CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

1.0 BACKGROUND

This Chapter will focus on introducing the subject of wage negotiations and collective

bargaining in general and specifically to the Catering Industry sector of the economy in

Zimbabwean. It is the researcher’s belief that expounding on the subject of collective

bargaining and the wage negotiation process, the wage negotiation process can better be

understood. A background to the study will be provided then followed by statement of the

problem and research objectives and research questions for the study. The chapter will

then conclude by giving a justification as to why it is necessary that this research be

undertaken.

The divide between employers and workers in wage negotiations is continuously

becoming greater and greater, with the gap between workers’ expectations and demands

against employers’ responses to those demands constantly increasing. To a large extent

wage negotiations are confrontational and characterized by extreme inflexibility. They

usually culminate in deadlocks, instead of agreements, whereupon the wage determinants

are arrived at by arbitration or by judicial determination in the Labour Court. The wage

levels sought by labour are generally understandable. This is because the employment

income of most workers does not suffice to service the essential needs of the workers,

their families and their dependants. Although the horrendous hyperinflation of 2008 has

been contained, with inflation levels in Zimbabwe now being less than those prevailing in

most of the countries of Africa, Zimbabwe has not yet experience deflation. Prices have

however not declined but have only stabilized to levels marginally greater than those then

prevailing. The consequences of Zimbabwe having attained the highest levels of inflation

ever endured by any country, throughout recorded history, were horrendous especially for

those that are in the lower income range. Not only were a majority of the populace unable

to pay for the education and health of their families, but they could not even meet the

most basic of needs.

As prices have generally not declined the trials and tribulations of workers, and of those

reliant upon them, have continued unabated. The result of those tragic circumstances is

1

that the workers representatives in general and trade unions in particular, focus wholly on

worker needs with total disregard for the ability or lack thereof of employers to meet their

demands. As a general rule worker representatives are insistent that the minimum wage

should equate the poverty datum line (PDL). However in demanding PDL-related wages,

the worker negotiators disregard two key factors. The first of such is that the PDL relates

to the requirements of families of six and in Zimbabwe, in any such family there are

usually at least two income earners. However one of them maybe operating in the

informal sector instead of being in formal employment. Inevitably, the two income

earners will not be recipients of identical income. More often than not one of them will be

generating about 60% of the family’s income, whilst the other generates only 40%.

Worker negotiators have also developed an insensitive and despicable disregard for the

extent of employer ability to pay wages at the levels demanded for them. On the one

hand, almost all employers are grievously undercapitalized to finance their operations

effectively. The hyperinflation that prevailed in Zimbabwe was of such magnitude that

the organization’s capital resources were decimated and eroded. The illiquidity in the

money market is pronounced, and the limited funding available is exceptionally costly

and only available for very limited periods of time. Similarly, because of the tiny extent

of accessible foreign investment with held because of concerns about the political and

economic stability, it is presently difficult for organizations to access core working capital

and therefore to fund the wages demanded by the employees. The ability of employers to

pay well is also adversely affected by the need to be price competitive internationally. If

production costs are markedly greater than those in other economies, then Zimbabweans

are prone to purchasing imported products instead of those locally produced. As a result,

exports fail to be competitive. This has already severely impacted upon the viability of

Zimbabwean enterprises.

Whilst wages paid are generally much less than what the workers need, it is long overdue

for labour to recognize that inadequate wages are better than total unemployment, with

associated zero incomes. Maybe the wage determination criteria must endure until such

time as Zimbabwe can achieve substantive deflation. There is also a tendency amongst

arbitrators to make wage determinations with retrospective effect, whereby they award

the increases in wages with back pay to the date when negotiations had commenced. For

almost all employers this has ruinous consequences. This is because they cannot increase

their selling prices retrospectively. The goods or services sold prior to the arbitration were

2

sold at prevailing prices at that time, and no customers will accept a subsequent price

increase for the goods or services already purchased. The consequential effects of back

pay awards are massive losses for the organizations subjected to such. In many instances

it results in closure or liquidation of the organization, and the loss of employment for their

workers. Arbitrators who award retrospective back pay are in practice, doing the workers

a grave injustice and worsening their circumstances.

It is in this context that this research has to be understood. Whilst in business, the human

being has often arbitrarily been referred to as the most priced asset, very few

organizations pay credence to this assertion. The implications on failure to handle this

asset have far reaching and greater consequences both for the enterprise itself as well as

the employees. It would be foolhardy for the enterprise to neglect the human beings in

their businesses as mishandling such comes with great costs (economic/productivity) on

the business. Issues of staff morale are central to the productivity of the enterprise and the

national economy at large.

The Zimbabwean economy prior 2012 beginning 2007 was characterized by periods of

hyperinflation where prices of commodities were changing rapidly and at its worst twice

or thrice a day. Payment of wages in the years 2007 and 2008 was converted into other

forms in order to preserve value as the buying power of money had been eroded. Wage

negotiations were now being done every second month. Companies experienced and

continue to experience low capacity utilization, there are huge disparities between

management and workers earnings leading to inflexibility on both parties which has now

become very much prevalent. Furthermore the economy is not improving as had been

expected due to lack of resources to recapitalize the business.

Annual wage negotiations/bargaining have been taking place under this environment. In

almost all Industries these wage negotiations did not yield much result as they all ended

up having to be referred for arbitration as parties failed to agree on new wage minimums

for each year. NEC Catering was also among the NECs that failed to register an

agreement during this period and since the devolution of powers to NECs by the

government. According to Dr. Kanyenze an economist with the ZCTU, limited scope and

role of NEC was a major cause of wage disputes because they focus narrowly on wage

negotiations. Very little is given to discuss the state of the economy, resources,

development issues of productivity and competiveness. Employees often lack information

and more critically, a shared vision of their sectors or firms thereby creating a fertile

3

ground for contestation and inevitably conflict. Absence of a quality database for

information is also another handicap that was sighted by Dr. Kanyeze when his opinion

was sought on the causes of annual wage negotiation deadlocks.

The National Employment Council (NEC) for the Catering Industry is the umbrella body

representing all employers and employees in the Catering Industry. These include hotels,

motels, lodges, fast food outlets, restaurants and bars. The body to which all employers in

the catering industry belong is known as the Catering Employers Association of

Zimbabwe (CEAZ). The CEAZ represents the interests of all employers in this industry.

When negotiating for conditions of employment and annual salary increases the CEAZ

has a secretariat mandated with engaging the trade union on behalf of all its members. On

the other hand the there is the Zimbabwe Catering and Hotel Workers Union (ZCHWU)

as part of the NEC members. The ZCHWU represents the interests of all employees in the

Industry. Membership to both these institutions is voluntary and members who wish to be

affiliated pay annual subscriptions that are meant to assist with the running of these

institutions. The CEAZ and the ZCHWU have thus established a body mandated with

ensuring that the minimum working conditions agreed upon by the two parties (i.e. CEAZ

& ZCHWU) is being observed. This body is known as the National Employment Council

for the Catering Industry (NEC). The National Employment Council then employs

administrators and agents whose responsibility is to ensure there is harmony at the

workplace. To this effect a booklet known as the Collective Bargaining Agreement

(CBA) came into effect in 1991 and has now become known as Statutory Instrument 167

of 1991(SI 167/91). This statutory instrument was promulgated in line with the provisions

of the Labour Relations Act of 1985. The agreement covers among other things some of

the following issues; scope of application of agreement, alteration of agreement,

administration of agreement, trade union representation on the council, registration of

employers, wages, grading and increments, overtime rates of pay, payment of wages and

many other areas of interest.

All conditions of employment by workers in the Catering Industry are set out in Statutory

Instrument 167 of 1991. These conditions have been negotiated between the employers

and employees through their respective bodies, i.e. CEAZ & ZCHWU. The Labour Act in

Zimbabwe stipulates the minimum working conditions that both parties are required to

observe. The parties are however at liberty to better what has been set out in the Labour

Act provided they have reached an agreement regarding those specific aspects.

4

Collectively bargaining in Zimbabwe for most NECs is at the multi-employer level,

meaning that employers come together to negotiate with one trade union responsible for

the Industry. Whilst most conditions of employment conform to those stipulated in the

Labour Act, some companies have adopted individual company policies that better the

Statutory Instrument as well as the Labour Act. Every year all NECs find themselves in a

position they have to set new minimum wages for their respective industries. Different

NECs therefore negotiate for wage increments at varying times throughout the year.

Previously government used to set and then announce minimum wages for Industries until

2002. NECs were then empowered to negotiate and agree on minimum wages for their

respective industries, a position the NEC Catering Industry also find itself in.

Since government empowered NECs to agree on minimum wages for their respective

Industries, very few have been able to agree on new wage levels without having to refer

the issue for arbitration and in some instances strikes taking place. At the time of the

research, this researcher was advised there was already a case pending before the

arbitrator regarding the awarding of salary differentials for grades 10 to 14 in the Catering

Industry. Therefore this aspect of collective bargaining has been very topical year in year

out with all cases having been referred for arbitration since 2002. There is therefore need

to understand what factors are behind this failure by parties to reach an agreement on

wages every year with regard to the Catering Industry.

Almost across all industries in Zimbabwe from private to the public sector, every year

there are always disagreements on wage negotiations which end up in a deadlock. These

wage deadlocks are so widespread to an alarming extent that it has become standard to

end up with arbitration. An independent arbitrator has to be appointed by the parties so

that they can decide on an acceptable or compromise pay rise/increment between the two

parties. In Zimbabwe, the varied employer associations and trade unions represented by

their respective bodies are therefore either involved in collective bargaining for that

specific period they would have agreed or have now referred the issue of wage

negotiations to an arbitrator and now awaiting the outcome. Again as noted in the case of

NEC Catering Industry, there has not been an instance where parties have concluded

wage negotiations without referring the matter to an arbitrator.

The issue of wage negotiations deadlock has been compounded by the fact that the

general outlook of the economy has not been at its best. It is not a secret that since 2007

many companies have been operating at below capacity with some even failing to break

5

even after the introduction of multi-currency in February 2009. Those that have failed to

break even closed shop rendering the workforce jobless. In the Catering Industry several

big names have applied for exemptions to pay for wages below the minimum wage

stipulated by NEC because of their financial situation. It is now a public secret that the

foreign direct investment expected over the years since the Global Political agreement has

wilted and the expected incomes have not materialized. The country has not seen any

meaningful investment despite parties in the GPA assuring the world that Zimbabwe is a

safe destination to do business. Operating costs have been very high to the extent that in

most instances goods from outside the country have been landing cheaper here in

Zimbabwe. The effect again has been to put pressure on the local operators. The labour

laws in Zimbabwe have also not helped much, for companies wishing to retrench in the

unfortunate circumstance that they have failed to stay afloat, it has been a costly exercise.

It is no surprise therefore that some organizations have chosen to go the voluntary

liquidation way.

As already noted, in 2002 the government of Zimbabwe made a decision to do away with

the setting of minimum wages for most industries except for employees under the public

service. The thinking behind was that government was involving itself too much in affairs

that had nothing to do with it leaving no freedom to the private enterprise to allow market

forces to determine supply of labour and how it was going to be priced. It was felt that it

was not the government’s role for setting minimum wages, moreover it had carried

industry long enough for it to be able to now stand on its own feet. From then on

industries were expected to sit down at the negotiating table and agree on new

yearly/periodic wage minimums for the various industries.

The NEC for Catering Industry tops the list of perennial wage negotiation breakdowns

especially in the last five years. It however needs to be noted that generally the world

over the Hospitality Industry ranks among some of the lowest paying Industries and

professions. This situation does not make it any better when parties now seat down at the

negotiation table. To show that this problem of wage negotiation is not only peculiar to

the NEC Catering Industry in Zimbabwe, here are some of the headlines and quotes found

in newspapers in Zimbabwe and South Africa pertaining to the issue of wage negotiations

deadlocks:

6

“Employer and worker representatives in the insurance industry have referred 2012

salary negotiations to arbitration after a deadlock. But they have agreed not to contest

the outcome of an independent mediator’s determination” (The Herald, Wednesday 11

January 2012)

“The wage negotiations between public service unions including SADTU and the

employer have reached a deadlock. The negotiations resumed yesterday (20 May) when

the employer offered a 5.3% increase- a mere 0.1% increase from last week’s 5.2% offer

implemented as from 1 July. This latest offer by the employer is disgraceful”.

(www.sadtu.org.za/node/203)

“Wage negotiations in South Africa’s gold sector came to a deadlock on Wednesday, with

trade unions declaring a dispute with the Chamber of Mines. The National Union of

Mineworkers (NUM) is asking for a 14% increase while solidarity is demanding a 12%

pay rise. (www.miningweekly.com)

“A final dispute meeting today between solidarity and employers in the Grain Bargaining

Council deadlocked after employers offered a final wage offer of between 5% and 7%. An

independent arbitrator last week recommended that all parties return to the negotiating

table today with new mandates” (www.salabournews.co.za)

The above quotes point to the wage negotiation problem across sectors in other countries

outside Zimbabwe and to the south where South Africa is our neighbour. It would be easy

to relate to South Africa being Zimbabwe’s neighbour as they share almost the same

history. Is South Africa however unionism appears to be more vibrant that it is currently

in Zimbabwe. A strong union is therefore more likely to be heard and advance the

interests of its membership.

In the extract in table 1.0 it can be noted that all wage negotiations that took place for the

period January 2005 to September 2011 were all referred for arbitration. The parties (i.e.

ZCHWU & CEAZ) failed to reach a conclusive agreement regarding new wage levels for

each of the periods under review. Table 1.0 table gives the history of wage negotiation

deadlocks in recent years

7

Table 1.0 NEC Catering Wage Negotiation Deadlocks from 2007 to 2011

Period Involved Statutory Instrument Comments

September 2011 No Statutory Instrument was promulgated Ref to Arbitration

February to September 2010 No Statutory Instrument was promulgated Ref to Arbitration

January to December 2009 No Statutory Instrument was promulgated Ref to Arbitration

January to December 2008 No Statutory Instrument was promulgated Ref to Arbitration

January to December 2007 No Statutory Instrument was promulgated Ref to Arbitration

Source: National Employment Council for the Catering Industry

As a result the parties referred all the wage negotiations to an Independent Arbitrator.

During this whole period a lot of negotiations tensions and high, morale is low and

productivity is not spared and there is a lot of anxiety since no one is sure of the outcome.

In some instances when there are deadlock, it often leads to strikes as a last alternative.

In order to illustrate the extent of the problem, below are a few examples taken from the

Ministry of Labour Harare province statistics for the year 2009 on deadlocks wage.

Table 1.1 Wage Deadlocks in 2009, sector by sector referred for Arbitration

Wage Deadlock Date

Declared

1 NSSA vs. Employees 30.03.09

2 Chloride vs. Chloride Workers Committee 23.04.09

3 National Commercial Employers of Zimbabwe vs. Commercial Workers

Union

27.04.09

4 Chamber of Mines Zimbabwe vs. Associated Mine Workers Union of

Zimbabwe

06.07.09

5 Detergents Edible Oils and Fats vs. Trade Union 30.07.09

6 Catering Employers Association (CEAZ) vs. ZCHWU 09.10.09

7 Harare Municipality vs. Harare Municipal Workers Union 10.06.09

8 Leather, Allied Employers Association vs. Workers Union 11.12.09

9 Banking Employers Association of Zimbabwe vs. Zimbabwe Industrial

Banking Workers Union

18..05.09

Source: Ministry of Labour Harare Province 2009

1.1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

8

The Government has left collective negotiation/bargaining for industries with

employment councils to conclude wage negotiations on their own. Since then there has

been continuous deadlock in wage negotiations every year in industry resulting in parties

referring the deadlock to an independent arbitrator. The NEC Catering has also not been

spared. This failure to conclude wage negotiations in time and having an independent

arbitrator make a ruling has not helped the employee-management relations at the

workplace. Productivity has been affected as a result of the low morale of the employees

who are anxious about the outcome of the wage negotiations meaning the continuity of

the enterprise is a t risk because of low productivity. The aim of this study is to identify

the causes of wage negotiation deadlocks so as to assist employees and management

reach amicable solutions and avoid industrial disharmony, improve relations and the

smooth operation of the enterprise. The costs associated with low morale and arbitration

outcomes (in some instances back pays for up to six months) are too huge to bear for the

organization and hence it is in both parties interests to avoid deadlocks

1.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

1. To identify the wage negotiation/bargaining process and how its conducted

2. To establish the underlying causes of wage negotiation deadlocks

3. To identify alternatives to the ways of wage negotiation process

4. To recommend how the negotiation process can be improved to minimize wage

negotiation deadlocks.

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. How is the wage negotiation process conducted?

2. What are the causes of wage negotiation deadlocks?

3. What alternatives are available to determining wages?

4. How can the wage negotiation process be improved to avoid arbitration?

1.3.1 PROPOSITION

9

Wage negotiation deadlocks are as a result of parties not negotiating in good faith.

1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

It is the researchers’ conviction that the research brought out significant issues in an area

that parties have taken for granted in a long time of negotiating. It is only through

understanding the causes of wage negotiation deadlocks that trade unions and employer

representatives are better equipped to respect the negotiation process and avoid

deadlocks. The parties are then able to appreciate and to tolerate each other’s view point

and hence decision making is improved. When wage negotiation deadlocks are avoided

the employees are motivated and are less likely to bring attitudes at the workplace which

may rub onto guests and affect service delivery. Instead the employees are productive and

give their best as they have no anxieties or worries.

The employers on the other hand are able to better plan their finances and cash flows in

the absence of deadlocks. The costs of deadlock come in the form of low morale, reduced

productivity and high employment costs as a result of back pays that the employer may be

ordered to pay. It therefore means that when there is agreement from the onset the

employer is certain as to what they are going to pay and will not need to face back pays

which would not have been budgeted for. When service is seamless and uninterrupted this

has the effect of attracting more customers in future since they are going to talk good

about the organizations and industry as a whole.

Tourism ranks amongst the top five major income earners for the country. The more

arrivals we have the better for the economy as they bring in money to spend since they

will be satisfied with the service. As a result the economy grows and the country is able to

meet some of its obligations towards its citizens. It is also important in the adjustment of

the balance of payments for the country.

The research benefited the researcher in fulfilling the requirements of the School of

Business Sciences for the attainment of the Master of Science in Strategic Management.

The researcher also benefited from the new knowledge made available of the subject of

collective negotiation/bargaining by undertaking the research and getting first hand

information on the practices in organizations.

1.5 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

10

The research was conducted at the National Employment Council for the Catering

Industry sited at number 87 Selous Avenue, Harare. The NEC Catering is made up of

Catering Employers Association of Zimbabwe (CEAZ) representing all the employers on

the one hand and the Zimbabwe Catering and Hotel Workers Union (ZCHWU) on the

other hand. Therefore the secretariat and administrators at the NEC was asked to give

their opinions by use of questionnaires. The trade union representative and employer

representatives interviewed constituted those who have a direct bearing on the negotiation

process. It is the researcher’s belief that the chosen sample will be a true representation of

the views and opinions of the Industry. The study was conducted over a period of two

months.

1.5.1 LIMITATIONS

Human Resources Management- the study is narrowed to the social sciences domain

and therefore limited to the Industrial Relations at the workplace

Financial constraints - a lot of costs were involved in typing, printing, binding,

internet and travelling during the course of the study.

Confidential information – respondents are always not comfortable in fully disclosing

information in fear of the unknown.

