Management Negotiators, Assignment Example

Question 1:  In recent years, management negotiators have increased their resistance to increases in private pension funding. Do you foresee any changes in this trend moving forward? Why or why not

Virtually, underfunded employee pensions continue to pose critical concerns within the service sector. Mainly, the private sector bears the most brunt with the majority of their employees leaving the arena without benefits (Carrell & Heavrin, 2010). Consequently, a greater number of private sector employee resort to personal savings to sustain them in retirement. Even with such efforts, the private sector workers still find it hard to meet their future needs in retirement. Already a problem exists in the private pension funding, and there are potential consequences for the service sector generally in the years ahead. It is only reasonable, therefore, that the management negotiators up their efforts to increase pension funding in the private sector.

In the service sector, the pension crisis is not a new concern if the current trends are anything to go by. The private sector funding problem bears a history of contention spanning decades within the American job market. The problem, though driven by numerous concerns, only gets worse despite the fact that management negotiators have upped their game to increase pension funding. Under the current situation, things are not rosy for the employees serving in the private sector (Carrell & Heavrin, 2010). However, considering the net efforts put by management negotiators, there is a reason to believe that this push might culminate into some positive changes in the years ahead.

Question 2: Which negotiated benefits are most important to you? Draw up an ideal benefits package, which items would you include. List in order of importance

Numerous economic advantages and wages are central to labor relation’s collective bargain. In practice, negotiated benefits are the face of economic viability, which gives the employees the ability to earn a comfortable life until retirement. To the majority of the people, wages are often the most significant negotiated benefit that sums all other bargaining issues. Industrial research, as Carrell and Heavrin (2010) note, pay level has a direct relationship to employee satisfaction hence the need to give it a more insightful consideration in negotiations. Whenever the employees get the exact measure of their reward for the services rendered, it becomes the primary indicator of goodwill that earnestly drives service.

Apart from improved wage plan, labor laws also find their way onto the negotiation table in both private and public service sectors. Labor laws should be agreeable to either party of the negotiation as this determines the working relations between the employer and the employees. It is conceivable that organizations that guarantee enhanced labor laws secure all opportunities for growth in the concept of business. Moreover, negotiation cannot be complete without a viable wellness program. Such programs, as Carrell and Heavrin (2010) note, are the idea behind employee satisfaction hence organization’s success. A robust benefits package must, therefore, include enhanced payment schemes, agreeable labor laws, and a resilient wellness program.

Question 3: There are many nuances to the design of an acceptable pension program. Design a model program to be offered to the union and explain your rationale.            

Designing an ideal pension program should be the end-plan within negotiation practices. This is so because, after years of service, employees look upon their employers to guarantee them a safe passage to retirement life. The service sector is diverse, and there are many approaches to designing the pension program. According to Carrell and Heavrin (2010), negotiators to the program should strike a balance between the cost benefits enjoyed by both the employer and the employee. Of much importance, however, is to ensure that the pension plan guarantees the well-being of the employee and serve to secure their lives under retirement.

A structured pension program should have the capacity to guarantee a valid social security system that covers individuals in their post-employment lives. The idea behind social security should be to cover all retirees in the service sector to ensure that the populations in a country have meaningful retirement life (Carrell & Heavrin, 2010). Particularly, the “pay as you earn” program has been effective in most systems across the world. In this program, the employer retains a given percentage of the employees’ remuneration that will in turn constitute what the employees earn as their pension benefits. The “pay as you earn” model would be effective to unions because the employer mandates the employees to save for themselves to cater for their future needs. Apart from that, the program guarantees profit sharing and style incentive plans that benefit both the employer and the employees.

Question 4: During the past decade, employers and unions have moved away from the concept of Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs) to Profit Sharing and Incentive style plans. Differentiate between the different styles of plans and defend or argue against the move to the new style plans.

Virtually, the concept of Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs) is increasingly giving way to profit sharing and incentive style plans. Many organization and systems advocate for the shift are due to the tremendous cost-benefits attached to profit sharing incentive plans. Unlike the traditional COLAs plan that seems constricted, the profit sharing and incentive plans are comprehensive. COLA provisions, according to Carrell and Heavrin (2010), prevent the parties from predicting future costs pertinent in the labor market. Under COLA provisions, wage adjustments are tied to compensating for inflation. As such, there seem to be no sound principles that guide the practice.

Many systems, therefore, favor profit sharing as a wage supplement due to the cost benefits attached to both to the employer and the employee. Under this system, organizations make payments only when they make profits hence ensuring that the systems are financially stable. Unlike COLAs, under profit sharing, inflation does not dictate payments as certain elements of inflation might not necessarily relate to an organization’s financial status. Moreover, the profit sharing plan links worker compensation to their productivity and not necessarily to the hours worked. This scenario gives workers a direct incentive to ensure that an organization becomes more profitable than before. Finally, the profit sharing motif guarantees a feeling employee involvement is hence injecting a sense of conscious in the general corporate objectives.

References

Carrell, M., & Heavrin, C. (2010). Labor relations and collective bargaining: Cases, practice, and law. New Jersey, USA: Prentice-Hall