Often, conflicts result from group activities and meetings. Simple disagreements can escalate into major problems. Sometimes disagreements and problems from prior meetings are continued into the current meeting. Other times, dominant members may shut down and frustrate those who are more quiet and reserved. The following tools can be helpful in addressing/managing conflict.
A check-in at the beginning of the meeting will give members the opportunity to describe behaviors before they are acted. If someone is ill or distracted for some reason, that can be identified at the beginning. If there are time constraints, the member who is impacted can identify those time issues. Identifying who is missing and why can eliminate needless rumors. Giving people the opportunity to talk about controversial issues or “elephants” can help clear the air. This is the opportunity to identify situations that could affect the functioning of the group. Identifying expectations for the meeting can help provide direction to the group. Once again, the check-in gives group members the opportunity to raise issues that could impact group effectiveness.
The check-out, which would occur at the end of the meeting, gives members the opportunity to comment on the meeting. An effective check-out is to use an SII approach. Briefly identify strengths of performance in the meeting and why the strengths were important to the success of the group (e.g., when we all listened more effectively, we were able to completely address the topic). The I represents improvement. This gives members an opportunity to comment constructively about ways in which the meeting could be improved in the future (e.g., if we followed the agenda more completely, we would be more effective). The second "I" represents insight. Members can identify a new or significant discovery/understanding/observation gained concerning the group process (e.g., when side conversations stopped and we truly focused on the issue, we were ale to develop a creative and effective solution. All input was crucial.). Once again, an effective check-out would give individuals an opportunity to comment about group effectiveness.
The next tool that can be very helpful for effective group work is team roles. A part of group effectiveness involves assuming responsibility for the groups effort which includes self-monitoring and self-assessment. Using team roles can help group improve effectiveness and monitor performance. Roles that are important include: captain/facilitator, reflector and recorder.
The captain/facilitator is responsible to ensure that the process is enjoyable and rewarding for team members. The captain/facilitator makes sure that each member has the opportunity to contribute. This role also manages time, stress and conflict. The captain/facilitator controls the process and keeps members focused.
Another important role is that of reflector. A reflector provides a 30-second report when called upon. The report is based on the individual’s observations regarding performance interactions and the dynamics within the group. The reflector makes observations about the process and suggestions and suggests strategies for change. A reflector’s report may contain a strength, an opportunity for improvement and an insight (SII).
Another important role is recorder. The recorder tracks group progress and identifies who is responsible for what tasks. The recorder’s notes need to be complete and accessible for future meetings.
Rotating these roles among all members can be very helpful for the group. The effective use of these roles can dramatically increase group effectiveness.
Often group problems develop when communication is not clear. Listening to one another is obviously crucial. One problem with listening is that the attention spans for most individuals are relatively short. Also, the brain can process many more words than are actually spoken. The temptation to “tune in” and “tune out” is ever present.
Paraphrasing or rephrasing can be a very effective tool to insure that understanding occurs. It helps individuals clarify what is intended. Paraphrasing can also promote active listening as individuals need to stay alert in order to accurately paraphrase.
Misunderstandings can be clarified immediately by using paraphrasing tools. Simple statement may include:
What I hear you saying is ____________?
Are you saying ____________?
A paraphrase could also be a simple statement of the speakers thoughts in your words. A paraphrase could take the form of a summary statement that captures the essence of a longer statement. Paraphrasing communicates to the other party that you were listening and that you are understanding or attempting to understand.
Constructive feedback is another tool that can be used effectively to reduce group conflict. Rather than confronting the individual, the recipient could identify the personal impact of a statement or situation. An example of this would be:
When you criticize me in public, I feel embarrassed.
As a result, I lose the respect of my co-workers.
I would like for us to talk about your concerns in private.
Would you agree to meet in private when you have concerns about my performance?
What do you think?
Identifying how you feel about the interaction is difficult to dispute. Suggesting an alternative plan of action can be very positive. A constructive feedback response can be very helpful in reducing conflict.