1.6 DEFINITION OF TERMS

BATNA- Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement

CBA- Collective Bargaining Agreement

CEAZ – Catering Employers Association of Zimbabwe

CUT- Chinhoyi University of Science Technology

ILO- International Labour Organization

NEC- National Employment Council for the Catering Industry

SI- Statutory Instrument

ZCHWU- Zimbabwe Catering and Hotel Workers Union

1.7 RESEARCH OUTLINE

11

This study report is presented in five chapters. Chapter 1 is the Introduction to the

research, Chapter 2 (Literature Review) reviews the literature related to wage

negotiation/bargaining. The reviewed literature will be used in the critical analysis of the

study findings. Chapter 3 (Methodology) presents the methodology on how the study was

conducted. Chapter 4 (Results and Discussion) presents the study findings and discussion

of the study findings. Chapter 5 outlines the conclusions and recommendations of the

study derived directly from the research findings. Furthermore, the chapter presents the

suggested area of further research as shown by the study findings. The next chapter

presents the literature review of the study.

1.8 CHAPTER SUMMARY

A background to the study was provided detailing how the government left NECs to

determine wage negotiations on their own without the involvement of government

anymore. This was then followed by stating what the problem of the study will be focused

on highlighting the costs of failure to reach agreement when negotiating. Research

objectives and questions were then provided to help shape and guide the research

followed by significance of the study. In other words of what importance is this research

to the employee, employers, the economy and nation as a whole? The Chapter then

closed by giving an outline of the structure the dissertation followed.

12

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents a review of related literature. The chapter begins by exploring

literature related to the negotiation theories and models of collective bargaining. The

principled negotiation process and its’ requirements are discussed in greater detail

followed by causes of wage negotiation deadlocks. The approach taken is that negotiation

is a component of collective bargaining, hence to understand wage negotiation reference

should also be paid to collective bargaining. As a follow up, ways to overcome wage

negotiation deadlocks are then discussed enabling parties to understand and appreciate

their short comings so that they do not fall into the same mistakes again. The penultimate

discussion is then on alternatives to the collective negotiation process and new ways of

determining wages without resolving to collective negotiation. The chapter concludes by

looking by summarizing the discussion on wage negotiations.

2.1 THE PRINCIPLED NEGOTIATION PROCESS

2.1.1 NEGOTIATION

(Kersten, Michalowski, Szpakowicz and Koperczak: 1991) argue that negotiation is a

form of decision making with two or more actively involved agents who cannot make

decisions independently, and therefore must make concessions to achieve a compromise.

The effectiveness of negotiation is measured by the degree of achievement of the goals

which were put forward by agents. Negotiation is also a method of conflict resolution,

and as such it is used in modeling of decision processes.

Pilbeam and Corbridge (1997) agree with Kersten et al (2003) in saying that negotiation

is a process whereby two or more interested groups seek to reconcile their differences

through attempts to persuade the other group to move from their initial position, with the

overall aim of reaching agreement.

13

Alvarez and Kennedy (2006) put it more interestingly by saying that negotiation is the art

of letting them have your way. They say your task is to understand and shape your

counterpart’s perceived decisions, so that the counterpart chooses in its own interest

something you also want. Alvarez and Kennedy (2006) further point out that people think

of negotiating power as being determined by resources like wealth, political connections,

physical strength, friends and military might. In fact the relative power of two parties

depends primarily upon how attractive to each the option is of not reaching agreement.

The aim of negotiation is therefore to try and reach agreement by convincing the other

party to see things in the same light as you. Kersten et al (1991), Pilbeam and Cobridge

(1997) and Alvarez and Kennedy (2006) are of the same view.

2.1.2 PRINCIPLED NEGOTIATION- PRE-NEGOTIATION PREPARATIONS

According to Silva (1996) there are various activities that one needs to undertake before

engaging the other party. www.au.af.mil summarizes the pre-negotiation preparations as

follows; A party wishing to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion or arrangement through

collective bargaining should first identify the objectives of the exercise.

“The negotiating team, and the respective roles of the members, should be

determined before the negotiations. Employers would find it useful to include in

the team people from different disciplines. The union’s demand should be

carefully studied. It is a matter of assessment in each situation as to whether the

management should make an initial response in writing to the union before

negotiation commence. Since negotiations may not proceed to take place in the

way a party may plan, party should be able to provide alternative options to wheat

he, or the other party, expects. A party to collective bargaining negotiations has to

formulate a strategy for all stages of the negotiation, including the pre-negotiation

stage”. www.au.af.mil

According to Fisher and Ury (1991), principled negotiation has a great deal in common

with the process of consensus team decision making. There are seven conditions which

are essential if a principled negotiation is to have a successful outcome. In the next

discussion an elaboration of the principled negotiation requirements is now provided for

better understanding of the concept.

14

2.1.3.0 PRINCIPLED NEGOTIATION PROCESS- REQUIREMENTS

Once you have established the necessary condition for negotiations, the process can now

take place. There is no inflexible rule as to who should open negotiations. However it is

not unreasonable for the management to claim that if the union has initiated the

negotiations, it should make it clear at the outset that agreement on any particular issue is

subject to an overall assessment, including its own expectations from the union.

2.1.3.1 PEOPLE: SEPARATE THE PEOPLE FROM THE PROBLEM

Afredson and Cungu (2008) notes that Fisher et al., (1991), argued that parties in a

dispute often forget that the other side consists of people who, just like themselves, are

subject to human frailties such as emotions, potentials for misunderstandings and

mistaken assumptions. A common failing when there is a difference of opinion or goals is

to attack the opposing person while attacking the opposing position, especially if the

attack is demeaning. It will unfairly have negative outcomes in both decisions making and

bargaining. Experienced negotiators separate the people from the problem. Fisher and

Ury (1991) suggest the following ways:

Relationships. Bargaining, even principled bargaining, may involve strong

comments about the substantive issue. It is only human nature that these, on

occasions are taken as personal attacks, generating emotions that block

communication. A good relationship can be a vaccine against communication

blockage.

Perceptions. In the heat of battle, it is easy to view the opponent as a personal

enemy, as opposed to someone who is just doing a job. Effective negotiators must

get inside the heads of their opponent so that they can see the issues as they do.

From inside the opponent’s frame of reference, many things become clearer: why

a given position is held so fiercely, where the vulnerabilities are, where there are

doubts and where there may be blind spots. Perceptions come in many ways.

Colosi (2000) makes a point of the importance of body language and tone as

communication channels that give information, sometimes information of crucial

15

value to the other side, Fisher and Ury (1991) emphasize such things as acting

inconsistently with expectations.

Emotion. Experienced negotiators have long since learned how to manage their

emotions. A part of this is understanding that there are going to be emotions.

Skilful negotiators can turn anger on and turn it off for effect, while at the same

time avoiding the blow and counterblow that gets out of control. If under personal

attack, promise- do not threaten. You may highlight that these are personal attacks

which are not relevant to the substantive issue and for that reason they are unfair.

Communication. The essence of communication is the transmission of meaning.

According to Fisher and Ury (1991), much communication in positional

bargaining fails because meaning is not clearly transmitted, where bargaining is

positional, Colosi (2000) adds that one may want to be cautious about the

direction of communication. The mandate is for active listening, getting the other

person to talk more and thus reveal more. Listening with interests to what the

other negotiator has to say pays dividend, you are getting valuable information

about his/her position and intentions, without giving away your own.

2.1.3.2 INTERESTS: FOCUS ON INTERESTS NOT POSITIONS

According Fisher and Ury (1991), the first step is to identify the interests involved in an

issue as opposed to dealing with positions of the negotiating parties. Lens (2004), argues

that if a positive relationship can be established with the other negotiator, the only

remaining ingredient for principled negotiation is finding shared interests that can serve

as the common ground for generating creative options. Interests are a key issue because

interests are the factors underlying the decisions. Sometimes when principled negotiation

is not possible and harder positional bargaining must be used. When that is the case, it

pays to know if there are divisions in the enemy camp. Colosi (2000), point out that there

probably will be stabilizers who would bargain soft and destabilizes who would bargain

very hard indeed, and it might scuttle the negotiations if they could. A thorough

understanding of the other side’s case is essential for the exploitation of their differences.

16

2.1.3.3 OPTIONS: GENERATE SEVERAL OPTIONS BEFORE DECIDING

WHAT TO DO

Afredson et al., (2008) point out that once parties have begun to build relationships and to

exchange information in order to gain a clearer understanding of the intentions at stake,

the parties should turn to the task of generating options. In negotiations, options are

possible solutions to a problem shared by two or more parties. In integrative bargaining,

options represent possible ways of meeting as many of both parties’ interests as possible.

When using the principled negotiation options for action can often be the hardest to get

partners to participate in. Fisher et al (1991) suggest that there are four particular

obstacles to this: premature judgment, searching for a single answer, assumption of a

fixed pie and thinking that no-one else is able to assist in problem solving. It is here that

negotiators have the best opportunity to expand the pie. As long as options are kept open,

many avenues for creative ideas may appear.

2.1.3.4 ALTERNATIVES

In order to set realistic goals, negotiators must start by considering certain fundamental

questions: where will each side be if no agreement is reached? What alternative solutions

are available for meeting your goals if you cannot count on the cooperation of the other

side? Fisher and Ury (1991), argue that it is critical for both parties to know their BATNA

(Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement) both before and throughout all stages of a

negotiation. A Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement provides negotiators with a

measure of flexibility that is lacking from a bottom line. Unlike bottom lines Best

Alternatives to a Negotiated Agreement’s change when negotiators perceive a change in

their alternatives. Alfredson and Cungu (2008) points out that when negotiations are

viewed in terms of Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreements’, as opposed to positions

or bottom lines, the negotiation can continue even when figures are rejected because

negotiators are freer to continue to explore additional possible solutions. Negotiators who

fail to evaluate their alternatives to an agreement both before and during the process may

therefore also be in danger of rushing to an agreement without having fully considered

their or the other party’s alternatives, leading one side to end up with a deal that should

have been rejected.

17

2.1.3.5 CRITERIA/LEGITIMACY

When bargaining over positions, negotiators create a situation in which one side must

concede his original claim in order for negotiations to succeed. Positional bargaining is

bargaining in which two sides lock into compatible positions. According to Fisher et al.,

(1991), this can lead to a contest of wills, bitterness and deadlock. They maintain that

when negotiations are approached in this way, even when a deal is made, it may come at

high cost. The authors instead argue that there is a better way to approach the negotiation

process. This involves invoking objective criteria as part of the negotiation process.

According to Lens (2004), once options have been generated, the next step is to evaluate

them and to find a fair solution based on merits. It helps to be concrete but flexible- in

other words, to work through the options in detail, but to treat the options as illustrative

rather than fixed. The commitment has to be to address the participants’ interests (not

positions) and, by pushing hard on the interests, partners can stimulate each other’s

creativity in thinking up mutually advantageous solutions. Developing an agreement

should be framed as a joint search for objective or fair criteria and this will promote

reasonableness, fair play and trustworthiness

2.1.3.6 COMMITMENTS

A negotiated settlement is only enduring if all the parties honour the commitments that

they make. Afredson et al., (2008) emphasizes that, of course, those that fail to follow

through on their promises stand to suffer a loss of integrity, be subject to the resentment

of the other side, and risk that their partner in the negotiations (and possibly others

outside of the deal as well if word of their reputation escapes) will refuse to deal with

them in the future. Therefore no party to a negotiation should intentionally create

commitments that they do not intend to honour. Fisher and Ertel (1995), points out that

during negotiation process, parties should think carefully about the kind of commitments

they should be prepared to make? Are they capable of honouring them? How broad

should the commitments be? When will each party be expected to make good on their

promises? One way of building trust is to create a commitment structure that can be

implemented in stages

18

2.1.3.7 COMMUNICATION

Negotiation is only possible through communication. Fisher and Ury (1991), maintain

that the feeling heard is also a key interest for both sides in a negotiation. Good

communication can change attitudes, prevent or overcome deadlock and

misunderstandings and help improve relationships. Moreover, good communication skills

are essential to clearly relay your message, and to thoroughly understand the message of

the other side (Wondwosen, 2006). In addition, integrative approaches stress the

importance of sharing information as a means of uncovering interests and of helping

parties to explore common problems or threats. Still negotiators are frequently hampered

in theories roles by common communicational errors or inefficiencies.

2.2.0 THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS

Most authors on negotiation reference back what Fisher and others have said regarding

the whole concept of negotiation. According to Fisher and Ury (1991), there can be no

doubt that that the process is a contest where each negotiator can take nothing for granted,

and can even relax. Even if it is possible to establish mutual interests and move into the

principled negotiation mode, prudence demands risk analysis and control. The more

consequential the issue, the more important risk management is. Experienced negotiators

say that you should prepare, prepare, prepare. The Air Force Negotiation Centre for

Excellence, USA (2011) outlines the negotiation process as given below.

1) Discover what the other side knows

2) Educate the other side on your position

3) Make the other side advocate for your position

4) Determine enforcement means

5) Enhance implementation through good relationship

2.2.1 DISCOVER WHAT THE OTHER SIDE KNOWS

According to the Air Force Negotiation Centre for Excellence (2011), until the other side

establishes trustworthiness by credible performance, you must learn as much about the

19

other side’s position as possible, while revealing as little as possible about one’s own. It is

important that you should have completed preliminary work, to cope out what the other

side’s position and strategy will be, so you aren’t hearing it in negotiations for the first

time. Secondly you should have selected your team with an eye toward enhancing your

ability to figure out the other side, its strengths and weaknesses.

2.2.2 EDUCATE THE OTHER SIDE ON YOUR POSITION

Lens (2004), reiterates the need to get the other side to lose its confidence in its position

while gaining confidence in yours. This is where education comes in the process of

selectively revealing information that strengthens your case while questioning that of the

other. Lens (2004), says it sounds like a breach of ethics to reveal information selectively

to strengthen your case while weakening your opponent’s. However if trust is established,

negotiation is a contest. You would not use your weak arm to arm-wrestle with a stinger.

Ethics to do in negotiation has to do with being principled and fair, and neither demands

complete disclosure. The decision in negotiation is whether the negotiators agree on, and

can convince their ratifiers to accept it.

2.2.3 MAKE THE OTHER SIDE ADVOCATES FOR YOUR POSITION

According to Fisher et al., (1991) as you educate the other side to see the advantages of

your position, you want to undermine their confidence in their own position. These two

principles, educating the other side on your position and creating doubt about their own

position, are a cyclical process. It is important to make the other side an advocate for your

own position. According to Colosi (2000), neither you nor they will have the power to

decide. That power has been withheld by those who sent you to negotiate for them. So

part of your strategy is to manage the other side’s access to your ratifiers. You don’t want

someone as good as you are to have access to your own decision makers.

2.2.4 DETERMINE ENFORCEMENT MEANS

Glaser (2005), points out that it is important to enhance both enforcement and

implementation by building in objectively verifiable means. Fisher et al., (1991) argues

20

that even with principled negotiation and trust, future doubt or suspicion can be avoided

by including in the agreement some objective means of checking that the agreement is

honoured by both sides, and for enforcing compliance. Sales contracts, for example, have

clauses that address the potential for default. Equally negotiated agreements should be

written how non-compliance would be treated.

2.2.5 ENHANCE IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH GOOD RELATIONSHIP

It is essential to maintain good relationships with the other side. A good relationship

enhances the operation of the preceding principles, and, indeed may be essential to some

of them. Further, according to Fisher et al., (1991) if initiatives towards principled

negotiation get no response from the other side, maintain a good relationship in spite of

all adversity you may produce a change of heart with your opponent. Principled

negotiation can emerge at almost any time, so long as one negotiator has been behaving in

a principled manner all along. Below are steps in negotiation as adapted from

www.examiner.com

1) Agree to negotiate

2) Gather points of view

3) Focus on interests

4) Create win-win options

5) Evaluate options

6) Create an Agreement

Source: www.examiner.com

2.3.0. THEORIES OF NEGOTIATION

Wikipedia underlines the fact that negotiation is a specialized and formal version of

conflict resolution most frequently employed when important issues must be agreed upon.

Accordingly, negotiation is necessary when one party requires the other party’s

agreement to reach its aim. The aim of negotiating is to build a shared environment

leading to long-term trust. Alfredson and Cungu (2008) points out that those negotiation

theories may be prescriptive, descriptive or normative in nature. Additionally theorists

21

and practitioners from various disciplines have developed and utilized a variety of

approaches or levels of analysis to improve their understanding of particular aspects of

negotiations. Alfredson and Cungu (2008) further expatiate by saying, while formal

definitions of negotiation vary, theorists do accept certain basic tenets. Foremost among

them is the assumptions that parties who negotiate agree in at least one fundamental

respect; they share a belief that their respective purposes will be better served by entering

into negotiation with the other party. Implicitly then, negotiating parties have come to the

conclusion, at least for a moment, that they may be able to satisfy their individual goals or

concerns more favourably by coming to an agreed upon solution with the other side, than

by attempting to meet their goals or concerns unilaterally. Schelling (1960) goes on to say

that it is this mutual perception that leads to the onset of negotiations and betrays the

independence that exists (to whatever degree) between negotiating parties. This common

interest in shared agreement is the starting point for the common interest and mutual

dependence that can exist between participants in a conflict.

It may be important at this juncture to say a word here about strategies and tactics and

how they fit into the various schools before focusing on our next discussion on the

various approaches to negotiation. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary (1994) defines a

strategy as a careful plan or method, especially for achieving an end. Whereas the use of

tactics refers to the skill of using available means to reach that end.

According to Alfredson and Cungu (2008), theorists differ on how to categories the main

schools of thought in negotiation. Druckman (1997) describes the main schools of

thought in negotiation theory as corresponding to four approaches to negotiation:

negotiation as a puzzle solving, negotiations as a bargaining game, negotiation as

organizational management and negotiation as diplomatic politics. Alternatively, Raiffa

(1982) puts forward a typology of approaches crafted around dimensions of symmetry-

asymmetry and prescription-description. Zartman (1988) presents five levels of analysis

or core approaches. These are structural, the strategic, the processual (concession-

exchange), the behavioural and integrative approaches. However in practice according to

Afredson et al., (2008) most negotiators use a combination of approaches and borrow

from all kinds of schools of thoughts during a negotiation. The approaches to negotiations

are now discussed below, one after the other.

22

2.3.1 STRUCTURAL APPROACH

These consider negotiated outcomes to be a function of the characteristics or structural

features that define each particular negotiation. These characteristics may include features

such as the number of parties and issues involved in the negotiation and composition or

relative power of the competing parties (Raiffa, 1982; Bacharach and Lawler, 1981).

According to Zartman (1976) structural approaches to negotiation find explanations of

outcomes in patterns of relationships between parties or their goals. They can be

deterministic in that they often view outcomes as a priori once structural factors are

understood. In structural approaches to negotiation theory, analysts tend to define

negotiations as conflict scenarios between opponents who maintain incompatible goals.

Afredson and Cungu (2008) argue that analysts who adopt a structural approach to the

study of negotiations share an emphasis on the means parties bring to a negotiation.

According to Bacharach and Lawler (1981), one of the main theoretical contributions

derived from the structural approach is the theory that power is the central determining

factor in negotiations. In this view relative power of each party affects their ability to

secure their individual goals through negotiations. Structural theories offer varying

definitions of power. For example power is sometimes defined as the ability to win, or

alternatively, as the possession of strength or resources. In trying to understand why

victory in negotiations does not always go to the party who is ostensibly the more

powerful, analyst taking a structural approach have looked at additional structural

properties such as symmetry-asymmetry, the availability of alternatives or the role of

tactics in detail. According the wikipedia structural analysis is easy to criticize because it

predicts that the strongest will always win. This however does not always hold true.

