GAP ANALYSIS: GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS
Gap Analysis: Global Communications
Gap Analysis: Global Communications
Global Communications is a company that needed a new strategy in order to compete with its competitors. The telecommunication industry was flooded with the addition of cable companies joining in their market. Global Communications was financially in a decline and had already asked union workers to give up a percent of their benefits in order to help. The union did so willingly in order to preserve the future of their jobs within the company. The company brought in new executives to try and come up with a plan to save the company from its decline. The senior leadership team came up with a strategic plan to compete with the telephone and cable companies. They obtained approval to implement the plan, but not without problems. The senior leadership team did not consult or divulge any of their plans to the union representative or the employees prior to their approval. Their plan included outsourcing some of the work overseas which would reduce cost but also cut jobs within the company. The senior leadership team needed the support of the union representative in order to explain to the worker's what the company's plans were and how it would affect them. The union representative was upset she was left out of the communications and had to hear it from her superiors. Global Communications needed the employees to grow and increase profitability; however they could not reach an agreement and Global Communications implemented layoffs. The union is discussing what action they will take to stop the outsourcing plan that will set precedent for the whole industry.
Gap Analysis: Global Communications
Situation Analysis
Issue and Opportunity Identification
Communication is the key to having a successful business. A company must be able communicate the overall plan and future goals to their employees so the employees can support the organizations goals. Global Communication's first issue was the lack of communication to the union about their need to enter international markets for the company to expand. The second issue was also a lack of communication to the union about their plans to outsource the technical call center to India and Ireland, which would in turn affect the employee's job status. They should have contacted the union president and furnished their goals to them before moving forward. This would have opened up the communication process and not left the union workers in the dark.
Despite attempting to predict the eventual outcome of the negotiation, I did not anticipate the confrontations between Local H-56 and the management of Hotel Zinnia. Although they initially agreed to engage in integrative bargaining, the union and management subsequently entered an intense negotiation. When Local H-56 presented its proposal of wage increases and health insurance, management immediately responded with a counterproposal that surprised the union. Both the union and management eventually behaved confrontationally, accusing each other of bargaining unreasonably and focusing on the trivial aspects of the negotiation. Moreover, as the union and management felt increasingly frustrated, they suffered from a lack of unity in their teams. The union could not fulfill its objectives because its lead negotiator prevented other team members from contributing to the negotiation. On the other hand, several team members of management struggled to assert their authority as the lead negotiator. After observing these issues, I ultimately believe that the union and management failed to achieve their individual objectives. Moreover, by approaching the negotiation with a zero-sum strategy, I assert that the union and management failed to reach a mutually beneficial contract. At the same time, both sides of the bargaining table lacked cohesive teams and therefore struggled under the pressure of the negotiation.
In times of heated business disputes, navigating negotiation strategies is paramount to a successful business venture. In addition, the need to understand the various aspects of emotional exchanges that shift from rights, powers, and interests on both sides in the integrative and distributive approaches is the core of the modern day negotiations in business disputes. In the negotiation case between the parties, the two opposing sides represent an actual negotiation that occurred between Hormel and Local P9 in the 1980s. In this case, P-9 symbolized democracy and a willingness to oppose different demands for consensus regardless of the agenda or strategies of the international union. The defeated strike is a classic example of how employers can utilize
The case study of GMFC provides an example of a company attempting to avoid unionization of its workers. GMFC is expanding by building a new U.S. plant which will manufacture motorized recreational equipment. The company plans to hire about 500 production workers to assemble mechanical components, fabricate fiberglass body parts, and assemble the final products. In order to avoid the expected union campaign by the United Automobile Workers (UAW) to organize its workers, GMFC must implement specific strategies to keep the new plant union-free. GMFC’s planning committee offers suggestions with regards to the plant’s size, location, staffing, wages and benefits, and other employee relations issues in order to defend the company against the negative effects of unionization and increase...
The ethical issue in this situation is the willingness of the company’s director to prevent the employees from organizing in union. Among others, the company’s director try to use unfair tactic like diversion, intimidation, manipulation, termination of job contract and threat to shut down the company leading to massive loss of job. In an ethical standpoint, these tactics are wrong.