These tools can be applied in any group setting. While the tools do not guarantee success, effective use can dramatically improve communication and understanding which generally leads to increased effectiveness.
Back to top ↑
Labor management collaboration strategies have been instrumental in improving productivity and quality in a number of other organizations. One county nursing home was experiencing a large number of absenteeism and sick leave abuse problems. This increased overtime costs and necessitated employees working in “short-staffed” situations. Interestingly, labor representatives initially raised this issue. The Union identified that sick leave abuse was posing a tremendous problem for the conscientious employees. While some overtime was appreciated, the excessive amount had become a burden. The Union was concerned about providing due process for potential offenders. The union was also concerned that the conscientious employee was not disadvantaged.
The parties worked together to analyze the problem. It was clear that absence rates were higher among new employees than the seasoned veterans. It was also clear that many of the new employees were working the third shift and weekends. Working together, the parties improved the new employee orientation process stressing the need for regular attendance. Further, a new employee mentoring program was put in place. In this program, veterans were matched with new employees so that the newcomer had a ready contact in the event problems developed. The parties believed that this positive peer influence would be helpful in a number of areas, in addition to attendance.
A point system program for absences was developed on a trial basis. Not unlike other point based systems, absences resulted in the accumulation of points. At specific levels, warnings and other discipline occurred. The union and management were able to build in safeguards that helped protect employees who were experiencing “legitimate” problems that caused absences. Economic incentives for good attendance were also introduced. Union and management felt that it was important to meaningfully recognize good attendance. The effectiveness of this absence reduction program was due in large part to the cooperative approach utilized by labor and management. Labor and management representatives jointly implemented the program, trained employees and took a united position against absenteeism while protecting individuals with legitimate attendance issues.
In another instance, the Sanitation Department of a large municipality was heavily criticized because of rising costs. In a response to the criticism, management began exploring private contracting alternatives. Management had retained the right to subcontract this work and it appeared to many that this might be the only way to meaningfully reduce costs while maintaining service. Prior to implementing a contracting alternative, labor and management met to discuss the problem. It became apparent that the higher costs were directly related to the use of 3 or 4 employees per truck.
On a trial basis, the parties agreed to automate aspects of the process. One area of the city eliminated the use of garbage cans and substituted carts. The wheeled carts were able to be positioned and dumped through an automated lifting process. With this new equipment, the size of the crews was dramatically reduced to one or two employees per truck. While there was some initial equipment expense, it soon proved to be a money-saving venture. In addition to the staff reductions, injuries were greatly reduced.
Management had agreed at the onset of the cart program that current employees would not be laid off if it proved successful. The commitment to adjust staff based on attrition was necessary to gain membership support. After the initial success of the program, it spread to other areas of the city until it was fully implemented. Employees liked the new aspects of the job including the reduced physical burden and fewer injuries. While union membership was reduced, it occurred through attrition leaving a secure group of employees. The alternative would have been to negotiate severance and layoff benefits prior to the elimination of all positions. This agreement to modify the process worked to the benefit of everyone involved including the taxpayers.
The Department of Public Works in another municipality was attempting to deal with aging equipment. Following a traditional approach, management recommended that a new chipper be purchased as part of the budget process. Management representatives explained during the budget process that the current chipper was not doing an adequate job of shredding brush and tree limbs. Because of this, the efficiency of crews was greatly reduced. While a good case was made for the new chipper, the common council rejected this request.
The department supervisors and employees felt very strongly about this matter and decided to work cooperatively in an effort to reach their goal. Labor and management researched chipper alternatives, evaluated efficiency and analyzed accident reports. In order to better make these points to the common council, they jointly produced a video that showed the operation of the existing chipper. The video showed how material frequently jammed and often discharged pieces striking employees. The parties demonstrated the suggested replacement. The video showed the dramatic increase in productivity and safety. While the employees jokingly said that they would miss the opportunity to dodge rejected chunks of wood, they thought they would be able to adjust.