Negotiators need to be aware that a blind attachment to winning all you can from

negotiation regardless of the resulting satisfaction of other parties, can be a poor long

term strategy if it means that the other side will lose its will, or ability to maintain its side

of the negotiated agreement.

2.3.2 STRATEGIC APPROACH

Random House Dictionary (1993) defines strategy as a plan, method, or series of

manoeuvres for obtaining a specific goal or result. Strategic approaches to negotiation

23

have roots in mathematics, decision theory and rationale choice theory and also benefit

from major contributions from the area of economics, biology and conflict analysis.

Emphasis in strategic models of negotiation is on the ends (goals) in determining

outcomes. Strategic models are also models of rational choice. Negotiators are viewed as

rational decision makers with known alternatives who make choices guided by their

calculation of which option will maximize their ends or gains, frequently described as

payoffs. Actors choose from a choice set of possible actions in order to try and achieve

desired outcomes. According to Raiffa (1982), each actor has unique incentive structure

that is comprised of a set of costs associated with different actions combined with a set of

probabilities that reflect the livelihoods of different actions leading to desired outcomes.

Strategic models tend to be normative in nature because they are grounded in the belief

that there is one best solution to every problem, they seek to represent what ultra smart,

impeccably rational, super people should do in competitive, interactive situations.

Because they look for best solutions from all perspectives of a negotiation, this approach

has been called symmetrically prescriptive (Raiffa: 1982). Snyder and Diesing (1977),

points out that the strategic approach is the foundation for negotiation theories such as

game theory and critical risk theory.

2.3.2.1 COOPERATIVE OR COMPETITIVE: A NEGOTIATORS DILEMMA

According to Alfredson et al., (2008) one of the best known games to treat negotiations is

the Prisoner’s Dilemma Game. The game reflects the following scenario. Two prisoners

are awaiting trial for a crime they committed. Each must decide between the two courses

of action: confess or not. If neither person confesses, in other words, they cooperate with

each other; each prisoner will have to serve a prison term of two years. On the other hand,

if both prisoners chose to defect and turn evidence against one another, both prisoners

will be faced with a four year prison term. If the game ended here cooperation by the two

prisoners would be likely, but in the classic version of the game there is another set of

alternatives. The prisoners learn that if one party cooperates and the other defects the one

who defects will not serve time, leaving the one who refused to testify against his partner

to serve the full five year sentence. Because each player is seeking to maximize his own

outcomes, and neither knows what the other will do, the game demonstrates that the

24

rational player will choose defection every time because he realizes that by choosing to

defect he will fare better in the game, no matter what his opponent does.

Negotiators face a similar challenge in their decision-making as they also have

incomplete information about the other negotiator’s intentions. In bargaining scenarios,

this formulation suggests that agreements are unlikely because each party has an incentive

to defect in order to maximize his own gains. However such an outcome is sub-optimal

because players would be better off if they both cooperated. In real life cooperation does

occur.

2.3.3 BEHAVIOURAL APPROACH

According to Afredson and Cungu (2008) behavioural approaches emphasize the role

negotiators’ personalities or individual characteristics play in determining the course and

outcome of negotiated agreements. Nicholson (1964) further elaborates by pointing out

that behavioural theories may explain negotiations as interactions between personality

types that often take the form of dichotomies, such as shopkeepers and warriors or

hardliners and soft liner where negotiators are portrayed either as ruthlessly battling for

all or diplomatically conceding to another party’s demands for the sake of keeping peace.

The tension that arises between these two approaches forms a paradox that has been

termed the “toughness dilemma’ or the negotiators’ dilemma (Zartman, 1978; Lax and

Sebenius, 1986). The dilemma states that though negotiators who are tough during a

negotiation are more likely to gain more of their demands in a negotiated solution, the

trade off is that in adopting his stance, they are less likely to conclude an agreement at all.

The behavioural approach derives from psychological and experimental traditions but

also from centuries old diplomatic treaties. These traditions share the perspective that

negotiations-whether between nations, employers and unions or neighbours are ultimately

about individuals involved. Approach highlights human tendencies, emotions and skills.

They may emphasize the role played by arts of persuasion, attitudes, trust, perception,

individual motivation and personality in negotiated outcomes. Another important

contribution from the behavioural approach is the work on framing. According to Raiffa

(1982), frames refer to the way a problem is described or perceived. Is the glass half full

or half empty? The way a question is posed can make certain evaluative objectives

significant and thereby influence the outcome. Neale and Bazerman (1985) and

25

Bazerman, et al., (1985) found out how a conflict was framed or presented to negotiators

influenced whether they viewed their task as one of maximizing gains or minimizing

losses. It also influenced the likelihood of reaching a negotiated settlement.

2.3.4 CONCESSION EXCHANGE (PROCESSUAL) APPROACH

According to Zartman (1978), this approach (which Zartman calls the processual

approach) looks at negotiation as a learning process in which the parties react to each

other’s concession behaviour. From the perspective negotiations consist of a series of

concessions. The concessions mark the stages in negotiations. They are used by parties to

both signal their own intentions and to encourage movement in their opponent’s position.

Parties use their bids both to respond to the previous counteroffer and to influence the

next one; the offers themselves become an exercise in power. The risk inherent in this

approach according to Afredson and Cungu (2008) is that participants engaged in

concession-trading may miss opportunities to find new, mutually beneficial solutions to

their shared dilemma and end-up instead in a purely regressive process which leaves both

sides with fewer gains than they could have if they had pursued a more creative approach.

2.3.5 INTEGRATIVE APPROACH

Lewicki et al.,(2003) states that, where as a zero-sum game view sees the goal of

negotiations as an effort to claim one’s share over a fixed amount of pie, integrative

theories and strategies look for ways of creating value or expanding the pie so that there is

more to share between parties as a result of negotiation. Integrative approaches use

objective criteria, look to create conditions of mutual gain and emphasize the importance

of exchanging information between the parties and group problem solving. Because

integrative approaches emphasize problem solving, cooperation, joint decision making

and mutual gains, integrative strategies call for participants to work jointly to create win-

win solutions. They involve uncovering interests, generating options and searching for

commonalities between parties. Negotiators may look for ways to create value, and

develop shared principles as a basis for decision making about how outputs should be

claimed (and who claims them).

26

The integrative approach to negotiations has roots in international relations, political

theory, research on labour disputes and social decision making. Looking at labour,

Walton and McKersie (1965) published a theoretical framework for understanding the

negotiation process which they also applied to exchanges in international relations and

disputes over civil rights. They described integrative bargaining as bargaining in which

negotiators employ problem solving behaviour. Above all it must be noted that

negotiation is a process. As such planning for and negotiating over the process itself are

as critical for the outcome of a negotiation as the negotiation over the substantial issue

themselves. According to Wondwosen (2006) taking time to negotiate the process before

diving into talks is beneficial to all the parties involved. It might be time consuming, but

in the long run (negotiating the process) will not only save time, but will also enable

wiser, more robust and more valuable deals.

Principled negotiation is another phase theory of negotiations that falls in the integrative

school. Fisher and Ury (1981) argue principled negotiation goes beyond the limited

strategic choices of distributive bargaining. They frame negotiations as a three-phase

process whose efficiency depends on how negotiators treat four essential elements:

interests, people, options and criteria. According to Afredson and Cungu (2008), in a later

work, these pillars were refashioned into seven elements of negotiation comprising

interests, relationships, options, legitimacy, alternatives commitments and

communications. In the principled negotiations model, the essential elements serve as

prescriptive components for negotiations modeled on an integrative approach.

2.4.0 CAUSES OF NEGOTIATION DEADLOCKS AND SOLUTIONS

Muthoo (2000) stresses that if the bargaining process is frictionless, i.e. neither party

incurs any costs from haggling, then each player may continuously demand that

agreement be struck on terms that are most favourable to them. In such a circumstance the

negotiations end up in an impasse (or deadlock), since negotiators would have no

incentive to compromise and reach an agreement. If it did not matter when the negotiators

agree, then it would not matter whether they agree at all.

Impasse means the point at which no further progress toward an agreement appears likely

because neither side is making further movement on major unresolved issues. Normally

27

the union does not want to bargain to what could legally be defined as an “impasse”

because then management may be free to stop following the old contract, stop collecting

dues, and unilaterally change wages, hours, and working conditions. In private sector

cases, the union would have to file charges with the National Labour Relations Board if

the employer declared impasse and imposed unilateral changes. In public sector cases, the

state or local agency that oversees labour law enforcement would decide whether impasse

had been reached (www.theworksite.org). The NLRB or other appropriate agency will

ask such questions as

• How many times have the two sides met?

• How firm do they seem to be about their positions?

• Has each side made its last, best, and final offer?

Narlikar’s (2010) analysis is more comprehensive where she defines a negotiation process

as deadlocked if and when the following two conditions are present:

1) An extended situation of non-agreement exists such that parties adopt inconsistent

positions and are unable or unwilling to make concessions sufficient to achieve a

breakthrough on the particular issue; and

2) A landmark moment in negotiation process which may be an action-forcing event

in the shape of a chair’s text or deadline imposed by a negotiator, or may be a

natural landmark endogenous to the negotiation and recognized as such by the

parties involved despite having set up expectation towards a compromise, is

unable to trigger the necessary concessions toward agreement on the particular

issue.

Both conditions must exist for us to identify a situation as one of deadlock. According to

Faure (2005), the first condition captures his idea of a protracted standstill of the

dynamics of the negotiation system. But it clarifies the definition by providing a harder

condition for deadlock: that parties adopt inconsistent positions, and further, that

movement in the form of insufficient concessions does not signify an end to deadlock. To

see the deadlock broken, we would need to see agreement on the particular issue under

negotiation. It also helps us see resolving deadlocks as distinct from the set of tasks

associated with conflict resolution: breaking deadlock involves finding a solution to a

situation of standstill rather than escalatory dynamic.

28

The second condition is important as it ensures that we do not regard each and every

situation of non-agreement, i.e. all stages of the negotiation process until agreement is

reached, as one of deadlock. Deadlock does not begin on day one of every negotiation,

even though the seeds of the deadlock may be sown on day one. We would recognize a

situation of deadlock only after a landmark moment for agreement passes by and non-

agreement persist. A deadlock is a special and narrow case of non-agreement or non-

cooperation (Narlikar, 2010).

Narlikar (2010) acknowledges that deadlocks can be a product of strategic choice.

Negotiators have a range of strategies with the strict distributive strategy forming one end

of the spectrum and a purely integrative strategy the other. According to Narlikar (2010),

the distributive strategy comprises a set of tactics that are functional only for claiming

value from others and defending against such claims when one party’s goals are partly in

conflict with those of others. Examples of strict distributive strategies include: high

opening demands, refusing all concessions, exaggerating one’s minimum needs and

priorities, manipulating information to others’ advantage, taking other issues hostage,

worsening their BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement), issuing threats,

imposing penalties. However, to root explanations for deadlocks primarily in strategy

choice presents more of descriptive than analytic claim. In order to therefore explain the

causes of deadlock, six assumptions have been presented to explain the occurrence of

deadlocks.

Hypothesis 1: Deadlocks occurs because of superior BATNA or occur whenever and as

long as parties believe their alternative to agreement is superior to the deal on offer.

According to Fisher and Ury (1991), standard negotiation analysis suggests that the

deadlock occurs if all the parties believe their BATNA is superior to the proposed

agreement. They argue that, as such they have no incentive to make concessions to reach

an agreement. An alternative argument would be that the zone of agreement has shrunk so

much that it is better to have no agreement at all that the one on the table with its limited

gains and high costs.

According to Fisher and Ury (1991), in other conditions however, when a particular

problem is especially difficult to resolve, it may be possible for negotiators to work

around it through an alternative solution set. For instance if the negotiator perceives his

her BATNA to be superior to the agreement, besides attempting to worsen that BATNA

29

by somehow removing it from the range of options available, the negotiators may try to

delegitimize it by reframing it in terms of unfairness or bring in a third party as a

mediator.

Narlikar (2010) suggests that the way of getting round this, if the principal cause of

deadlock is the availability of a better BATNA, negotiators will have to expand the zone

of agreement such that its gains come to outweigh the BATNA. They might

simultaneously or alternatively pursue a strategy of worsening the BATNA of the parties

and thus bringing them back to the negotiating table.

Hypothesis 2: Deadlocks occur because negotiators bluff and lie.

Bluffing is a common place in most bargaining situations (Schelling, 1960 and Walton

and McKersie, 1965). However not all bluffs result in deadlocks. But when levels of

uncertainty and or distrust are high, deadlock can result. One party may indeed have a

superior BATNA or firmly believe that no deal is better than the one being offered. But if

the negotiator is unable to communicate these bottom lines credibly (partly because they

have a reputation for lying, or because such claims go against all previous behaviour), the

other party may understandably assume that he/she is bluffing and refuse to make any

concessions.

Narlikar (2010) argues that, a solution to the above if the central problem is uncertainty,

negotiators can build in more effective communication mechanisms, which would

facilitate the signalling of positions and interests. Institutions can play a role in this by

establishing better transparency and monitoring mechanism.

Hypothesis 3: Deadlock occurs because of certain types of balances of power.

3a: Deadlock is more likely, the more equal the power distribution

3b: Deadlock is more likely, the more the diverse the culture of the parties that

constitutes the balance of power

Narlikar (2010) posits that power matters crucially in the making and breaking of

deadlocks. Negotiation analysis recognizes this: for instance, it has been pointed out that

deadlocks occur if there is symmetry of power and neither party is able to impose its will

on the other (Faure, 2005; Zartman, 2002). Beriker and Druckman (1996) also reiterate

that deadlocks are more likely when the parties are symmetrically strong, but not when

they are equally weak. According to Vitz and Kite (1970), it has however been found that

30

mild discrepancies in power often leads to stalemate as stronger parties respond to the

weaker party’s demand for equal treatment with escalatory tactics.

According to Faure (2005) balance of power, at first glance can appear to be a structural

constraint and thus one that negotiators might not have much agency over. However,

balance of power can indeed be altered within specific institutional counter measures

(such as rules that alter the relative weights of the participants), but also by the

negotiators themselves through coalition building.

Hypothesis 4: Deadlocks occur because certain institutional structures facilitate or deter

agreement

Bazerman et al (1995), stresses that certain institutional peculiarities can make a system

more deadlocks prone. For instance some would argue that the consensus rule of the

WTO is precisely what makes it prone to deadlock as it gives de facto veto power to all

152 members.

In order to overcome, if the source of deadlock is a particular institutional process,

members of the organization may be able to amend it (depending on the flexibility

allowed by the institution), or at least find some wiggle-room by establishing new norms

and working practices.

Hypothesis 5: Deadlocks occur because fairness and justice matter

According to Narlikar (2010), only a limited amount of previous research has been done

to investigate the impact of fairness considerations on negotiations especially when

fairness is defined in harder terms of going beyond and even against self interest of the

parties. Bazerman and Neale (1995), argue that fairness considerations can lead

negotiators to opt for joint outcomes that leave both parties worse off than they would

have been had fairness considerations been ignored.

If the problem is based on differing conceptions of fairness and legitimacy, then

negotiators and analyst would need to give considerably greater attention to normative

issues than they would have done until now. For instance, notions of victory would have

to be framed carefully so that even the losing party can appear to show that it has won

moral victory. Considerably greater attention would also have to be paid to how demands

for concessions are framed.

31

Hypothesis 6: Deadlocks occur internationally because of certain configurations of

domestic interests

Even when levels of trust are high and negotiation brimming over with good will,

multilateral deadlocks can still occur due to presence of powerful domestic constituencies

that don’t favour agreement. Certain types of negotiations and issue areas are more prone

to the problem than others. For instance, obscure policy areas may not produce the same

level of mobilization and resistance at home than others.

Narlikar (2010) says if the primary source of deadlock lies at the domestic level inter-

state negotiation may be inadequate, short of expanding the zone of agreement

significantly so as to buy the approval of the dissenting constituencies of the negotiating

counterpart. But the range of alternatives available to the state-level negotiator is broader

than that. The negotiator may try to reframe the issue so as to win the domestic

constituencies over, or s/he may expand the negotiating pie so as to trigger the support of

alternative lobbies in favour of the agreement.

For analysts and practitioners interested in analyzing and breaking deadlock, solutions

depend on the cause identified as the main source of the problem. Sometimes, attacking

the particular source of deadlock maybe the only route to a breakthrough. According to

www.worksite.org you can try to avoid impasse by

• Not giving management a firm rejection on proposals you mainly disagree with. Instead,

stress that your position on individual items depends on the total package management is

willing to agree to.

• Continuing to make new proposals on controversial subjects, even if there is not a huge

difference between your new positions and your old ones.

• Insisting that management take the time necessary to prepare detailed information the

union needs in order to bargain intelligently on proposals each side has made.

• Not saying to management, your members, or the news media that you’ve reached the

point where it is clear that management has no intention of settling. (You can say that so

far they have not been willing to negotiate a fair settlement.)

According to www.worksite.org, when little progress is being made and you want to get

negotiations moving toward a settlement, some of the following techniques may be

helpful:

32

• Employ more pressure tactics. Your problem may not be a failure to communicate at

the table but rather a failure to force management to want to settle.

• Trade one or more items for one or more others. “We are willing to consider moving

on X if you are willing to agree to our proposal on Y.” (Be aware that in saying this you

are signalling that X is not a make-or-break issue for you.)

• Group several issues into a package or present an entire proposed contract that

contains some compromises by both sides. “We’ve developed what we think is a fair

package, and we’re willing to accept the compromises in it if you accept the entire

package.”

• Make minor changes to save face for one side or the other. If one team is finding it

hard to admit that it has to change its position on an issue, a relatively unimportant

change in wording may allow them to say, “Well, with that change I think we can accept

it.”

• Suggest resolving an issue through a side letter rather than in the contract itself. A

side letter is an agreement that is added on to the main contract. It is binding and can be

grieved unless you have agreed that it can’t. Whether side letters must be specifically

renewed when they expire depends on the understanding of the two sides during

bargaining.

If management officials are reluctant to break new ground on a controversial issue or to

agree to special provisions for a particular group of workers, they may feel more

comfortable using a side letter format to emphasize that the agreement is unusual or

experimental.

• Bring in a new face, such as a higher-level union official. If management officials are

ready to settle but their relations with local union negotiators have become too strained,

they may find it easier to settle with someone new.

In addition, the presence of someone from higher up may remind management that the

larger union stands behind this local.

If a settlement is reached with the higher official’s help, it is important that the

negotiating team be closely involved in considering and approving the tentative

agreement. Like any settlement, it probably will involve both compromises and victories.

The political heat for those compromises and the credit for those victories should be

shared by a united union leadership. In the long run, members’ confidence in their union

will be damaged if they see political division and jockeying among different levels of the

33

union or if they view the settlement as something higher-level officials negotiated over

the heads of their own negotiators.

• Step up the pace of bargaining. This might mean meeting every day instead of once a

week. Or it might mean using marathon bargaining sessions, in which negotiators agree to

stay in session all day and all night if necessary to reach an agreement.

This approach is supposed to help negotiators get into a rhythm of reaching agreement

that will help them find solutions when they get to the toughest issues. It is also supposed

to wear negotiators down, so that getting bargaining over becomes more important than

the details of the settlement.