Tensions between union supporters and management began mounting in the years preceding the strike. In April of 1994, the International Union led a three-week strike against major tracking companies in the freight hauling industry in attempts to stop management from creating $9 per hour part-time positions. This would only foreshadow battles to come between management and union. Later, in 1995, teamsters mounted an unprecedented national union campaign in attempts to defeat the labor-management “cooperation” scheme that UPS management tried to establish in order to weaken the union before contract talks (Witt, Wilson). This strike was distinguished from other strikes of recent years in that it was an offensive strike, not a defensive one. It was a struggle in which the union was prepared, fought over issues which it defined, and one which relied overwhelmingly on the efforts of the members themselves (http://www.igc.org/dbacon/Strikes/07ups.htm).
You can see by these two cases that there is a difference between employee and non-employee union organizers. The main difference being in where they ...
Employees are motivated to join labor unions for various reasons. Most important of all is to seek redress for any real or perceived injustices in the workplace (Kearney, & Mareschal, 2014). The management should take cognizance of this fact and act accordingly to roll out a labor relations strategy that will enable them relate well with their employees whether unionized or not. When dealing with union matters at the company, the management should take bold steps in preventing the increase of union-related activities by enticing the employees by enhancing grievance handling and how the employees relate with the company (Carrell, & Heavrin, 2004). This can be achieved by:
The employee argues that Walker brothers’ potential conduit of information to their father has no sufficient evidence and their do not receive special treatment due their relationship with the majority owner and it should not determine their status in the union. As for them employees asked to be excluded from the bargaining unit per their perceived managerial duties, the employer argues that they should be included as their do not perform duties that are typical of managerial roles such as hiring and disciplining employees and their supervisory roles make them charge hands not management. As for casual employees the employer argues that they cannot by excluded due to their nature of employment as they are not irregular or sporadic workers but employees with sufficient work histories and hours with the organization.
Telstra’s strategies create a number of unemployment (Contact Centre Central 2016). Palmer (2016) reports that Unions disagree with this strategies and claims that this decision shows the company is putting profits before customer and staff. Moreover, the Communication Workers Union (CWU) demonstrates that Telstra’s strategies focus on only finding the cheap labour while the organisation ignore its impact on individual employees, on their families and on Telstra’s own service quality. Unions have been pressuring the government to respond and take action of this huge offshore outsourcing which will take away jobs from local people.
How does this case illustrate the threats and opportunities facing global companies in developing their strategies?
In order to compete in the international market, Global must cut costs by outsourcing, however their employees belong to a trade union. This creates a problem in that Global has not included the union in their discussions. This could have legal ramifications as well as create morale issues within the company. The leadership team must communicate these changes to the employees and public in a positive manner to avoid negative publicity and the loss of valued employees.
Global Communications' management infringed on the rights of their technology workers union by not involving the union in the decision making process, and the union is now threatening to take legal actions against Global Communications. Global Communications also faces another dilemma based on their decision to outsource. GC has always been known caring for her employees, and placing a great value on them also. However by carrying out their outsourcing strategy, employee's morale will at an all-time low because both the union workers and the company's employees now face either job losses or a salary cut.
Management should have the right to determine whether a union should operate their workplace. Discuss.
Now, think to the present. You are a union member. You have worked as a rank and file member a few years. You have just been elected business manager of your union. Congratulations! Next week starts the beginning of contract negotiations, and globalization is here. Guess What? You have just been set up for failure. You have no idea how to negotiate a contract or even deal with the ramifications of globalization. The only training you have ever had was the necessary training to do your job. Your fellow leaders have only experience from the past, no new ideas, and have stagnated. What is going to happen with your union?
Every year in this country, there are major labor disputes that result in strikes or work stoppages. In each case, the organization, the labor union, and the public are negatively affected. Why can't there be a better way of resolving disputes between the management and labor unions to avert unnecessary strikes? Why does the relationship between the labor unions and management have to be adversarial in nature? Does anybody benefit from strikes and work stoppages? These are some of the questions that I will explore in this study.