After reviewing this joint presentation, the council overwhelmingly endorsed the purchase of the new chipper. In addition to having a safer and more efficient piece of equipment, labor and management were able to experience tangible benefits that working together provided. Both the supervisors and employees were pleased that the common council valued their opinions and insights. This project provided a basis for continued cooperative ventures.
The Building Inspection Department of a large municipality began a labor management collaboration effort as a result of suggestions provided by employees. It was felt that there were numerous areas in which labor and management could cooperate for the benefit of all. Code enforcement had been an area of frustration for both labor and management. By working together, a process was created that helped deal with the volume of code complaints. A new system was created in which property owners received advisory notices rather than work orders. The department found that almost 50% of the issues were resolved without the need of issuing work orders. Inspectors were only sent to sites if there was no compliance after the advisory notice. This had a positive impact on the workload of the building inspectors by focusing their efforts on the more difficult code compliance issues.
A water utility expanded the preventative maintenance (PM) program as a result of labor management collaboration. The limited PM program initiated by management had been very helpful. At the urging of the department labor/management committee, the PM program was expanded into many additional areas. This resulted in larger savings, fewer equipment breakdowns and less process interruption. One of the many changes included the movement of a valve controller. After reviewing various operational records, the joint committee became aware that the controller was located in a confined space, which was difficult to reach and created safety hazards. Also, after studying maintenance logs, it became apparent to the joint committee that when flooding occurred, the controller would need to be replaced. After reviewing this situation, it became obvious to all that relocating the controller would increase reliability, effectiveness and the safety of employees required to perform the work.
LMC strategies can be very helpful in addressing a variety of workplace problems.
One school district used a collaborative approach to resolve budget problems at one of the middle schools. This particular school district had been using collaborative strategies to negotiate labor contracts for a number of years. A middle school assistant principal, who had been a member of the bargaining team, saw great value in using this process to address issues at the school level. His principal and building teacher association leadership were also supportive. Training was provided to the school staff and several students during one of the district inservice days.
Because of significant financial difficulties, budget reductions needed to occur throughout the district, including the middle schools. Middle school teacher association leaders and management wanted to work together to best meet the needs of the school. They concluded that, while this was an unpleasant matter, they knew the situation better than others. Working together, they made the necessary reductions while causing the “least amount of damage”. While the financial dilemma was very troublesome, all parties felt that with the input of the school staff they had done the best job possible. The openness, candor and commitment exhibited during the process had positive impacts on staff morale during this difficult time. It should be noted that the district’s other middle school took a traditional approach to the financial problem with management making the budget reduction decisions independently. The teachers and staff chose not to participate in the process. Predictably animosities developed, decisions were undermined and students suffered.
Earlier when discussing improved productivity and quality, the nursing home joint labor management absence reduction program was mentioned. As part of this effort, research related to absences was conducted. The group concluded that the attendance problem significantly increased during third shift and weekends. While working to improve efficiency through improved attendance, it became evident that another problem existed. A peripheral benefit of the absence reduction program effort was the realization that alternative scheduling needed to be considered. The labor management group explored some creative scheduling alternative.
It was believed that some individuals in the community might wish to work in a part-time capacity over the weekends or in the evenings. Part-time positions were created for third shift work. Also, some part-time positions were created for Fridays and Saturdays. Union and management representatives participated in job fairs and open houses to recruit members of the community into these new part-time opportunities. The parties found that there were a number of families in the area that wanted to supplement incomes on a part-time basis. Teams of union and management provided training to these new part-time individuals, as well as, continuing the joint new employee orientation. This utilization of part-time employees helped reduce full-time employee turnover, provided improved services and reduced the burden on conscientious employees who previously had been asked to work excessive amounts of overtime and in short-staffed situations.