For these reasons, high-pressure bargaining obviously will help you if management’s

negotiators are the first to feel the effects, and will hurt you if your own team is the first

to wear down or get in the mood of compromise.

If you are going to engage in marathon bargaining, all members of the team who are

going to be present should go into it well rested and without family conflicts that will

make them too eager to reach a settlement.

Nathoo (2000) agrees with the above and summarizes by highlighting the following

points:

Patience during the process of negotiations confers bargaining power, while risk

aversion affects it adversely

A player’s outside option enhances her bargaining power if and only if it is

attractive and therefore credible.

A player’s Bargaining power is higher the larger is her inside option, provided that

all negotiators’ outside options are not attractive enough

If both negotiators’ outside options are sufficiently attractive, then it is likely that

gains from cooperation may exist (and the parties may thus prefer to exercise their

respective outside options)

When both negotiators’ cost of backing down from their initial demands are

sufficiently large, then making such demands may risk leading the negotiations

into a stalemate

A player’s bargaining power is higher the larger is their cost of backing down

from their initial demand

34

When a party does not know something of relevance to the ongoing negotiations

which the other party does, there is a risk of failure of negotiations or of costly

delay till the relevant information is credibly communicated to the uninformed

party.

Knowledge is veritable power in negotiations and enhances the bargaining

strength of the better informed.

The above views are also shared by Fisher and Ury, 1991, Narlikar, 2010, Krevynenyak

2002, Lax and Sebenius 1986, Raiffa 1982, Schelling 1960, Walton and McKersie, 1965

and Zartman, 1978.

2.5.0. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

Silva (1996) posits that collective bargaining is specifically an industrial relations

mechanism or tool and is an aspect of negotiation, applicable to the employment

relationship. As a process, the two are in essence the same and the principles applicable to

negotiations are relevant to collective bargaining as well. However, some differences

need to be noted. He further notes that in collective bargaining the union always has a

collective interest since the negotiations are for the benefit of several employees. Where

collective bargaining is not for one employer but for several, collective interests become a

feature for both parties to the bargaining process. In negotiations in non-employment

situations, collective interests are less, or non-existent, except when state negotiate with

each other. Further, in labour relations, negotiations involve the public interests such as

where negotiations are on wages which can impact the prices (Khabo, 2008, Okene, 2004

and Faruque, 2009)

Narlikar (2010) in collective bargaining certain essential conditions need to be satisfied,

such as the existence of the freedom of association and a labour law system. Further,

since the beneficiaries of collective bargaining are in daily contact with each other,

negotiations take place in the background of a continuing relationship which ultimately

motivates the parties in the specific issues. The nature of the employment relationship

between the parties in collective bargaining distinguishes the negotiations from normal

commercial negotiations in which the buyer may be in a stronger position as he could

take his business elsewhere. In the employment relationship the same employer is in a

35

sense, a buyer of services and the employee the seller, and the latter may have the more

potent sanction in the form of a trade union action.

Silva (1996) points out that the term ‘bargaining’ implies that the process is one of

haggling, which is more appropriate to a one time relationships such as the one-time

purchasers of a claimant to damages. While collective bargaining may take the form of

haggling, ideally it should involve adjusting the respective positions of the parties in a

way that is satisfactory to all.

www.fff.org.ph view collective bargaining as a process of negotiating an agreement

regarding the terms and conditions of employment through a system of shared

responsibility and decision making between labour and management. It has four essential

elements which are: legal in that collective bargaining is a process of negotiating an

agreement, economic in that its contents specify the terms and conditions of employment

(e.g. salary/wage increase, benefits, etc), political in that the agreement is a product of a

negotiation between labour and management and moral in that it involves a system of

shared responsibility (www.ffw.org.ph).

The International Labour Organization (ILO) right to organize and collective bargaining

Convention (No.98), 1949 describes collective bargaining as voluntary negotiation

between employers or employers’ organizations and workers’ organizations, with a view

to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment by collective agreements. They

further argue that collective bargaining could also be defined as negotiations relating to

terms of employment and conditions of work between and employer, a group of

employers or an employers’ organization on the one hand, and representative workers’

organizations on the other, with a view to reaching agreement. The same sentiments are

shared by Lewis et al 2003.

Lewis et al (2003) distinguishes between substantive terms which concern the content of

employment terms, e.g. pay, bonus and hours of work. In other words these are the

aspects of collective agreements that we would most readily recognize. Procedural terms

of collective bargaining on the other hand, set out the rules and procedures to be used by

both parties in regulating the conduct of the employment relationship and the bargaining

arrangement.

36

It can therefore be noted from the last two definitions that the authors agree that for

collective bargaining to take place there is need for labour and management to come

together to discuss and set and agree on conditions of employment. Broadly speaking

therefore, collective bargaining is the umbrella under which the wage negotiation takes

place.

2.5.1 CRITERIA FOR WAGE INCREASES

According to McPhie (2006), the factors which have influenced pay increases through

collective bargaining include enterprise profit, job evaluation, seniority, cost of living,

manpower shortage or surplus, the negotiating strength and skills of the parties. He goes

on to argue that these performance measures such as productivity or profit related to

groups or individuals have not featured prominently in collective bargaining. Further,

though wage rates negotiated through collective bargaining do reflect wage differentials

based on skills, such differentials have not been geared to the encouragement of skills

acquisition and application. Therefore, according to Silva (1996) the major concerns for

employers is the need to negotiate pay systems which are

Strategic in the sense that they achieve strategic objectives

Flexible in the sense that their variable component can absorb downturns in

business and reduce labour costs

Oriented towards better performance in terms of productivity, quality, profit or

whatever performance criteria are agreed upon

Capable of enhancing earnings of employees through improved performance

Capable of reducing the incidence of redundancies during times of recession or

poor enterprise performance through the flexible component of pay

Able to reward good performance without increasing the labour costs as part of

total costs through enhanced productivity

Able to attract and retain competent staff

Able overall to control or stabilize labour costs

2.5.2.0 MODELS OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

37

Good negotiating is not about outsmarting, outmaneuvering or manipulating the other

side. It is not about hitting (the other party) over the head and running off with the

goodies before they know what hit them. It’s not about deception, omission or getting

away with something. Foster (1992), points out that most of the time it’s not about one

side having to give up something it needs in order for the other side to get what it wants.

Nelson Mandela, one of the iconic figures of our time once said he attaches importance to

dialogue, solving problems through negotiation. It is an art which requires a great deal of

vision and strength of character. In the words of John F Kennedy in his inaugural speech

as President of the USA in 1961, he advised that people should never negotiate out of

fear, but let us never fear to negotiate.

Khabo (2005) notes that conflict is inevitable in employment relations, however, what is

important is how it is managed. The ideal situation is for parties to bargain voluntarily

without third party intervention. According to Fisher et al., (1991) negotiations however

sometimes fail. Where negotiations on any terms and conditions of employment have

failed, there must be in place mechanisms to which aggrieved parties can resort to. Hence,

the success of collective bargaining rests on the availability of efficient dispute resolution

systems (Khabo, 2005). These shall be discussed a little bit later in the chapter. Below are

some of the models of collective bargaining. As noted already these are not very different

from the theories of negotiation.

2.5.2.1 DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING

According to Mudyawabika (2003), this is when a win-lose scenario occurs where

objectives of one party are in fundamental and direct conflict to the objectives of the other

party. Resources would be fixed and limited and each party would want to maximize their

share of resources and their success or otherwise will depend on the strategies that they

use. The theory assumes a zero-sum game. Each party takes an extreme position and

stubbornly holds onto it. It is also sometimes referred to as traditional or positional

bargaining. Compromising is considered a sign of weakness. Each side puts forward its

position to the other, then, once the positions are clear, the negotiation becomes a process

of concession-making, whereby each side bargains with the other and compromises as

38

little as possible to keep the negotiations going. A fixed pie approach is adopted. There is

concealment or withholding of information, digging in. Exaggeration, misrepresentation,

use of bluffs, threats manipulation, putdowns and other dirty tactics. The preparations for

negotiations resemble a mobilization for war, differences are heightened, villains

identified, weapons honed and war paint generously applied. Other have argued and said

the result of this kind of negotiation is win-lose or lose-lose.

2.5.2.2 INTEGRATIVE BARGAINING

In this case there is a win-win situation. The bargaining process is collaborative and based

on assumptions that the parties are willing and able to cooperate in defining a common

objective and working toward it. Negotiators look at both their interests as well as those

of the other party. Parties are more concerned with future relationships than maximizing

their positions. Process builds trust and strengthens relationships (Walton and Mckersie:

1991). Fischer, Ury and Patton (1991) talk of principled negotiation. Principled

negotiation they say is premised of four attributes later expanded to seven.

Separate the people from the problem

Focus on interests, not positions

Invent options for mutual gains

Insist on using objective criteria

In principled negotiation, parties get more of what they want the expanded pie approach.

They do so in a collaborative climate, where relationships are established, where needs

are met and where both sides walk away as winners. Negotiators are therefore joint

problem solvers who seek solutions to mutual problems or issue of interest. Relevant

information is shared between the parties.

2.5.2.3 ATTITUDINAL STRUCTURING

Mudyawabika (2003) says that this is premised on the principle that the negotiation

process has a significant impact on the relationship between the parties. Negotiation

39

results in either the maintenance or the restructuring of the attitudes of the parties toward

each other

2.5.2.4 INTRA-ORGANISATIONAL BARGAINING

According to Mudyawabika (2003) these are internal organizational or party deliberations

within an organization or party which are carried out with a view to taking common

positions before engaging the other party in collective bargaining. It’s premised on

recognition that the parties to negotiations often lack the internal consensus about the

concerns, the strategies and/or tactics to be used and the relationship that should be

developed with the other party. We now turn our attention at what levels the bargaining

take place in the whole set up does.

2.5.2.5 BARGAINING LEVELS

According to Gernigon et al., (2000) ILO Recommendation No. 163 provides that

measures adapted to national conditions should be taken, if necessary, so that collective

bargaining is possible at any level whatsoever, including that of the establishment, the

undertaking, the branch of activity, the industry or the regional or national levels (ILO

1996d). Silva (1996) concurs with Gernigon (2000) and Khabo (2008) above and puts it

that collective bargaining may take place at any of the following levels:

a) National

b) Single Employer

c) Multi-Employer/Industry

d) Regional or District

Gennard and Judge (2005) concur with the above when they assert they are a number of

bargaining levels available from which to make a strategic choice i.e. multi-employer

level single employer level, enterprise level and a combination of all three above.

However for purposes of this research a brief detail of the multi-employer level has been

provided since it applicable to the NEC Catering Industry as it is in practice. Their

bargaining is modeled along the same lines. Multi-employer bargaining has

40

conventionally combined two levels- bargaining on the establishment of framework terms

and conditions at Industry level with bargaining on the other matters left to individual

companies. The actual distribution between the two tiers varies between industries and

also changes over time. Company bargaining is where all terms and conditions of

employment are negotiated at the central company level. Bargaining at this level enables

pay and conditions to be related to the economic circumstances of the company as a

whole and provides for standardized conditions across the company for similar jobs.

In no country does it take place exclusively at one level only. According to Silva (1996),

however, in many industrialized countries especially in Europe, the existence of strong

employers’ organizations and trade unions have resulted in many important agreements

being concluded at the national or industry level, supplemented by some enterprise level

bargaining. In the USA, however, bargaining at the enterprise level has been the more

usual practice, other than in specific sectors such as coal, steel, trucking and construction.

Salomon (2000) defines multi-employer agreements as those being negotiated between

Trade Unions and Employer Associations and covering employees of a given description

in a specified industry or sub-industry. Until recently, national multi-employer bargaining

was the dominant model in the UK and continental Europe. It affords both management

and union’s significant advantages (Lewis et al 2003, and Silva 1996).

The advantages to the employer include:

More concerted response to trade union organization

Reduces chances of employers competing with one another by wage and salary

costs

Smaller employers do not have to spend time negotiating as it is done by experts

Reduces trade union role at the workplace

The advantages that accrue to Trade Unions include:

Enhances bargaining strength

The negotiation of acceptable minimum standards for an industry’s employees

Increases chances of gaining recognition from new employers

Rationalization of resources

Demonstrable relevance to Industry employees thereby enhancing recruitment

prospects.

This is the model that is currently in application in Zimbabwe as provided for by the

Labour Act (Chapter 28:01) as well as Statutory Instrument 167of 1991.

41

2.5.3.0 CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESSFUL COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

2.5.3.1 PLURALISM AND FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION

Silva (1996), points out that a pluralistic outlook involves the acceptance within a

political system of pressure groups (e.g. religious groups, unions, business associations,

political parties) within specific interests with which a government has dialogue, with a

view to effecting compromises by making concessions. Pluralism implies a process of

bargaining between these groups, and between one or more of them on the one hand and

the government on the other hand. It therefore recognizes these groups as the checks and

balances which guarantee democracy (Okene, 2004 and Khabo, 2008)

2.5.3.2 TRADE UNION RECOGNITION

According to Okene (2004), the existence of the freedom of association does not

necessarily mean that there would automatically be recognition of unions for bargaining

purposes. Especially in systems where there is a multiplicity of trade unions, there should

be pre-determined objective criteria operative within the industrial relations system to

decide when and how a union should be recognized for collective bargaining purposes.

Silva (1996) notes then, that the accepted principle is to recognize the most representative

union, but what criteria is used to decide it and by whom may differ from system to

system. In some systems the issue would be determined by requiring the union to have

not less than a stipulated percentage of the workers in the enterprise or category in its

membership (Gernigon et.,al 2000). This is the case in Zimbabwe

2.5.3.3 OBSERVANCE OF AGREEMENTS

Gernigon et al., (2000), notes that in developing countries, unions are sometimes unable

to secure observance of agreements by their members. Silva (1996) emphasizes that,

where there is frequent non observance of agreements or understandings reached through

collective bargaining process, the party not in default would lose faith in the process.

42

2.5.3.4 SUPPORT OF LABOUR ADMINISTRATION AUTHORITIES

Faruque (2009) and Okene (2004) argue that support by the administration labour

authorities is necessary for successful collective bargaining. They say this implies that

they will:

i) provide the necessary climate for it. For instance they should provide effective

conciliation services in the event of a breakdown in the process, and even

provide the necessary legal framework for it to operate in where necessary,

e.g. provision for the registration of agreements

ii) will not support a party in breach of agreements concluded consequent to

collective bargaining

iii) as far as is practicable, secure observance of collective bargaining agreements

iv) provide methods for the settlement of disputes arising out of collective

bargaining if the parties themselves have not so provided.

2.5.3.5 GOOD FAITH

According to www.au.af.mil mutual trust comes from experience, either with the

negotiation process or from previous contact. If it does not exist, it must be built.

Collective bargaining is workable only if the parties bargain on good faith. If not, there

will be only the process of bargaining without a result. According to ILO (1996) good

faith is more likely where certain attitudes are shared among employers, workers and their

organization, e.g. a belief and faith in the value of compromise through dialogue, in the

process of collective bargaining and in the productive nature of the relationship collective

bargaining requires and develops. Gernigon et al., (2000) points out that in preparatory

work for Convention No. 154, it was recognized that collective bargaining could only

function effectively if it was concluded in good faith by both parties; but as good faith

cannot be imposed by law, it could only be achieved as a result of the voluntary and

persistent efforts of both parties (ILO, 1981).

2.5.3.6 PROPER INTERNAL COMMUNICATION

43

ILO (1996) stresses that both management and unions should keep their managers and

members respectively well informed, as lack of proper communication and information

can lead to misunderstandings and even strikes. Sometimes managers and supervisors

who are ill-informed may inadvertently mislead workers who work under them about the

current state of negotiations, the management’s objectives and so on.

2.6.0 LEGAL STATUS OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

Collective bargaining agreements have a unique status in the UK in that they are not

legally binding on the parties who have signed them. If either the union or management

acts contrary to the agreement, the other party cannot enforce its rights outlined in the

agreement via Courts (Gennard and Judge: 1999). According to Towers (2003) between

1979 and 1997 successive conservative governments sought to reduce the collective

rights of trade unions. Provisions to allow trade unions to claim recognition from

employers were repealed, legal support for the closed shop removed and taking industrial

action lawfully was made more difficult. However the election of the Labour government

in 1997 marked a fresh approach to collective arrangements involving Trade Unions.

In Zimbabwe however the situation is different. There are two main trade unions namely

The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions and The Zimbabwe Federation of Trade

Unions. Employees are free to choose where they want to belong. All collective

agreements reached and gazetted are enforceable via courts. The Labour Act (Chapter

28:01) recognizes collective bargaining at the workplace. Some of the sections of support

of the above include Part II of the Act on Fundamental Rights of Employees on

employees’ entitlement to membership of trade unions and workers committees. Section 6

of the act provides for protection of employees right to fair labour standards as well as

section 7 where it’s advocating for protection of employees’ right to democracy at the

workplace.

Part 5 of the Labour Act on section 19 provides for advisory councils whilst section 20

empowers the Minister to stipulate minimum wages through statutory instrument. The

Minister may, either on his own initiative or on the recommendation of any employer or

employee of any association representing employers or employees, appoint advisory

councils consisting of such persons as the Minister may deem fit, to investigate and make

recommendations to him or her as to one or more of the following

44

a) In connection with wages, salaries or benefits-

i) the fixing of minimum wages and benefits for employees or,

ii) any other matters to which minimum wage notices may relate

b) The making of regulations in terms of section 17 or section 26,

c) the compilation of a list of arbitrators in terms of section 98

Most of part 6 of the Labour Act is also in support of collective bargaining. The relevant

sections are section 23, 24, 25, 25A, 28, 29 and 31. Section 25 of the Labour Act talks of

the effects of collective bargaining agreements negotiated by workers committees. It

clearly states that

1) every collective bargaining agreement which has been negotiated by a

workers committee shall be referred by the workers committee to the

employees and the trade union concerned, and if, approved by the trade union

and by more than fifty per centum of the employees, shall become binding on

the employer and the employees concerned. Provided that where there is any

conflict between the terms and conditions of any such collective bargaining

agreement and the collective bargaining agreement negotiated by an

appropriate trade union, the latter shall prevail

2) where a collective bargaining agreement which has been negotiated by a

workers committee contains any provision which is, or has become-

a) inconsistent with this Act or any other enactment; or

b) unreasonable or unfair, having regard to the respective rights of parties;

the Minister may direct the parties to the agreement to negotiate, within such

specified period as he may specify , an amendment to the agreement to

negotiate in such extent as he may specify and he may give such other

directions relating to the operation of the agreement pending its amendment

as he may deem fit, and such direction shall be binding on the parties.

3) Where the Minister has made such a direction in terms of subsection (2), it

shall be the duty of the parties to the collective bargaining agreement

concerned to negotiate an amendment to the agreement in good faith, and

report back to the Minister within the period specified in the direction the

extent to which they have been able or unable to agree in amending the

agreement.

45

4) A collective bargaining agreement negotiated in terms of this section shall not

be

affected by-

a) Where the employer is a corporate body, a change in membership of the

management or ownership of the employer

b) a change in membership of the workers committee or the employees

concerned; or

c) a transfer of the undertaking or industry in which the employees

concerned are employed.

