strong competition in the market place.

The current negotiations to renew the agreement have been proceeding for six months. Agreements have been reached on a wide range of issues - annual pay increases, the taking of annual leave, meal breaks and parental leave, casual employment, and learning and development. The agreement will be a two-year agreement. Only three provisions are left to be resolved. For the purposes of this assessment the provisions to be negotiated revolve around important issues of principle and it should be possible to negotiate and reach agreement without delving too much into the intricacies of banking services. Thus online negotiation participants should not have to 'make up' lots of so-called facts in order to reach an agreement. Both parties feel the need to 'wrap this one up' and finalise an agreement.

Provisions to be negotiated - There are three provisions still to be resolved.

1. The inclusion of a 'Managing Change' or 'Consultation' clause. The relevant award, the Banking, Finance and Insurance Award 2010 [MA000019], has a 'Consultation' clause (clause 8), which outlines the process to introduce any significant workplace change. Both management and the union see advantages of having a similar clause in the new enterprise agreement. However, the nature of any consultation process, the obligations on management, and the rights of workers and their representatives detailed by the proposed clause are still to be negotiated.

2. The hours worked for full-time employees are currently 38 per week (five shifts of 7.6 hours); it has been agreed that the nominal weekly hours of 38 will be retained but worked across a multi-week cycle. It will be necessary to agree upon the length of the cycle and other roster issues (e.g. payment of overtime and penalty rates, and how part-time employees are effected by the new working hours cycle).

3. Long service leave. See notes below.

Long service leave is one of the National Employment Standards (NES) which apply to all employees in the national workplace relations system. Terms in awards, agreements and employment contracts cannot exclude or provide for an entitlement less than the NES.

The relevant award, the Banking, Finance and Insurance Award 2010 [MA000019], does not have a long service leave (LSL) clause. Therefore the relevant State or Territory legislation of the jurisdiction in which an employee of Eureka Bank Pty Ltd is located will apply unless the new enterprise agreement has a LSL clause. There are wide differences in the entitlement to LSL under these laws. Namely when LSL accrues, which employees can accrue LSL, and how LSL pay is calculated. The relevant legislation is:

Industrial Relations Act 2016 (Queensland);

Long Service Leave Act 1955 (New South Wales);

Long Service Leave Act 1958 (Western Australia)

Long Service Leave Act 1976 (Australian Capital Territory);

Long Service Leave Act 1976 (Tasmania);

Long Service Leave Act 1987 (South Australia); and

Long Service Leave Act 1992 (Victoria).

Other organisations in the sector have enterprise agreements that have a LSL clause. Some merely restate the main features of the least generous State or Territory legislation, while some have a wider scope and are more generous than some State or Territory legislation.

The bank is committed to an enterprise agreement provision that can be used to simplify LSL arrangements, so that all of its permanent employees have common entitlements. The bank views LSL as a way to reward and retain employees (i.e., limit its staff from being recruited by other organisations in the sector). The issues that that require resolution are:

• The coverage of LSL entitlements (i.e., which type of employees are covered by the arrangements).
• At what rate will the LSL be paid (for example 'ordinary pay' only or inclusion of normal penalty and shift allowances)?
• What should be the duration of the leave after satisfying the accrual period of service?

Please note the LSL provisions in the enterprise agreement cannot have a narrower coverage, have pay at a lower rate, and have a shorter period of leave than the least generous State or Territory legislation.

Details -

As noted previously, in this unit management and union groups are required to reach agreement on three unresolved issues in enterprise bargaining negotiations. The context for the negotiation is set out above. Negotiations are conducted via vUWS. The experience of the negotiation will assist students develop and demonstrate the skills necessary to participate in negotiation and bargaining. This assessment is directed to each group's preparation for, and engagement in the online negotiation. This assessment does not measure negotiation outcomes, or who 'won' the negotiation or gained the most favourable agreement. Rather the assessment is directed to the following criteria:

• Background research and use of material to inform negotiation strategy
• Development of negotiation strategy
• Timeliness, responsiveness to reasonable deadlines in negotiation
• Clearly presented agreement on three specified outcomes that is agreed by both management and union.

Markers will examine each group's pattern of negotiation through the discussion boards on vUWS. It is important that each group makes all relevant information available through their vUWS discussion board.

Attachment:- Assignment Files.rar