Case-1 Negotiating With the Writers Guild of America

The talks between the Writers Guild of America (WGA) and the Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers (producers) started off tense in 2007, and then got tenser. In their first meeting, the two sides got nothing done. As law and order producer said, Everyone in the room is concerned about this. The two sides were far apart on just about all the issues. However, the biggest issue was how to split revenue from new media, such as when television shows move to DVDs or the Internet. The producers said they wanted a profit-splitting system rather than the current residual system. Under the residual system, writers continue to receive residuals or income from shows they write every time theyre shown (such as when Seinfeld appears in reruns, years after the last original show was shot). Writers Guild executives did their homework. They argued, for instance, that the projections showed producers revenues from advertising and subscription fees had recently jumped by about 40% between 2002 and 2006. The situation grew tenser. After the first few meetings, one producers representative said, We can see after the dogfight whose position will win out. The open question there, of course, is whether each of us takes several lumps at the table, reaches and agreement, then licks their wounds later none the worse for wear or whether we inflict more lasting damage through work stoppages that benefit no one before we come to an agreement. Even after meeting six times, it seemed that, the parties only apparent area of agreement is that o real bargaining has yet to occur. In october 2007, the Writers Guild asked its members for strike authorization, and the producers were claiming that the guild was just trying to delay negotiation until the current contract expired (at the end of October). As the president of the producers group said, We have had six across-the-table sessions and there way only silence and stonewalling from the WGA leadershipWe have attempted to engage on major issues, but no dialogue has been forthcoming from the WGA leadershipThe WGA leadership apparently has no intention to bargain in good faith. As evidence, the producers

claimed that the WGA negotiating committee left one meeting after less than an hour at the bargaining table.

Both sides knew timing in these negotiations was very important. During the fall and spring, television series production is in full swing. So, a strike now by the writers would have bigger impact than waiting until, say, the summer to strike. Perhaps not

surprisingly, some movement was soon discernible. In a separate set of negotiations, the Directors Guild of America reached an agreement with the producers that addressed many of the issues that the writers were focusing on, such as how to divide the new media income. Then, the WGA and producers finally reached agreement. The new contract was the direct result of renewed negotiations between the two sides, which culminated Friday with a marathon session including top WGA officials and the heads of Walt Disney Co. and News Corp. Questions: Q-1 The producers said the WGA was not bargaining in good faith. What did they mean by that, and do you think the evidence is sufficient to support that claim? Bargaining in good faith means that both parties honestly communicate and negotiate to make a reasonable effort to arrive at a fair agreement. It would be very difficult to determine if the WGA was not bargaining in good faith without knowing additional facts and details regarding the negotiations and bargaining between both parties.

Q-2 The WGA did eventually strike. What tactics could the producers have used to fight back once the strike began? What tactics do you think the WGA used? The producers could have threatened to hire writers to take the place of striking employees. While this course of action would be very difficult given the creative nature of this business, often the threat of hiring replacement workers helps the process move toward a labor settlement. The WGA in return could claim the producers have committed an unfair labor practice. The WGA could also play to the media to gain sympathy for their job action.

Q-3 This was a conflict between professional and creative people (the WGA) and TV and movie producers. Do you think the conflict was therefore different in any way than are the conflicts between, say, the Autoworkers or Teamsters unions against auto and trucking companies? Why? 2

The conflict and bargaining process described in this scenario is no different than the dayto-day negotiations between any union and management. Very often, the issues are over wages, hours, and/or working conditions.

Q-4 What role did negotiating skills seem to play in the WGA producers negotiations? Timing played a role as well as a marathon bargaining session which tends to make each side more flexible and come to an agreement. Also the introduction of the heads of Walt Disney and News Corp played a role in moving both parties toward settlement.

Case-2 Carter Cleaning Company: The Grievance

On visiting one of Carter Cleanings Companys Stores, Jennifer was surprised to be taken aside by long-term carter employee, who met her as she was parking her car. Murry ( the store manager) told me I was suspended for days without pay because i came in late Thursday, said George. Im really upset, but around here the store managers word seems to be law, and it sometimes seems like the only way anyone can file a grievance is by meeting you or your father like this in the parking lot. Jennifer was very disturbed by this revelation and promised the employee she would look into it and discuss the situation with her father. In the car head-ind back to headquarters she began mulling over what Carter Cleaning Companys alternatives might be.

Q-1 Do you think it is important for Carter Cleaning Company to have a formal grievance process? Why or why not? Of course, there must be a formal grievance process in Carters cleaning Company. Certainly it is important for many reasons. Employees would be able to complaints to their upper level management in a formal way where they can sit and discuss the whole issues or matters. Employees complaints should be listened in a right manner and so that, they can feel comfortable to discuss the issues and to become open to say whatever they feel and what the real issue is. Here, in Carter Cleaning Company, employee need to complaints at the parking. So that it is important to have a formal grievance process.

Q-2 Based on what you know about the Carter Cleaning Company, outline the steps in what you think would be the ideal grievance process for this company. From the case, we are able to find that the Carter Cleaning Company is small scale company, so that it cant afford high involving process. Process should not involves more money or more human resources. Here by we suggest two methods for grievance process. 1. There should be a complaint box, so that employee can put their complaints to higher level and that complaints should be considered by them and they can call upon employee and discuss the issue.

2. According to an issues employees can inform managers using letter pad and application, this application should be considered and discussed issue among employee and managers.

Q-3 In addition to the grievance process, can you think of anything else that Carter Cleaning Company might do to make sure that grievance and gripes like this one are expressed and are heard by top management? In any of the company or firm, employee should be treated fairly and they should not be suffered from injustice. Here, in carter cleaning company, employee has been treated unfairly. A one day late does matter but not in a manner that employee is given with so hard punishment. A store manager has even not asked a reason for being late. Employees who would be punished, he should be heard by higher level authorities. Employees are permitted to give reason for any unusual behaviour, they can express their self and should be heard by upper level. If authority found that employee has fair reason for unusual behaviour they should not be punished and if they found it unfair, they can take step toward them fairly and according to their reason.