5) Any person who is aggrieved by any determination or direction in terms of

Subsection (2) or any amendment of a collective bargaining agreement in

terms of subsection (4) may appeal to the Labour Court

The statutory instrument for the Catering Industry is known as the CBA 167/1991 and

further supports the enactments of the Labour Act. This borrows from the principal

document which is the Labour Act the minimum conditions of employment that

organizations are expected to observe. The CBA on page 2 states:

In accordance with the provisions of the Labour Relations Act, 1985, this agreement is

made and entered into between the Catering Employers Association of Zimbabwe

(hereinafter referred to as the “employer” or “employers’ organization”) of the one part

and the Zimbabwe Catering and Hotel Workers Union (hereinafter referred to as the

“employees” or the “trade union”, of the other part, being parties to the National

Employment Council for the Catering Industry.

The procedural terms are then outlined followed by the substantive terms of the

agreement. The most important Section 10 of the CBA for this study, compels every

employer to place each employee in the grade appropriate to his occupation, and to pay

wages to such employees of at least the amount prescribed hereunder for the employee’s

grade and class and that no employee shall accept wages amounting to less than the

amount prescribed for him.

2.7.0 THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PROCESS

46

The collective bargaining process comprises five core steps according to

www.industrialrelations.naukrihub.com, which are now discussed below. It needs to be

noted that the negotiation process and the collective bargaining process are one and the

same. In collective bargaining the scope is wider however, whilst in wage negotiation, it

is one of the issues that can be discussed separately when bargaining.

1. Prepare: This involves composition of a negotiation team. The negotiation team

should consist of representatives of both the parties with adequate knowledge and

skills for negotiation. In this phase both the employer’s representatives and the

union examine their own situation in order to develop the issues that they believe

will be most important. The first thing to be done is to determine whether there is

actually any reason to negotiate at all. A correct understanding of the main issues

to be covered and intimate knowledge of operations, working conditions,

production norms and other relevant conditions is required.

2. Discuss: The parties decide the ground rules that will guide the negotiations. A

process well begun is half done and this is no less true in case of collective

bargaining. An environment of mutual trust and understanding is also created so

that the collective bargaining agreement would be reached.

3. Propose: This phase involves the initial opening statements and the possible

options that exist to resolve them. In a word, this phase could be described as

‘brainstorming’. The exchange of messages takes place and opinion of both the

parties is sought.

4. Bargain: Negotiations are easy if a problem solving attitude is adopted. This stage

comprises the time when ‘what ifs’ and ‘supposals’ are set forth and the drafting

of agreements take place.

5. Settlement: Once the parties are through with the bargaining process, a

consensual agreement is reached upon wherein both the parties agree to a common

decision regarding the problem or the issue. This stage is described as consisting

of effective joint implementation of the agreement through shared visions,

strategic planning and negotiated change.

According to Faraque (2008), a trade union is legally entitled to raise labour disputes

on behalf of the workers and to bargain collectively with the employers on the issues

of disputes. When an industrial dispute arises or is apprehended, the trade union or the

47

employer(s) of the establishment is required to communicate their respective views in

writing to the other. After communicating their respective views, both the trade union

and the employer(s) sit across the table and negotiate for arriving at a settlement.

Negotiations have to be completed within 21 days after the official demand. If a

settlement is arrived through collective bargaining, a memorandum of settlement is

recorded in writing and signed by both parties and a copy thereof is forwarded to the

appropriate government authority.

Below is the diagrammatic presentation of the Wage Negotiation Process

Figure 2.1 The Collective Bargaining Process

Source: http://industrialrelations.naukrihub.com/process.html

Faruque (2008), outline the collective bargaining process in Bangladesh below which is

alike to the Zimbabwean system of wage negotiation.

He goes on to say if parties fail to arrive at a memorandum of settlement through

collective bargaining, any of the parties, either the trade union or the employer, can refer

the dispute to the conciliator in writing with a request to conciliate. Upon such request it

becomes obligatory on the part of the conciliator to start the process of conciliation. At

plant level the trade union which is elected can raise a dispute in writing and place it

before management for collective bargaining. Similarly the employers can also raise a

dispute and place it before the trade union for negotiation (Faraque: 2008)

The Zimbabwean scenario is along the same lines as conducted in Bangladesh the only

difference being that parties in Zimbabwe do not usually waste time referring the matter

48

for conciliation but once deadlock is declared the matter is automatically referred for

arbitration.

2.8.0 ALTERNATIVE WAGE DETERMINATION MECHANISM

According to Nelson (2006) while the basic wage or pay is the main component of

compensation, fringe benefits and cash and non-cash benefits influence the level of wages

or pay because the employer is concerned more about labour costs than the wage rates per

se. McPhie (2006), notes that the tendency is towards an increasing mix of benefits,

which therefore have an important impact on pay levels. Pay determination may have one

or more objectives, which may often be in conflict with each other. Silva (1996),

classifies the objectives of pay under four headings.

Equity- income distribution through narrowing of inequalities, increasing wages

of the lowest paid employees, protecting real wages, the concept of equal pay for

equal work

Efficiency – attempts to link a part of wages to productivity or profit, group or

individual performance, acquisition and application of skills etc

Macro-economic stability- through high employment levels and low inflation, for

instance.

Efficient allocation of labour in the labour market

He goes on to say traditionally wages and pay have been determined through government

regulation, minimum wage determination, negotiation with unions, decisions of

arbitration or labour courts and the individual contract of employment. The factors which

have influenced wages and wage increases include profit (generally unrelated to

individual or group performance), job evaluation, seniority, cost of living, manpower

shortage or surplus, negotiating strength of the parties and skills. Nelson (2006), notes

that performance measure such as productivity or profit related to performance of a group

have been of less importance in determining pay increases. Though skills have been

reflected in pay differentials, pay systems have been seldom geared to the encouragement

of skills acquisition and application.

The Encyclopedia of Business, 2nd edition points out that traditionally pay systems for no-

executive staff have generally been characterized by standardization across and within

sectors (e.g. government, particular industries) and within enterprises. So long as

49

employers were competing mainly in domestic markets which were protected from

foreign competition in some cases leading to monopolies- the effects of standardization

on considerations such as performance, recruitment and retention of good staff etc, were

less felt. Indeed standardization, while being equitable from the point of view of

employees, benefited employers as well by reducing competition based on labour costs.

Silva (1996), notes that in the area of industrial relations, collective bargaining outside the

enterprise is seen by employers as achieving distributive justice in the sense of equality,

with outcomes often being based on the bargaining strength of the parties. It is

increasingly viewed as contributing little to productivity and performance. The outcomes

often leave employers with little or no capacity to make further payments on account of

performance under a scheme. The movement toward decentralization of collective

bargaining has been the result of the need to address efficiency and performance issues at

enterprise level. Increased earnings were secured and performance rewarded partly

through promotions. With limitations on higher positions in the context of organizations

becoming less hierarchical in the future, relating part of pay increases to performance

would be a way of rewarding performance other than through promotions (Nelson, Crum,

Ferentinos and Tsugawa, 2006).

Nelson et al., (2006) and Silva (1996) point out that pay systems are increasingly forming

part of human resource management initiatives to achieve enterprise level objectives and

strategies, with more attention being paid to how they fit into the overall human resource

management policies of organizations. Pay increases need to be more than matched by

productivity increases if competitiveness is to be achieved or maintained.

2.8.1.1 SCHEMES

Silva (1996) and McPhie (2006), posit that the types of schemes which fall within the

description of performance pay are varied. The schemes are designed to share or

distribute the financial results of the enterprise performance with or to employees. In

essence performance pay is based on paying the worker for his or her value, rather than

the value of the job. The schemes fall into four broad categories below:

individual- based or based on individual performance, such as incentive schemes

and sales commissions

50

profit- sharing, which applies to all or most of the employees

gain-sharing measured by a pre-determined performance formula, applicable to all

or groups of employees. The performance measure may be profit or some other

objective such as productivity

employee share ownerships schemes

Nelson et al., (2006), caution by saying that the success or failure of performance pay is

affected by a variety of circumstances which vary from country to country. That is why

transplanting such systems without the necessary modifications is unlikely to meet the

objectives. They go on further to say that success or failure will generally be influenced

by circumstances such as: the tradition of collective bargaining, attitude of unions,

cultural factors, a human resources management system which uses pay to reinforce

larger business strategies and whether the overall climate in the enterprise is favourable to

performance and productivity.

2.8.1.2 SKILL-BASED PAY

According to Nelson et al., (2006) skill based pay refers to a pay system in which pay

increases are linked to the number of depth of skills an employee acquires and applies and

it is a means of developing broader and deeper skills among the workforce. Such

increases are in addition to, and not in lieu of, general pay increases employees may

receive (Silva, 1996, Encyclopedia for Business 2nd Edition). Pay increases are usually

tied to three types of skills:

horizontal skills, which involve a broadening of skills in terms of the range of

tasks

vertical skills, which involve acquiring skills of higher level

depth skills, which involve a high level of skills in specialized areas relating to the

same job

Silva (1996), points out that skill-based pay differs in the following respects from

traditional pay systems which reflect skills differences in a structure consisting of rates of

pay for unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled workers:

51

skill-based pay is person-based and not a job-based, system. It rewards a person

for what he/she is worth, rather than the job, is worth. Job worth is reflected in a

basic rate of pay for minimum skills, but pay progression is directly linked to

skills acquisition (rather than to general pay increases applicable to all)

it rewards (and therefore emphasizes) a broad range of skills which makes the

employee multi-skilled and therefore flexible

it positively encourages skills development

a skill based pay may not necessarily reflect how well the skill is used, as this falls

within the performance component of pay.

The system needs to be underpinned by opportunities for training which is critical

to the success of the system.

Skills provide employees with a measure of protection against unemployment, as well as

opportunities for higher earnings. At the same time, skills provide employers with an

important means of achieving competitiveness. Skill based pay systems are appropriate to

organizations which depend on a high level of skills and in which labour costs represent a

relatively small portion of total costs, unlike in labour intensive industries.

2.9.0 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION MECHANISMS

Khabo (2008), says that on the context of collective bargaining and labour disputes

resolution, alternative disputes resolution (ADR) mechanisms contribute to the promotion

of collective bargaining through the resolution of labour disputes within the framework of

conciliation and/or arbitration processes in which parties to the collective bargaining

agreement participate. The situation is envisaged by article 6 of the Collective Bargaining

Convention, 1981 (No.154). Khabo (2008) observes that most of SADC countries subject

disputes related to collective bargaining agreements to conciliation and arbitration

mechanisms. The general trend is now to move towards the adoption of alternative

dispute resolution mechanisms (ADR) which embrace the voluntary, informal accessible

and speedy resolution of disputes. The Voluntary Conciliation and Arbitration

Recommendation, 1951 (No. 92) encourages parties who have consented to conciliation

and arbitration to desist from engaging in strikes while conciliation and arbitration

52

processes are in progress and indicates that none of its provisions may be interpreted as

limiting, in any way whatsoever, the right to strike.

2.9.1 ARBITRATION

One of the several functions of collective bargaining is the settlement of disputes by

laying down a rule making process. According to Okene (2004), the major interest of

trade unions is winning wage concessions from employers through collective action.

Where the employer fails to accede to the demands of the workers this could lead to strike

action. Thus collective bargaining provides the mechanism for dispute settlement by

negotiation on working conditions and terms of employment. There are instance when

parties fail to agree unfortunately, these cases have to be referred for conciliation and then

arbitration.

According to Gernigon (2000), one of the most radical forms of intervention in collective

bargaining, under the terms of the law or as a result of an administrative decision, is the

imposition of compulsory arbitration when parties do not reach agreement, or when a

certain number of days of strike action have elapsed. Compulsory arbitration may also be

sought by one of the parties, but always conflicts with the voluntary nature of negotiation,

since the solution which is imposed is not derived from the will of both parties, but from a

third party to whom they have not had recourse jointly. It is also acceptable where it is

provided for in the collective agreement as a mechanism for the settlement of disputes.

Furthermore it is also acceptable, as the Committee on Freedom of Association, following

the committee of Experts, has recently indicated in cases where, after protracted and

fruitless negotiations, as it is obvious that the deadlock in bargaining will not be broken

without some initiative in the part of the authorities (ILO, 1995c, Case No 1768

(Iceland)).

2.10 CHAPTER SUMMARY

This chapter presented literature on the wage negotiation process and collective

bargaining. Essentially annual wage negotiations are a component of the broader scheme

of the collective bargaining process. The theories of negotiations were discussed and

53

these include structural, strategic, behavioural, concession exchange and integrative. On

collective bargaining, models of collective bargaining were discussed and their link to

negotiations. In the next chapter focus will now be on presenting the study methodology

and justification as to why it was chosen.

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter focuses on providing information regarding the modus operandi of the study.

It is dedicated to the discussion of the research design and the various methodologies used

54

in this study. Furthermore a great deal of discussion centered on how to conduct the

research in order to collect reliable and valid data for the research questions as well as the

overall objective of the study. A discussion of the sampling techniques used and the

different types of data will be provided as well as an introduction and discussion of

development of research instruments and how data will be processed, analyzed and

presented. The reasons and justification for adopting such strategies are also presented.

The research will then discuss the results of the analysis. The chapter will wind up by

concluding giving an overview whether literature conforms to the findings of the study.

3.1 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY

A research philosophy refers to the belief about the way in which data regarding a

phenomenon should be collected, analyzed, interpreted and used. The objectives of

research include the quest to broaden knowledge in the researched field and to solve

practical problems (Girden: 2001). The philosophical direction of any research is

important for a number of reasons as it helps to clarify the research design, it helps to

recognize which designs will work and which will fail and it explains the researcher’s

identity and even create new designs that may be outside his experience (Easterby-Smith

et al 2002). According to Sunders and Thornhill (2000), research philosophy adopted by a

researcher depends on the researcher’s view on the developments of knowledge. In this

study the researcher sought to investigate the causes of wage negotiation deadlocks at the

NEC Catering Industry. This is a practical inquiry, thus an applied research as opposed to

basic research is appropriate. An applied research seeks to provide solutions to the

challenges identified in a certain community (Nunan: 1992).

Smith and Dainty (1991) wrote that there are different approaches to research based on

the inquirer’s values, assumptions and beliefs about the world. More importantly, the

researcher ought to understand the strengths and weaknesses of each of these

assumptions. There are two major categories of the research philosophy, i.e. positivism

and phenomenology. Galliers (1991) echoes the same sentiments by Saunders et al (2003)

and those of White (2000), that there are two main areas in research namely qualitative

and quantitative research. Quantitative (positivist) research involves the objective way of

studying things whilst qualitative (phenomenological) research is the subjective way of

studying things.

55

3.1.1 POSITIVISM

When positivism is adopted, it is because it supports the sharing of knowledge though

communication. The positivists approach assumes that things can be studied as facts and

relationships between the facts can be established as scientific laws. According to

Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (1996), positivism seeks to explain and predict what

happens in the business world by searching for irregularities and causal relationships

between variables. Other reasons for choosing the positivists approach include:

Clear theoretical focus for the research

Easily comparable data

Research control of the research process and

Economical collection of data from respondents.

According to Creswell (2003), the methodology of a positivist research follows the

assumptions of an empiricist paradigm. In a positivistic research the researcher is

independent from the research and data is used objectively to measure reality. Positivism

has its roots in science and most research methodology in both the natural and social

science subscribes to what has been termed the scientific methods (Allison et al: 2003).

The positivist approach assumes an external world determining behaviour, strives for

explanation, prediction, and control by dividing into parts, and isolating them,

mechanistic processes for explaining social behaviour, researcher is objective, and value-

free, truth has to be confined with empirical evidence, it is deductive and normally uses

quantitative data (Saunders et al, 1997). The positivist paradigm argues that one should be

able to explain phenomena in terms of what causes the behaviour observed. The cause

and effect relationship underpins the positivist methodology. Positivism prefers ‘working

with an observable social reality and that the end product of such research can be law-like

generalizations similar to those produced by the physical and natural scientists’(Bless &

Higson-Smith: 1995). They further claim that in this paradigm, the researcher is

independent of and neither affects nor is affected by the subject of the research.

3.1.2 PHENOMENOLOGY

56

Phenomenology is a research approach where social reality is multiple, divergent and

interrelated, analyses from the actor’s own perspective, human behaviour is how people

define their own world and reality is the meaning attributed to experience and is not the

same for everyone, (Finn, White and Walton: 2000). Phenomenology focuses on the

social process and how individuals shape and give meaning to the social world.

Understanding and interpreting these meanings underpins the phenomenological

methodology (Converse & Presser: 1986). The phenomenological approach emanates

from a key criticism of the positivist philosophy and asserts that the positivists approach

is irrelevant in business and management studies according to Saunders et al (2000).

Phenomenologist’s are of the view that the social world of business and management is

far too complex to rely on theorizing by definitive ‘laws’ as it is the case with physical

sciences. The business world and management are complex and unique. The business

environment is constantly changing and thus generalizations less valuable.

By adopting a phenomenological stance, a researcher can potentially dig deeper to

explore the taken for granted assumptions of the social world (Smith: 1998). This notion

is given credence by the gestalt principle which states that the whole is more than the sum

of its parts, meaning that there is more to reality of the matter than its individual members

can portray (Kriel:2006). It has been stated that the greatest strength of phenomenological

philosophy lies in its ability to help discovering underlying assumptions influencing

certain behaviours, which assumptions the group members will be unaware of (Saunders

et al: 2000).

3.1.3 PHILOSOPHICAL APPROACH

There is no philosophy that is superior to the other. The type of research will determine

the most suitable philosophy. Sunders et al (2000) argue that business and management

research is often a mixture of positivism and phenomenology philosophies with more

emphasis being on the phenomenological approach.

This research is premised on the phenomenology philosophy which requires the capturing

of complexities of social research. Wage negotiation/bargaining are a social interaction

57

between two parties that represent two different constituencies. It’s important to note that

in this set up elements such as personalities, motives, power and politics are real and the

underlying determinants to the parties’ ultimate outcomes. Consequently it becomes

critical to interpret the parties actions in order to determine motives and respective goals

and to interpret the behaviour of the parties (Russel: 1994) and hence reliance on

phenomenology. Nevertheless aspects of positivism inform the study through the use of

positivist’s instruments such as the questionnaire.

3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN

Social research needs a design or a structure before data collection or analysis

commences. The function of a research design is to ensure that evidence obtained enables

the researcher to answer initial question as unambiguously as possible. Obtaining relevant

evidence entails specifying the type of evidence needed to answer the research question,

to test theory, to evaluate a programme, or to accurately describe some phenomenon

(Yin:1988).

This is the blue print for the collection, measurement and analysis of data (Cooper and

Schindler: 1998). White (2000) noted that it is a general term that covers a number of

separate but related issues associated with research study. It also refers to the organization

of data and its analysis to obtain information. Zikmund (2003) has supported the above

views by defining research design as a master plan specifying the methods and

procedures to be used for collecting and analyzing the needed information. Jankomicz

(2002) views a research design as a systematic approach taken towards the collection of

data so that information can be obtained from those data. A research design refers to a

series of advance decisions that, taken together, comprise a model of how the

investigation to answer research questions was conducted (Bryman: 1988). It can be

considered as a blueprint to guide the data collection, data processing and information

transmission and analysis.

In this study both qualitative and quantitative research designs were adopted in the

context of a cases study. The researcher undertook an analysis of the literature on wage

negotiation. This constituted the qualitative part. Thereafter data capturing was conducted

58

through the application of questionnaires and interviews. These approaches were critical

to ensure that all the research questions were adequately answered.

3.2.1 CASE STUDY APPROACH

The researcher used the case study approach in dealing with the research topic- the case

of NEC Catering. Yin (1994) defines a case study as an “empirical inquiry that

investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real life context” using a variety of

sources of evidence. Another strong advocate of the case study approach to research is

Stake. According to Stake (1995) a case study is intended to catch the complexity of a

single case. Saunders (2003) argues that a case study enriches the understanding of the

context of research and the processes being enacted whilst Ben-basat (1987) considers a

case study to be important for the following three reasons which are:

It is necessary to study the phenomenon in its natural setting.

The researcher can ask questions relating to how and why so as to understand the

nature and complexity of the process taking place,

Research is being conducted in an area where few, if any previous studies have

been undertaken.

It has been argues that case studies are difficult to generalize because they are based on

qualitative, subjective data and generalize to a particular extent only. The researcher used

a case study approach, using self administered questionnaires and personal interviews to

gather data because of the specialized or sophisticated nature of the industry and the

complexity of the phenomenon under study.

3.3 POPULATION OF THE STUDY

Population can be referred to as the aggregate of the individual units of the analysis from

which a survey sample will be derived (Wagner & Babbie: 1983). This means that the

population is the entire country as represented by the National Employment Council.

According to Fraenkel and Wallen (1996), population refers to the entire group the

researcher is interested in, which he/she wishes to describe or draw conclusion about.

Jankowicz (2000) concurs by saying that population refers to a collection of items of

59

interest in research. The population represents a group that the researcher wishes to

generalize the research too. Populations are often defined in terms of demography,

occupation and time. In order to make any generalizations, about a population, a sample

that is meant to be representative of the population is often studied. For each population

there are many possible samples. They divide the population into two categories: the

target population and the study population. The target population is the actual population

to which the researcher would optimally wish to generalize the research findings, whilst

study population is that population in which that researcher is practically able to

generalize these findings.

In this study the target population was composed of 90 members from CEAZ and

ZCHWU as well as NEC in Zimbabwe. The study population was the NEC Catering

Industry. It is the researcher’s view that the wage negotiation practices at NEC would

generally portray the practices of the companies in the Catering Industry since the

governing instruments to wage negotiation are common, although there maybe variations

due to localized peculiarities of the companies in the Industry. However generalizations

of the findings could be made to the Industry and thus the results for NEC would

relatively represent the situation in the companies in the Industry. Defining the population

is important because it helps the researcher in selecting a sample for study (Labovitz and

Hagedorn: 1976).

3.4 SAMPLING AND SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

Sampling is necessary when the size of the population is large and if the cost and time

required in obtaining information from the whole population is high. Dealing with large

population can negatively impact of the idea of making quick decisions if a large sample

is to be investigated.

Ferber (1974) defined a sample as a small part of anything designed to show the style,

quality and nature of the whole. The purpose of a sample is to approximate the

measurement of the whole population well enough, within acceptable limits. Allison et al

(2001) asserts that a sample is a group of subjects from whom the researcher collected

information. According to Saunders et al (2003) a sample is a subset of the whole

population which is actually investigated by a researcher and whose characteristics will

be generalized to the entire population. Holstein and Gabrium (1995) contend that

60

sampling is closely linked to external validity or generalisability of the findings in a

study, the extent to which what has been found in a particular situation at a particular time

applies more generally.

In this study a mixture of stratified and random sampling procedure (a probability and

non probability sampling method) was adopted for drawing the sample. This was done in

order to reduce expenses and save time. According to Kotler (1997) a target population of

less than 1% of the population can provide for good and reliable results. The research

selected 30 respondents for the questionnaire. The target population and samples was as

given below in the table.

Table 3.1 Population and Samples of the Study

Strata Population Sample

NEC 10 5

CEAZ 50 15

ZCHWU 30 10

TOTAL 90 30

There are two methods of coming up with a sample. Saunders et al (1997) reports that

random (probability) sampling ensures that the probability of each case being selected

from the population is known and is usually equal for all cases. On the other hand, non-

random (non-probability) sampling is such that the probability of each case being selected

from the total population is unknown and cannot answer questions that require statistical

inferences about the population’s characteristics. Simple random selection is based on

purely random (chance) basis from the population. Each element of the population has an

equal chance of being selected. This method is most appropriate when there is an

assumption that the population is relatively homogenous with respect to random variable

under study. This research adopted the stratified random sampling method and this is

explained below.

3.4.1 STRATIFIED SAMPLING

61

Stratified sampling involves dividing the population into a number of groups or strata,

where members of a group share a particular characteristic(s) De Vaus (1990). There is

then random sampling within the strata. Sampling theory shows that in some instances,

stratified sampling can be more efficient than simple random sampling. This is because

for a given sample size, the means of stratified samples are likely to be closer to the

population mean (Marsh, 1992). This occurs when there is a relatively small amount of

variability in whatever characteristic being measured within the stratum, compared to

variability across strata.

Allison et al (2001) point out that stratified random sampling involves dividing the

population into strata with each stratum having relatively homogenous elements. Once the

strata have been identified, a simple random sample is selected from each stratum

separately. Stratified random sampling is used when the population is thought to consist

of a number of smaller subgroups or sub populations such as male/female, different age,

ethnicity, interest groups, which are thought to have an effect on the data to be collected

(Allison et al: 2001). This method was used in this study.

The researcher divided the respondents into different strata namely NEC Administrators,

CEAZ Council and ZCHWU Agents a total of thirty five respondents representing forty

percent of the target population were considered adequate to give the level of accuracy

desired in the survey results. The choice of the sample size was guided by Hoinville et

al.., (1978) as cited in Saunders et al.., (2007) who argued that there are a number of

competing influences in choosing the sample size. Hence it is not surprising that the final

sample size is almost a matter of judgment rather than calculation.

According to Dillion et al (1990) and Saunders et al (1997) a well-planned and

administered sample provides a perfect alternative to collecting data from the entire

population.

3.5 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS

3.5.1 QUESTIONNAIRES

The research gathered data using structured questionnaires. This method was used in

order to capture the desired information and consequently, to produce quality results.

Questionnaires were used as data collection instruments because of their applicability to

the survey research design (Zikmund: 1997). A set of questions were developed for the

62

respondents. These were solicit their opinions and understanding on the causes of wage

negotiation deadlocks and how it can be overcome.

Saunders et al (2003) notes that the questionnaire is a technique of data collection in

which each person is asked to respond to a same set of questions in a predetermined

order. Bell and Openheim (2000) as cited in Saunders et al (2003) contends that it is far

harder to come up with a good questionnaire and therefore a combination of interviews

and questionnaires was used as a way of trying to overcome the shortcomings of each

instrument.

A questionnaire has advantages that it can be administered to large numbers of people at

the same time. Respondents will respond to the same questions which will improve

precision of the results. They are an efficient way of collecting responses from a large

sample and they maintain uniformity, are convenient and cost effective to use and give

respondents an opportunity of anonymity. By this virtue, questionnaires were adopted as

the core data collection instrument in this study as they suit the nature of the problem

under discussion. As a way of improving quality of the questionnaires, pre-testing of

questionnaires was done on five respondents at company level. Through the use of the

questionnaires this researcher was able to reach out to a larger sample and collect data

which was quick as compared to interviews that require the presence of the researcher.

Campbell and Katona (2005) stated that it is this capacity for wide application and broad

coverage which gives the survey technique its great usefulness.” The researcher resorted

to the use of telephones where clarifications were needed or required.

3.5.2 INTERVIEWS

Interviews solicit primary data responses through direct questioning (Wegner: 1993). This

researcher used personal interviews for purposes of this research study. Keogh (1999)

defines personal interviews as when the interviewer asks questions face to face with the

interviewee. For this study an interview was conducted with the Chief Designated Agent

at NEC Mr. Nunurai Bore only although the intention had been to also have interviews

with the Secretary General of the ZCHWU and President of the CEAZ. Efforts to set up

63

meeting were unsuccessful as most of the time they were never in the office and the times

they were in the office their schedules were not accommodating. Notable advantages of

the interview technique are their ability to expand on the areas of interest. They give non

verbal cues that could be very useful in bringing deeper information. Interviews are also

directed at the target population and clarity can be sought. The researcher can probe

further questions

According to McCracken (1988) the desire for depth of insight and relatively few prior

themes or questions suggested that depth interviews would be the most appropriate data

collection technique. Similar qualitative methods have been used by other researchers

examining consumer behaviours related to corporate social responsibility (Carrigan and

Attalla: 2001; Essoussi & Zahaf: 2008; Mohr et al: 2001) jus to mention a few. A total of

3 in-depth personal interviews were conducted with the Secretary General of ZCHWU,

President of CEAZ and Chief Designated Officer of NEC. A semi-structured interview

guide (see the Appendix) was employed and follow-up questions were used to allow the

participants to both elaborate on initial answers and to provide detail. The use of a semi-

structured interview guide allowed for the participants to discuss their views openly in

their own words and allowed the researcher to probe for deeper responses where

necessary (Miller and Crabtree: 1992). Interviews setbacks that may affect the flow of the

research are that they consume a lot of time and given the nature of this research this

could be a major setback. Interviews can also limit the research to a few people and are

costly as one needs to travel long distances and costly in terms of time spend in

conducting the interview.

The structured questionnaire with non disguised questions used for collecting data was

considered to be the best instrument for this study due to its versatility, simplicity and its

provision for a list of possible answers from which the respondents could choose. The

study also recognized the fact that data obtained from the administered non disguised

questionnaires is easier to tabulate and interpret. A structured interview was used to

solicit responses from the one respondent to help the researcher to bring out the required

information while keeping the line of questioning relevant and flexible. The telephone

network used by the researcher provided convenient and quick sources of information

where people were either busy or unavailable. The telephone method also helped in the

clarification of gaps and for consistency checking.

64

3.6 DATA COLLECTION METHODS

There are two main types of data found in research and these are primary & secondary

data. According to Bryman (1989) and Saunders et al (2003) data can be classified as

documentary, secondary data which is often used in projects that also use primary data

collection methods. Secondary data can also be found in forms of notices,

correspondences, and minutes of meetings, business plans, websites, company

documents, and reports to shareholders and other public records. Survey based secondary

data refers to data collected by questionnaires which have been already been analyzed for

the original purpose (Cook, 1982). Secondary data provides a useful source of data from

which to answer research questions. In this study however very little use was made of

secondary data especially in Chapter One.

On the other hand, primary data according to Merriam (1998) is one that is collected

specifically for a research project. Parasuraman (1991) argues the data is expensive to

collect, but it is easy to formulate structured and unstructured questions that focus on the

study topic. This forms the core and crux of this research project as it constituted the

central nerve of the problem diagnosis, the analysis and findings. In this study, primary

data was collected using questionnaires and interviews on the target population thereby

allowing for triangulation.

Within the three strata’s the researcher gained access to the database and collected names

and positions of the target population. The names were exported to the excel spreadsheet

were the names were assigned unique codes in relation to the origin of i.e. by NEC

Administrators, CEAZ and ZCHWU separately. Names were picked at random by the

computer and indicated 30 (thirty) to whom questionnaires were sent. This study was

conducted at the National Employment Council Offices in Harare. The distribution of

respondents is indicated below:

Table 3.2 Respondents of the Study

Strata Number of Respondents

NEC 5

CEAZ 15

ZCHWU 10

Total 30

65

3.7 RELIABILITY

In developing the research instruments, validity, reliability and objectivity of the

information obtained from the instruments were considered.

According to Sekaran (2003) reliability refers to the degree of reproducibility or variation

of outcomes of an experiment carried out in different settings, with different operators,

and over different applications ( reliability is a measure of precision), while validity refers

to how well an instrument measures the particular concept it is intended to measure. A

reliable instrument is one that gives consistent results (Bellenger and Greenberg: 1978).

The consistency gives the researcher confidence that the results actually represent what

he/she intended to study. Reliable instruments ought to obtain similar responses when

administered to different respondents.

3.8 VALIDITY

Labovitz and Hagedorn (1976) define validity as the ability of an instrument to measure

what it is supposed to measure. However, Fraenkel and Wallen (1996) view this

definition as old fashioned and instead, they argue that a more accurate definition of

validity revolves around the defensibility of the inferences researchers make from the data

collected through the use of an instrument. Moreover, they argue that validity of the

instruments must always be considered within the context inferences, the researcher

makes regarding particular areas or topics. In other words, the researcher needed

instruments that would permit him to obtain valid conclusions about the characteristics

(perceptions, attitudes, interests, politics etc) of the individuals under study.

Validity and reliability are crucial aspects of any research. It is important to understand

clearly the distinction between reliability and validity. Kjaer (2005) described validity as

follows: The validity of an experiment is the degree to which it measures the theoretical

construct under investigation. The economic literature refers predominantly to three types

of validity (described by the American Psychological Association in 1974): content

validity, criterion validity and construct validity. Content validity refers to all aspects of

66

the experimental design, such as choice of attributes, attribute levels, ordering of

attributes, and framing. According to Kjaer (2005) this validity is difficult to assess

because it depends on the intuition and experience of the researcher. Auger et al (2003)

carefully selected the attributes in previous studies in 2003, 2005, and 2006; these are

supported in the reviewed literature.

Criterion validity, also named external validity, refers to the extent to which the measure

of the construct can be compared with another measure which may be regarded as a

criterion. Construct validity refers to the extent to which a particular measure relates to

other measures and is consistent with the theoretically-derived hypotheses that relate to

the concept under measurement. Construct validity is concerned with whether the

measure is correlated with other measures of the same theoretical constructs, termed

convergent validity. Construct validity is also concerned with whether the findings

conform to the theoretical foundation of the research (Kjaer: 2005). In reference to the

internal validity Adamowicz et al (1998) stated, “The repeated question nature allows for

internal validity tests and provides a response surface which may yield important

information about the consistency of individual responses.” Considerable evidence exists

that preferences or values inferred from the research are similar to those inferred from

behaviour in the real market. According to Louviere (2001), “previous studies show fairly

consistent results that stated and actual preferences seem to correspond closely in many

cases”.

Fraenkel and Wallen (1996) argue that the issue of objectivity refers to the absence of

subjective judgments. It is important in research to try to eliminate subjectivity from the

judgments made concerning the subjects under study. Unfortunately, objectivity is never

probably attained completely. The questionnaire was pre-tested before administering

them at. The aim of doing this was to reveal the ambiguities, poor worded questions,

unclear choices and also to indicate whether the instructions to the respondents were clear

(Fowler: 1984)

According to Fowler (1984) attention should be paid to the length and clarity of the

questions when preparing research instruments. Both close-ended and open-ended

questions were used in the questionnaire. The close-ended questions allowed the research

to cover a wide range of areas regarding wage negotiation disputes. Respondents prefer

close-ended questions to open-ended questions since they are simple to answer (Fraenkel

and Wallen: 1996). However, close-ended questions have limited breath of responses, are

67

harder to construct and require more questions to cover the research topic than the open-

ended type (Babbie: 1973).

Open-ended questions were included to allow respondents to express their views

independently. The advantages of these questions were that they allowed more freedom

of response, were easier to construct and permitted follow-up by the interviewer.

However, the disadvantages were that the responses tended to be inconsistent in length

and content across respondents, which made them susceptible to misinterpretation and

were more difficult to process (Fowler: 1984). Validity was the key issue and that was the

reason the pre-testing of the instruments was conducted.

3.9 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The respondents’ privacy was respected and they were assured that the information

obtained was going to be used for academic purposes only. Respondents were asked to

participate willingly and those that did not want to were not forced and were part of the

questionnaires that were not returned.

3.10 DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURE

Data processing consists of questionnaire coding, data entry and data cleaning. Initially,

the questionnaires were given unique codes for all responses and all badly completed

questionnaires were not considered for analysis. Data entry was done using Microsoft

Excel and data was also analyzed using Microsoft Excel. In data analysis and

interpretation, frequencies, percentages and means were used. The information was

presented using tables, graphs, and charts to enable easy comparison and clear projection

of the situation. These findings are presented in chapter four, together with their detailed

discussion.

Data for this research study was extracted from the original records i.e. the

questionnaires. The use of graphs and tables was made to show the findings of the

research. Conclusions were then drawn from the findings in the field. The researcher

identified emerging trends and issues which could be areas for further research in future.

Saunders et al (2003) and White (2000) noted that there exist two types of quantitative

data which are categorical and quantifiable. They noted the following; for continuous

68

data, it is recommended to use histograms. Tables, frequency distribution, bar charts, are

also recommended for this kind of data. For data that shows trend use of line graphs, bar

charts, or histograms is recommended. To compare trends it is recommended to use

multiple line graphs or multiple bar charts. Raw data in its numeric form from the

research was first of all coded and then grouped into the relevant groups or frames in

order to facilitate its analysis. Qualitative descriptions and data were first coded using

open coding into numerical data and then presented on the appropriate graphs or charts to

group and present them for a comprehensive and ease of analysis.

Wegner (2003) notes that statistics or numerical findings are only effective and of great

value to management if tables, graphs or charts were used to establish relationships

between data and the pie charts used to highlight the proportionate representations of the

data variables. The produced descriptive statistics were then compared and contrasted

with relevant research objectives to come up with interpretations and conclusions.

3.11 CHAPTER CONCLUSION

This chapter has discussed the research design used in the study and the reasons for

choosing the design. The chapter also discussed how research instruments were

developed, methods of data collection, data entry, data processing and analysis. It

presents and discusses the research findings.

CHAPTER 4

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

4.0 INTRODUCTION

This was a study of causes of wage negotiation deadlocks and how parties can overcome

and or avoid deadlock situations. The study also sought to establish the negotiation

69

process and alternative ways of determining wages with recommendations of how the

process can be improved. In this chapter, the researcher presents and discusses the study

results. This is done in relation to the objectives of the study.

4.1 QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE RATE

The instrument used for data collection was the questionnaire. A total number of 30

questionnaires 30 were sent out to NEC Catering Industry, Zimbabwe Catering and

Hospitality Workers Union and Catering Employers Association of Zimbabwe and 25

were successfully completed and one being spoilt or rather no data was given giving a

response rate of 83.3%. The response rate was therefore good enough to proceed with

analysing the results. According to Kotler (1997) a target population of less than 1% of

the population can provide for good and reliable results

4.2 DEMOGRAPHIC RESULTS

4.2.1: GENDER DISTRIBUTION

Figure 4.1 indicates that 36% of the respondents were female whilst 64% were male. It

can therefore be noted conclude that the majority of the respondents in the study were

male, whilst women in the study constituted almost half of the respondents. In order to

help illustrate the sample demographics use of diagrams was made as in the diagram

below.

The table below provides an analysis of the gender distribution of the respondents.

70

Figure 4.1: Gender Distribution of Respondents

64%

36%

Male Female

4.2.2: AGE GROUP OF RESPONDENTS

The diagram below illustrates the respondent’s age distribution

Figure 4.2: Age Distribution of Respondents

Less than 30 years 31-35 years 36-40 years 41-45 years Above 46 years0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

20%

32%

24%

8%

16%

The results in figure 4.2 above shows that 20% of the respondents are below the age of 30

years, with the highest number of respondents falling into the age category of 31-35 years

which registered 32%. The second highest of 24% was registered on the age group 36- 40

years. The number of respondents decreases to 8% for the age group 41-45 years before

71

rising to 16% for the age group of those above 46 years. Majority of respondents is

therefore middle-aged as can be observed from the diagram above.

4.2.3: HIGHEST LEVEL OF EDUCATION

The majority of the respondent’s amounting to 64% indicated they had either had a

degree or a diploma as the two have 32% each as indicated in the diagram. Therefore

32% have degrees and a further 32% have Diplomas as their highest qualification. It can

also be observed that 20% of the respondents have a Masters degree and 16% have O &

A level as their highest qualification. It can be concluded that reading and understanding

of the questionnaire was therefore not likely to have been an issue taking into account the

level of literacy.

The diagram below shows the highest level of education of the respondents

Figure 4.3: Highest Level of Education

16%

32%

32%

20%

O and A LevelCertificateDiplomaDegreeMasters

4.2.4: LENGTH OF SERVICE

In figure 4.4 8% of the respondents had served their current organization for less than a

year whilst 40% had served their current organization for between 1 and 5 years. Another

20% had served their organization for 6-10 years.

72

Figure 4.4: Length of Service with Organization

0- 12 months 1- 5 years 6 -10 years 11-15 years Above 15 years0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

8%

40%

20%

12%

20%

In the 11-15 years there was a total of 12% whilst those who had served in their current

organization for more than 15 years were 20%. We may imply that those who may have

served their organizations for a number of years are likely to have understood the wage

negotiation process better and hence would by now be aware of the weaknesses and

strengths of the system.

4.2.5: AFFILIATION

In the diagram 4.5 below, the respondent’s affiliation is illustrated as shown

Figure 4.5: Affiliations of Respondents

NEC ZCHWU CEAZ0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

16%

28%

56%

73

The diagram above shows the affiliation of respondents i.e., the organizations they

represent during the wage negotiations. The figure shows that 16% of the respondents are

members of the National Employment Council (NEC), these are the administrators whilst

28% are members of the Zimbabwe Hotel and Catering Workers Union (ZCHWU)

representing the employees on the one hand and 56% of the respondents are members of

the Catering Employers Association of Zimbabwe (CEAZ) representing the employers on

the other hand. As already noted each party comes to the negotiation table with their own

beliefs and values which influence how they will bargain. Silva (1996) points out that

these people do not have the final say but carry the mandate of their ‘ratifiers’ on behalf

of whom they negotiate and hence will have to go back for endorsement on whatever

they would have agreed on.

4.3 THE WAGE NEGOTIATION PROCESS

From the research, it was established that 100% clearly understood the wage negotiations

process as conducted at NEC. They indicated that towards the time for negotiation, both

parties i.e. ZHCWU and CEAZ prepare their position papers in preparation for the

negotiations. The parties then submit their papers detailing their offers with justifications

for each. The negotiation process kicks off under the guidance of an independent

chairman. The aim will be to try and find common ground so as to reach agreement.

Where parties fail to agree then the parties declare a dispute/deadlock and will now have

to refer the matter for compulsory arbitration. Faraque (2008) outlined the wage

negotiation process in Bangladesh which process is almost the same as the situation

prevailing in Zimbabwe. It can therefore be concluded that both parties have a sound

understanding of the wage negotiation process.

4.3.1: SUCCESS OF WAGE NEGOTIATION

In the table below, respondents were asked to rate the overall picture of how they view

the success of the whole negotiation process and this was their response.

In table 4.1 it can be observed that 16 % indicated good whilst 84% indicated poor in

terms of the success of the wage negotiation process.

74

Table 4.1 Success of the Wage Negotiation Process

Good 16%

Poor 84%

The views of respondents on how their perception of the whole negotiation process can be

represented diagrammatically as shown below where 16% indicated good, whilst 84%

indicated poor.

Figure 4.6: Success of Wage Negotiation Process

Good Poor0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

16%

84%

The majority of the respondents were not satisfied with what the wage negotiation

process has managed to achieve to date. It therefore means that CEAZ and ZCHWU

continue to engage each other year in year out despite both parties not being satisfied with

the wage negotiation process. This set up is part of the established system by government

in terms of how the wage negotiation process is supposed to be conducted throughout all

National Employment Councils. It should therefore follow that when the parties are

dissatisfied there are just conducting the process as fulfilment of the law but they are not

fully committed to the process. It may suggest that may be it is about time that a rethink

of the whole process is required and ways of improving the system can be considered to

encompass the concerns of all so that ultimately they are able to reach agreement without

dwelling too much on impasse.

75

According to Zartman (1976) the wage negotiation process conducted at NEC above can

be said to border between concession exchange to being and integrative. It has elements

of give and take as well as cooperating to seek a lasting solution to a common problem.

Bazerman et al (1995), stresses that certain institutional peculiarities can make a system

more deadlocks prone. It is the researcher view that certain institutional peculiarities

inherent with the NEC may be rendering agreement impossible hence members may need

to agree on amending these.

Whilst still at the wage negotiation process, the researcher also sought to establish

whether the respondents were happy with the arbitration process as a sub-process of the

whole negotiation process. The respondents were therefore asked to rate whether the

negotiation process had been successful or not and the table below provides a summary of

their responses.

Table 4.2 Success of the Arbitration Process

Disagree 60%

Agree 40%

The above table can be presented diagrammatically as shown below.

Figure 4.7: Success of Arbitration Process

Disagree Agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

60%

40%

76

The diagram below presents the responses of participants in the survey on how they view

the success of the arbitration process as a component of the wage negotiation process as

conducted yearly. In figure 4.7 below, 60% of the respondents disagreed whilst 40%

agreed that the arbitration process had been successful. It can be noted that the majority

respondents of the respondents were not satisfied with the wage negotiation process and

in particular the dispute resolution mechanism that is in place in the event of deadlock.

Again this brings us back to the issue of the system as observed earlier. The arbitration

process is part of the established system by government on how labour disputes should be

resolved. If the users of the system are not happy, chances of getting a meaningful result

are very minimal. It therefore make fertile ground for the parties to chat a new way

forward in realization of the fact that the system can no longer serve their needs

adequately.

Okene (2004), notes that the major interests of trade unions are winning wage

concessions from employers through collective action. Where the employer fails to

accede to the demands of the workers this could lead to strike action. There are instance

when parties fail to agree unfortunately, these cases have to be referred for conciliation

and then arbitration. When arbitration has failed therefore strikes are inevitable as a last

resort. The effects of strike harmful to both parties’ interests that and relations and as such

must be avoided at all costs.

The table 4.3 below summarises the respondents’ views when asked whether there was

any need of continuing that wage negotiation process considering the first two earlier

sentiments in their responses in figure 4.6 and figure 4.7 indicating that the process had

not yielded any tangible results neither had it been successful in quickly resolving wage

negotiation disputes in the event parties were deadlocked. The responses are given in the

summarised table 4.3 below.

Table 4.3 Continuation of Wage Negotiation Process

Disagree 68%

Agree 32%

When asked whether the wage negotiation process should continue in the same way it has

operated, the respondents’ views are as indicated diagrammatically below.

77

Figure 4.8: Continuation of Negotiation Process

Disagree Agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

68%

32%

In figure 4.8 above 68% disagreed whilst 32% agreed that the wage negotiation process

should continue in the same way as it has operated over the years.

On the overall it can be noted that NEC and ZCHWU are no longer in favour of the way

the wage negotiation process has been conducted over the years and it maybe about time

that some change is incorporated into the whole process or even abandon as it has failed

to serve the need of the people it is meant to benefit. When one has no faith in the system

but are forced to use it they will do so but with reservations. Therefore chances of

reaching agreement are greatly compromised.

According to Narlikar (2010) inn order to overcome, if the source of deadlock is a

particular institutional process, members of the organization may be able to amend it

(depending on the flexibility allowed by the institution), or at least find some wiggle-

room by establishing new norms and working practices.

The diagrams above figure 4.6, figure 4.7 and figure 4.8 sum up the parties views on the

wage negotiation process. If one closely follows it is easy to observe that the parties are

saying the wage negotiation process has not brought forth any meaningful results, neither

has the dispute resolution mechanism. In the end it is in both parties’ interests to

discontinue the process because it has failed to serve their needs in terms of reaching

agreement for fixing annual wage increases in the Catering Industry in Zimbabwe.

78

4.4: CAUSES OF WAGE NEGOTIATION DEADLOCKS

The table below provides a summary of the responses when respondents were asked to

give their personal views on what could be causing wage negotiation deadlocks.

Table 4.4 Causes of Wage Negotiation Deadlocks

Cause Rating

Good Faith 40%

Productivity 32%

Training 16%

Legal Framework 8%

Economic Fundamentals 4%

It is always a mudslinging exercise as parties accuse each other of being insensitive to the

needs of each other. The number of respondents who indicated that lack of good faith was

an issue amounted to 40%, whilst 32% indicated low productivity as a cause of wage

negotiation Another issue raised was that of untrained negotiators and the lack of

negotiation skills which had 16%, legal framework 8% and lack of appreciation of

economic fundamentals had 4%.

Gernigon et al., (2000) points out that in preparatory work for Convention No. 154, it was

recognized that collective bargaining could only function effectively if it was concluded

in good faith by both parties; but as good faith cannot be imposed by law, it could only be

achieved as a result of the voluntary and persistent efforts of both parties (ILO, 1981).

Negotiating in good faith is therefore one of the conditions for successful collective

bargaining and as such it is imperative that all parties practice it.

The situation where parties find themselves stuck with untrained negotiators who have

poor negotiation skills can be resolved during the preparation stage. This involves

composition of a negotiation team. The negotiation team should consist of representatives

of both the parties with adequate knowledge and skills for negotiation. Those lacking may

need to go for training or be omitted from the team altogether. In this phase both the

employer’s representatives and the union examine their own situation in order to develop

79

the issues that they believe will be most important. The first thing to be done is to

determine whether there is actually any reason to negotiate at all. A correct understanding

of the main issues to be covered and intimate knowledge of operations, working

conditions, production norms and other relevant conditions is required.

Silva (1996), notes that performance measures such as productivity or profit related to

performance of a group have been of less importance in determining pay increases. Hence

it is about time that parties to wage negotiation start seriously paying attention to

productivity. Companies are generally operating below their normal production capacities

due to several factors. This makes it difficult for them to then be able to generate enough

revenue to cater for the high salaries demanded by the employees.

The table 4.4 below provides a summary of the rating on factors suggested as causing

wage negotiation deadlocks by Fisher et al (1991) and Narlikar (2010).

Table 4.5 Causes of Wage Negotiation Deadlocks

 Cause Agree Disagree

Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement 76% 24%

Need to Maintain Balance of Power 76% 24%

Bluffs and Lies 44% 56%

System which Deters Agreement 52% 48%

Concern for Fairness and Justice 44% 56%

In the diagram figure 4.9 above, 76% agreed and 24% disagreed that wage negotiation

deadlocks were a result of parties having a BATNA. Another 76% agreed whilst the other

24% disagreed that wage negotiations were caused by the parties fighting over balance of

power. Further, 44% agreed whilst 56% disagreed that wage negotiations were caused by

bluffs and lies. On system peculiarities causing deadlock, 52% agreed and 48% disagreed,

whilst 44% agreed whilst 56% disagreed that concern for fairness and justice was a major

cause of deadlocks.

The diagram 4.9 provides a summary of the respondents’ rating on the factors suggested

by earlier authors.

80

Figure 4.9 Causes of Wage Negotiation Deadlocks

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

76% 76%44% 52% 44%

24% 24%56% 48% 56%

DisagreeAgree

As can be observed from the diagram above, BATNA and the need to maintain balance of

power are the most influential in causing wage negotiation deadlocks at NEC. The third

most influential factor is the system which deters agreement. Bluffs and lies as well as

concern for fairness and justice are not that very much influential. The parties i.e. CEAZ

and ZCHWU strongly believe that their BATNAs are better off than reaching an

agreement as well as maintaining their balance of power. A situation likes this as it

prevails in the Catering Industry will not likely yield agreement and deadlocks are likely

to take place every time in the foreseeable future if these are not addressed. Again as part

of the wage negotiation process put up by the government in order to allow market forces

to determine the price of labour, the wage negotiation process appears to have failed to

achieve the intended objectives.

It can be concluded that overall the respondents were in agreement with Hypothesis 1

according to Narlikar (2010). According to Fisher and Ury (1991), standard negotiation

analysis suggests that the deadlock occurs if all the parties believe their BATNA is

superior to the proposed agreement. They argue that, as such they have no incentive to

make concessions to reach an agreement. An alternative argument would be that the zone

of agreement has shrunk so much that it is better to have no agreement at all that the one

81

on the table with its limited gains and high costs. The above findings appear to conform

to the hypothesis.

As noted by Narlikar (2010), power matters crucially in the making and breaking of

deadlocks. Negotiation analysis recognizes this: for instance, it has been pointed out that

deadlocks occur if there is symmetry of power and neither party is able to impose its will

on the other (Faure, 2005; Zartman, 2002). The results of the study therefore appear to

conform to the hypothesis as both parties acknowledged the importance of power in the

negotiation process as evidenced by the 76% who were in agreement. Since the parties at

NEC Catering cannot reach agreement, the matter then has to be referred for compulsory

arbitration in order to resolve the impasse as both sides believe strongly in their positions.

Bluffing is a common place in most bargaining situations (Schelling, 1960 and Walton

and McKersie, 1965). However not all bluffs result in deadlocks. But when levels of

uncertainty and or distrust are high, deadlock can result (Narlikar, 2010). The responses

above however do not appear to sufficiently justify that bluffs and lies are an issue in the

Industry as evidenced by the 44% contribution against the 56% against.

Bazerman et al (1995), stresses that certain institutional peculiarities can make a system

more deadlocks prone.

The results of the study appear to confirm the hypothesis which says deadlocks occur

because of the long established system which deters agreement in this instance. The

parties at NEC are cognisant of the fact that should they be unable for whatever reason to

reach agreement, there is always compulsory arbitration as a last resort, may in itself deter

agreement. It may be about time that parties learn the hard way that arbitration is not the

panacea to their woes, and hence measures may need to be introduced that compel the

parties to resolve issue amicably without the intervention of a third party. According to

Narlikar (2010), in order to overcome, if the source of deadlock is a particular

institutional process, members of the organization may be able to amend it (depending on

the flexibility allowed by the institution), or at least find some wiggle-room by

establishing new norms and working practices.

Bazerman and Neale (1995), argue that fairness considerations can lead negotiators to opt

for joint outcomes that leave both parties worse off than they would have been had

fairness considerations been ignored. According to Narlikar (2010), only a limited

amount of previous research has been done to investigate the impact of fairness

considerations on negotiations especially when fairness is defined in harder terms of

82

going beyond and even against self interest of the parties. It can therefore be observed

that the hypothesis 5 does not hold true in this study as a combined total of 56% rejected

the hypothesis when they strongly disagreed as well as disagreed that deadlocks occur

because the two parties are more concerned with fairness and justice. In other words

fairness and justice are not really an issue as far as wage negotiations deadlocks are

concerned according to the results of this study.

Another area that has contributed to deadlocks has been the employers’ demands that

need to be incorporated into a wage before they can settle. These will now be discussed

below.

Table 4.5 below provides a summary of the results when respondents were asked to rate

the importance of each factor in causing wage negotiation deadlocks.

Table 4.6 Considerations for Wage Increments by Employers

Description Disagree Agree

Strategic 20% 80%Flexible 16% 84%Performance Driven 44% 56%Enhanced Earnings 56% 44%Reduce Redundancies 36% 64%Enhanced Productivity 44% 56%Attract & Retain Staff 48% 52%Control & Stabilise Costs 16% 84%

From the figure 4.13 it can be observed that 80% agreed whilst 20% disagreed that pay

systems need to be strategic, 84% agreed whilst 16% disagreed on flexibility, another

64% agreed whilst 36% disagreed with wages that reduce redundancies, another 84%

agreed and16% disagreeing on wages that control and stabilise costs.

In reality employees are particularly concerned or rather ensure that these considerations

have been factored in all wage increments before putting pen to paper. These are some of

the potential problem areas for failure by the trade unions to acknowledge these is a sure

recipe for deadlock. Whilst the employers want to ensure their agenda for a wage that is

reflective of the components mentioned above, the trade union pays little regard to these

issues in most instances. Since the two parties do not share the same views about this

delicate matter, inevitably deadlock is bound to arise.

83

In the diagram below, the respondents’ views on the above are now presented

Figure 4.10: Determinants of Wage Increases

Strate

gic

Flexib

le

Perform

ance

Driven

Enhan

ced Ea

rnings

Reduce

Redundan

cies

Enhan

ced Pro

ductivit

y

Attract &

Retain St

aff

Control &

Stab

ilise C

osts0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

20% 16%

44%

56%

36%44% 48%

16%

80% 84%

56%

44%

64%56% 52%

84%

DisagreeAgree

As can be observed the respondents ranked the need to have wages: that are sstrategic, in

the sense that they achieve strategic objectives, flexible in the sense that their variable

component can absorb downturns in business and reduce labour costs, capable of

reducing the incidence of redundancies during times of recession or poor enterprise

performance through the flexible component of pay and able overall to control or stabilize

labour costs as the top most four considerations.

Although wage rates negotiated through collective bargaining do reflect wage

differentials based on skills, such differentials have not been geared to the encouragement

of skills acquisition and application. As observed by Silva (1996) the major concern for

employers therefore is the need to negotiate wages and wage increments which reflective

of these seven elements above.

4.5 ALTERNATIVES TO NEC WAGE NEGOTIATIONS

As an alternative to the NEC national wage negotiation process, 40% of the respondents

indicated that the other alternative would be to agree on wage increases at business or

company level, another 40% indicated that wages should be based on productivity and

84

performance of the organization as a whole whilst 20% indicated that government should

reintroduce announcing the minimum wage levels yearly like in the past.

Whilst advocating for negotiations at plant level instead of at national level it does not

remove the likelihood that deadlocks may still be encountered. However the thinking

behind moving away from the national level to the business unit is that it appears more

realistic as parties have first hand information on the organisation’s performance and

ability to pay. It therefore means that partly are unlikely to ask for unreasonable wages

since they are privy to the operations of the entity. This removes the need to take

everyone on board used in the blanket approach by the negotiations that take place at

national level. Some institutions are unable to meet the salary demands negotiated at NEC

as they in most instances do not consider their individual situations.

The only feasible way out appears to be negotiation of salaries that take care of the

organization’s ability to pay through performance and productivity. When an organization

registers profits, it is only fair that they also be shared with the workers who would have

produced. In other countries and organizations, employees have a fixed salary and a paid

and incentive performance bonus for their contribution on helping the organization

achieve its targets. The company will then fix production targets that are agreed upon by

the employees and once those have been met the employees will be paid an agreed

percentage for achieving the target and another percentage for everything above the

target. A few organizations in Zimbabwe have adopted this approach and one such

example is Innscor Africa which operates a number of fast food outlets throughout the

country. Silva (1996), notes that the movement toward decentralization of collective

bargaining has been the result of the need to address efficiency and performance issues at

enterprise level. Increased earnings were secured and performance rewarded partly

through promotions.

Other respondents also felt maybe it was about time that the government re-introduced

the announcement of minimum wages like they used to in the past. This has advantages

and disadvantages but may not be the best way forward as it tends to ignore market

forces. The system may be prone to populist ideologies and ignore productivity. In the

next discussion focus shall be paid to what has been suggested by other authors on

resolving the wages impasse.

85

In the table below, respondents were asked whether collective wage negotiations was the

only way of fixing wages in industry and this was their response below.

Table 4.7 Alternatives to NEC Wage Negotiations

Disagree 56%

Agree 44%

Figure 4.14 shows the diagrammatic presentation of the table above

Figure 4.11: Alternatives to Collective Wage Negotiation

56%

44%

DisagreeAgree

In figure 4.14 above, 56 % disagreed whilst 44% agreed that the only feasible way to fix

wages remained as the collective wage negotiations.

It can be noted that on the overall, the majority recognises that annual wage negotiations

is not the only way of fixing wages in industry. There are other ways available by which

wages in organizations can be determined. These initiatives have mainly been from the

organization. As already noted by Silva (1996), traditionally wages and pay have been

determined through government regulation, minimum wage determination, negotiation

with unions, decisions of arbitration or labour courts and the individual contract of

employment. The factors which have influenced wages and wage increases include profit

(generally unrelated to individual or group performance), job evaluation, seniority, cost of

86

living, manpower shortage or surplus, negotiating strength of the parties and skills. Silva

(1996), notes that performance measures such as productivity or profit related to

performance of a group have been of less importance in determining pay increases.

Though skills have been reflected in pay differentials, pay systems have been seldom

geared to the encouragement of skills acquisition and application.

In the table 4.7 below respondents were asked whether performance and skill based pay

were becoming relevant and this was their response.

Table 4.8 Performance and Skill based Pay

Disagree 42%Agree 58%

Figure 4.15 below depicts the results of the respondents in a diagram form.

Figure 4.12: Performance and Skill based pay

Disagree Agree0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

42%

58%

In the discussion above, the researcher sought to establish first whether the respondents

understood that the NEC Wage negotiation process was not the only way of fixing wages

in Industry. In figure 4.14 the respondents indicated that they were aware that there were

other ways to fix wages. Their responses are corroborated in 4.5 above when they gave

their personal opinions. In figure 4.15 the suggested ways are performance and skill based

pay.

87

4.6 IMPROVING THE WAGE NEGOTIATION PROCESS

When asked how the negotiation process can be improved, 62% indicated that

negotiations should be based around productivity, 28% indicated that good faith needed

to be upheld whilst the remaining 10% indicated the need to train negotiators.

The ability of organizations to pay demanded wages levels based on productivity and

business performance cannot be over-emphasized. For an organization to pay certain

wage levels it has to be productive and profitable. The majority of the respondents views

therefore are that negotiations should incorporate issues of productivity is agreement is to

be struck quickly as it is central to the issue of wage negotiations.

Whilst parties to the negotiation process are required to negotiate in good faith,

unfortunately this cannot be imposed or forced upon someone. Parties felt that in order

for the wage negotiations to be successful there was need to negotiate in good faith.

It was also felt that maybe there was need for competent trained negotiator is the process

is to succeed. Indeed it is true to have negotiators who are trained and competent and are

able to handle and analyse issues with a clear mind. It does not help anyone to rely on

untrained vociferous negotiators as their value addition is zero. In order to forge ahead it

is important to prepare and plan.

Some of the suggested ways of improving negotiations are discussed below. In table

below respondents were asked their opinions on whether these four suggested ways can

indeed help improve the negotiation process and this was their response.

Table 4.9 Improving Negotiation Process

  Disagree Agree

Separate People from Problem 48% 52%

Focus on Interests not Positions 22% 78%

Generate Several Options 16% 84%

Results based on Objectivity 12% 88%

When asked whether these four suggested ways could improve the wage negotiation

process, the respondents indicated as shown below in the diagram 4.16 in terms of

ranking from lowest to highest.

88

Figure 4.13: Improving the Negotiation Process

0%20%40%60%80% 48%

22% 16% 12%

52%

78% 84% 88%

DisagreeAgree

In the diagram above figure 4.16, 48% disagreed whilst 52% agreed that separating the

people from the problem can improve the negotiation process, another 22% disagreed

whilst 78% agreed that focusing on interests and not positions was important, further 16%

disagreed whilst 84% agreed that generating options played a part and lastly 12%

disagreed whilst 88% agreed that results based on objectivity is crucial to shaping

negotiations.

It can therefore be observed that the respondents valued results based on objectivity more

than anything else. Generation of several options before settling on a decision was second

highest followed by focussing on interests and not positions. The least though it still had

the majority of the votes was separating people from the problem. It can therefore be

noted that the results appear to conform to what other studies have observed before on

improving wage negotiations.

As observed in literature, Fisher et al (1991) noted that parties in a dispute often forget

that the other side consists of people who, just like themselves, are subject to human

frailties such as emotions, potentials for misunderstandings and mistaken assumptions.

They go on to say that a common failing when there is a difference of opinion or goals is

to attack the opposing person while attacking the opposing position, especially if the

attack is demeaning. It will unfairly have negative outcomes in both decisions making and

bargaining. Experienced negotiators separate the people from the problem. In this study

however the opinion did not quite get the majority vote though signaling that participants

89

have different views. An appreciation of the above will greatly improve negotiations and

lead parties on to an agreement path and avoid deadlocks.

As far as interests are concerned, according to Fisher at al., (1991) and Lens (2004) the

most important step is to identify the interests involved in an issue as opposed to dealing

with positions of the negotiating parties. They argue that if a positive relationship can be

established with the other negotiators, then the only remaining ingredient for principled

negotiation is finding shared interests that can serve as the common ground for generating

creative options. In this integrative approach parties are likely to struck agreement

quicker.

Afredson et al (2010) points out that in negotiations, options are possible solutions to a

problem shared by two or more parties. In integrative bargaining, options represent

possible ways of meeting as many of both parties’ interests as possible. When using the

principled negotiation options for action can often be the hardest to get partners to

participate in.

Positional bargaining is bargaining in which two sides lock into compatible positions.

According to Fisher et al., (1991), this can lead to a contest of wills, bitterness and

deadlock. When negotiations are approached in this way, even when a deal is made, it

may come at high cost. They however argue that there is a better way to approach the

negotiation process. This involves invoking objective criteria as part of the negotiation

process. It is easier to reach agreement when objectivity is a component of the whole

negotiation process.

4.8 CHAPTER SUMMARY

In this chapter, the researcher presented and discussed the research findings. This was

done in relation to the objectives of the study. Generally speaking, the parties to the

negotiation wage process at NEC are dissatisfied with the wage negotiation process

because of its many inadequacies and short comings. The major causes of wage

negotiation deadlock were found to be the need to maintain a balance of power from each

side as well as presence of a BATNA. On the other hand generation of several options

before settling and results based on objectivity were found to be the major ways of

improving wage negotiations. The following chapter has a more comprehensive

discussion on the conclusions and recommendations of the study.

90

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.0 INTRODUCTION

In the previous chapter data was presented and analysed in terms of the patterns

emerging. This chapter now presents the conclusions and recommendations from the

study conducted.

The government left wage negotiations and specifically collective bargaining on wages

for industries with employment councils to conclude wage negotiations on their own. In

Zimbabwe wage negotiations are therefore loosely referred to as collective bargaining.

The failure to conclude wage negotiations in time resulting in the matter being referred

for arbitration has not helped the employee-management relations at the workplace. The

study sought to investigate the causes of annual wage negotiation deadlocks and how the

process can be improved so that parties reach agreement at NEC.

The major finding of the study was that wage negotiation deadlocks occur because of lack

of good faith on the part of the negotiators. Both CEAZ and ZCHWU are engaging each

other just to fulfil the legal provisions of the wage negotiation process but they are not

fully committed to the process.

5.1 CONCLUSIONS

Neither party (i.e. CEAZ and ZCHWU) are satisfied with the wage negotiation

process.

Negotiations have failed to reach agreement as a result of parties negotiating in

bad faith

The negotiators fail to reach agreement because of their belief in a Best

Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement

Administrative authorities have been lacking in support towards the wage

negotiation process.

91

Negotiators are lacking in competency and therefore require training.

The failure to reach agreement in time during wage negotiations has a negative

bearing employees morale and service delivery

5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended that the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare invite

submission from the various NECs on how the current legal framework on wage

negotiations can be improved so that it is tabled before parliament for

consideration.

It is recommended that the Ministry of Labour considers the introduction of a

detailed Certificate/Diploma programme on Negotiations in conjunction with an

institution of Higher learning in order to address the negotiation process

The NECs must address the issue of negotiating in bad faith by its members

through imposition of deterrent penalties on parties for no-disclosure of material

facts during negotiations.

It is further recommended that NECs ensure that all negotiators are competent by

initiating a negotiation course that incorporates the areas covered by wage

negotiations and only those with valid certificates are allowed to sit for wage

negotiations.

5.3 AREAS OF FURTHER STUDY

The researcher proposes that further studies be carried out into why there is lack of good

faith amongst negotiators.

92

REFERENCES

Babineaux M.F (2004), Negotiating after Deadlock: Moving from Confrontation to

Collaboration, Even after They’ve Said NO! 89th Annual International Supply Chain

Management Conference, April 2004

Bazerman Max, H and Margaret A Neale (1997), Negotiating Rationally, First Free

Press Paperback Edition, Library of Congress Cataloguing-in-Publication Data, USA

Bless C. and Higson-Smith, C. (1995) Fundamentals of Social Research Methods,

Lansdowne, Juta Education.

Bloom D.E (1988), Arbitrator Behaviour in Public Sector Wage Disputes, When Public

Sector Workers Unionize, University of Chicago Press (pages 107-128)

Booysen L (2009), Guidelines for the MBL 3 Research Report: 2009, Graduate School of

Business Leadership, UNISA

Bryman N. (1988) Using Data/Getting Results, Northwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon

Publishers

Bulmer D. A (1986) Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York,

John Wiley & Sons.

De Vaus T. (1990) Applied Business Statistics, Juta and Co. Ltd

Encyclopaedia of Business, 2nd Edition

Faraque A (2009), Current Status and Evolution of Industrial Relations System in

Bangladesh, International Labour Organizations Publications

Ferber R. (1974) Handbook of Marketing Research, New York: McGraw-Hill

Ferber S. B (1974) Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education, San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fisher and Ury (1983), Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In, New

York, Penguin Books

Fowler, F. F. (1984) Survey Research Methods. Beverly Hills: Sage

Fraenkel, J. R. and Wallen, N.E. (1996) How to design and evaluate research in

education. 3rd Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill

Gennard J and Graham G (2005), Employee Relations, 4th Edition, Chartered Institute

of Personnel Development (pages 216 – 230)

Gennard J and Judge G (1999), People and Organizations, Employee Relations, 2nd

Edition, Chartered Institute of personnel Development, (pages 32-39)

Glen H Synder and Paul Diesing (1985), Conflict Among Nations, Princeton University

93

Judd K, Smith E and Kidder P (2001) How to Conduct a Survey, Statistics Department,

University of Zimbabwe, Harare.

Labour Act, Chapter 28.01

Labovitz D. J. and Hagedorn R. S. (1976) Marketing Research 7th ed., New Jersey:

Prentice-Hall

Leedy P. D (1997) Practical Research: Planning and Design, New Jersey, Prentice Hall

Lewis P, Thornhill A and Saunders (2003), Employee Relations: Understanding the

Employment Relationship, Prentice Hall Financial Times Pearson Education (pages 212-

220)

Marsh, G. T. (1992) Practical Sampling. In: Applied Social Research Methods Series.

Vol.21, Newbury Park. CA: Sage

Narlikar A (2010), Deadlocks in Multi-lateral Negotiations: Causes and Solutions,

Cambridge University Press

Raiffa Howard (1982), The Art and Science of Negotiation, How To Resolve Conflicts

and Get The Best Out Of Bargaining

Random House Dictionary 1993

Saunders M, Lewis P. and Thornhill A. (1997) Research Methods for Business

Students, London, Pitman.

Sparrow P.R and Cooper C.L (2003), The Employment Relationship, Key Challenges

for Human Resources, Butterworth Heinemann

Statutory Instrument 167 of 1991

Towers B (2003), The Handbook of Employment Relations, Law and Practice, 4th

Edition, Kogan Page, London

William Ury (1993), Getting Past NO, Negotiating in Difficult Situations, Library of

Congress Catalogue, USA & Canada

Zartman Ira William (1999), International Multilateral Negotiations, Approaches to the

Managment Complexity, John Hopkins University

Zikmund W. G (1997) Exploring Market Research, Fort Worth, Texas, The Dryden

Press

Alfredson T, and Cungu A (2008), Negotiation Theory and Practice, A Review of the

Literature, FAO learning Programme, Conceptual and Technical Material, EasyPol

Module 179 (pages 1-32)

94

Dean H. (2012), Supplement to Labour Relations Information Service, Paper No. 1

Frey A.H (1947), The Logic of Collective Bargaining and Arbitration. Law and

Contemporary Problems, Volume12, No.2, Labour Dispute Settlement, Duke University

of Law

Gernigon B, Odero A, and Guido H (2000), ILO Principles Concerning Collective

Bargaining, International Labour Review, Volume 139, No. 1(pages 33-54)

Kersten G.E, Michalowski W, Szpakowicz and Koperczak (1991), Restructurable

Representations of Negotiations, Institute of Operations Management Science, Volume

37, No 10, (pages 1269- 1290)

Khabo F.M (2008), Collective Bargaining and Labour Disputes Resolution: is SADC

Meeting the Challenge, Issue Paper No. 30, (pages 1- 31)

Makings G (2012), Update on Collective Bargaining and Wage Awards, George

Makings Annual Labour Briefing April 2012

McPhie Neil A.G, Barbara J Spain, Steve Nelson ,John Crum, Cynthia H.

Ferentinos and James J Tsugawa (2006), Designing An Effective Pay For Performance

Compensations System, A Report to the President and the Congress of the United States

by the US Merit Systems Protection Board, Washington DC

Muthoo A (2000), A Non-technical Introduction to Bargaining Theory, World

Economics Volume 1, No. 2 (pages 145-166)

Nguwi Memory (2011), Are Zimbabwean Employees Underpaid? An Analysis of Salary

Trends, Industrial Psychology Consultants

Okene O.V.C (2004), Collective Bargaining, Strikes and the Quest for Industrial Peace in

Nigeria, University of Essex

Rehman S (2003), Collective Bargaining and Wage Determination in Pakistan,

University of Karachi

Silva S (1996), Collective Bargaining Negotiations, International Labour Organization

ACT/EMP Publications, Bureau for Employers’ Activities (pages 1- 16)

Silver S (2004), An Introduction to Performance and Skill-based pay Systems,

International Labour Organization ACT/ EMP Publications, Bureau for Employer’s

Activities

Stevens C (1958), On the theory of Negotiation, The Quarterly Journal of Economics,

Volume 72, No.1 pages (77-97)

95

http://www.au.af.mil.au.awc

http://www.cmalearning.com

http://www.dol.govt.nz/publications/research/contemporary-mediation-practice/page-

07.asp

http://www.emeraldinsight.com

http://www.epress.anu.edu.au

http://www.ffw.org.ph/TRAINING

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.mediate.com/articles/grant/sftm

http://www.negotiation.atwork.network.com

http://www.paralegaladvice.org.za

http://www.referenceforbusiness.com

http://www.wikipedia.org

96

APPENDICES

INTRODUCTORY LETTER

…………………………………..

…………………………………..

………………………………….

………………………………….

20 April 2012

National Employment Council

Catering Industry

Harare

Dear Sir/Madam

RE: QUESTIONNAIRE COMPLETION ON CAUSES OF WAGE NEGOTIATION

DEADLOCKS

My name is Mandioma Edmond and I kindly ask for your assistance in the completion of my

questionnaire. I am a Chinhoyi University of Technology (C.U.T) student. As part of the

requirements of the institution for the completion of the Master of Science in Strategic

Management program, I am carrying out a research entitled; An investigation into the causes of

Annual Wage Negotiation Deadlock: The Case of NEC Catering. It is against this background

that I kindly seek your opinions by completing the attached questionnaire.

Please feel free to say out your honest opinion and I assure you that all the information you

provide will be treated in strict confidence. For any clarifications, please contact me on the details

provided above.

Yours sincerely

Mandioma Edmond T

C.U.T STUDENT

97

INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING QUESTIONNAIRE1. Please kindly respond to all Questions2. Indicate your response by ticking in the box where applicable3. There is no right or wrong answer hence tick the response that is closest to your opinion4. All your responses will be treated with strict confidentiality and the study will be used for academic purposes onlyKEY

Agree - ADisagree -D

SECTION A- DEMOGRAPHYFemale Male

1. Please indicate your gender

< 30yrs 31 - 35yrs 36-40yrs41-45yrs > 46yrs

2. Indicate age group to which you belong. O & A Level Certificate Diploma Degree Masters

3. Please indicate your highest level of

education 0-12 months 1-5 yrs 6-10 yrs11-15 yrs < 15yrs

4. How long have you worked for your current Organization. NEC ZCHWU CEAZ5. Please indicate the organization which you are affiliated to during wage negotiations.

SECTION B- WAGE NEGOTIATION PROCESS6. Please briefly explain your understanding of the wage negotiation process as conducted at NEC.________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________7. How would you rate the success of the annual wage negotiation princess since Good Poor 2007 to date? 8. In your opinion, in the event of deadlocks the arbitration process has been very A Deffective 9. The current wage negotiation process should be continued in the way it has operated.

SECTION C- CAUSES OF WAGE NEGOTIATION DEADLOCKS10. In your opinion what are the causes of the annual wage negotiation deadlocks at NEC Catering?________________________________________________________________________________________________

98

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________11.In your opinion wage negotiation deadlocks occur because the parties A Dbelieve their alternative to agreement is superior to the deal on offer

12. The wage negotiation deadlocks occur the two parties want to maintain A SAbalance of power on their side.

13. Wage negotiation deadlocks occur because negotiators pretend and deceive A SAeach other. 14. Wage negotiation deadlocks occur because of the long established whichdeters agreement

15.Wage negotiation deadlocks occur because the two parties are more concerned with fairness and justice

16. A major concern for employers is the need to negotiate wage increases which are:a). Strategic in the sense that they achieve strategic goal of the Organization

b). Flexible in that their variable component can absorb dowturns in business and reduce labour costs

c). Oriented towards better performance in terms of productivity, quality and efficienyd). Capable of enhancing the earnings of employees through improved performance

e). Capable of reducing the incidents of redundancies during times of recession or poor enterprise performance

f). Able to reward good performance without increasing labour costs as part of the total costs through enhanced productivity

g). Able to attract and retain competent staff h). Able to control or stabilise labour costs.

SECTION D - ALTERNATIVES TO WAGE NEGOTIATION17. In your opinion, what are the other ways of determining wages without resorting to annual collectivewage negotiations that currently take place at NEC?_________________________________________________

99

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________18. Collective wage negotiations remain the only feasible way of fixing wages A D

19. Performance and skill based pay are soon becoming the new way of fixingwages. 20. In your opinion how can the annual wage negotiation process be improved to avoid arbitration?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________21. The wage negotiation process can be improved by: A Da). separating people from the problem. b). focussing on interests and not positions c). generating several options before settling on a decision d). Insisting that results be based on objective criteria

100

INTERVIEW GUIDE

1. History of Wage Negotiations and Government their role?

2. What had been the challenges faced by government in announcing wages?

3. When and why was Industrial Collective Bargaining introduced?

4. What have been the challenges facing NEC Catering regarding wage negotiations?

5. In your opinion what would you say have been the successes registered by the Collective wage negotiations at NEC Catering?

6. What has been the major causes of wage negotiations deadlocks in the Industry?

7. How can wage negotiation deadlocks be overcome at NEC catering?

8. What would be your overall assessment of the wage negotiations to dates?

101