Another labor management group dealt with a workplace problem related to hours of work. A number of employees had been experiencing childcare and other scheduling problems. The normal hours of the department had been from 8:00 - 4:30 p.m. The labor management committee had concluded that some changes could occur that would benefit both labor and management. On a trial basis the committee experimented with variable start times. In this experiment, employees could start an 8 hour shift between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9 a.m. This flexibility proved very helpful for individuals who had child care, educational or other scheduling needs. Management found that by implementing this variable start time, the hours of the office were extended by 2 hours each day which provided greater access to taxpayers. After the initial success of this scheduling change, the parties explored job-sharing arrangements for some of the positions. The job sharing arrangement provided various flexibilities for management and employees alike.
Some labor management committees have utilized interest based strategies to resolve various types of workplace conflicts. Assisting parties in disputes to clarify interests helps remove some of the emotion from the situation. Having an agreed upon step-by-step process also adds order to potentially volatile situations. If problems develop, parties can refocus on the particular step of the process during which difficulties arose. Often parties to a dispute are uncertain about how the problems developed or what they truly want to happen. This step-by-step interest based process helps provide order, work environment predictability and quality solutions to difficult problems.
In addition to improving productivity and addressing workplace problems, effective LMC efforts can help improve the overall work environment. Applying these principles can be very helpful in job redesign matters. A city sanitation department example greatly reduced the stress and strain associated with refuse collection. Injuries were greatly reduced. A Public Works Department DPW road-patching job was made easier and more effective by redesigning the way in which employees obtained hot patch materials. Instead of reaching into the back of a truck with a shovel, a tray positioned at knee level was added to the trucks. Productivity increased and injuries decreased. While this positive change may have seemed obvious after it was implemented, it only came about as a result of an effective labor management collaboration effort.
Many labor management collaboration efforts have been instrumental in improving safety of the workplace. After all, the employees who are actually performing jobs on a day-to-day basis know them best. This wealth of information can be tapped to make important improvements. Improved lighting, changing work design, ensuring that safety equipment is used, are ways in which committees can contribute to an improved work environment.
While improving productivity, addressing workplace problems and improving the work environment are important, the process involved in doing these things also leads to increased employee morale. Morale improves when employees feel valued. Morale improves when individuals can see that their input is received and implemented. Effective teamwork and collaboration improves morale. Working in a positive, productive and meaningful environment helps everyone.
A chapter of the National Electrical Contractors Association (NECA) and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) applied interest based strategies in several ways. Both groups were very concerned about losing market share. Numbers of non-union electrical contractors were surfacing and taking work that previously had been performed by union contractors and IBEW members. The groups had concern that if this loss of market share continued, it could lead to layoffs and undermine the economic viability of area union contractors.
The relationship between union contractors and the IBEW had been problematic at times. Non-union contractors advertised that customers did not need to deal with labor disruptions and expensive labor contract provisions. The NECA and IBEW chapters concluded that it was very important to change their relationship, improve overall effectiveness and increase productivity. The parties participated in interest based training with the idea that it could be applied in many situations. They began a series of meetings that were entitled “Mutual Gains Meetings”. Specific objectives of their initiatives included increasing market share, providing employment security, increasing profitability and increasing wages. While there was significant skepticism on the part of both groups, the groups agreed to meet on a regular basis to address these objectives. The parties brainstormed a list of industry problems. Using a consensus approach, the group decided to address field productivity problems first. By applying the interest based process, several approaches were developed. The efforts of the group resulted in revised and improved foreman training which helped in job pre-planning and estimating. Other productivity-based areas were added to the foreman curriculum. The revised and improved foreman training programs helped increased field productivity.
As progress occurred with mutual gains meetings, the parties planned a joint advertising campaign. Working together, ads were created that emphasized the benefit of using union contractors and union labor. The ads emphasized the value and quality of union apprenticeships and foreman training. A newsletter was created to inform contractors and electricians about the activities of the mutual gains meetings. Over the course of two years, progress was noted through increased work going to union contractors. Also, a number of non-union firms became union contractors with electricians joining the IBEW.
The increased work and market share success gave rise to the next issue to be addressed which was a manpower shortage. The parties also applied interest based strategies to address this issue.
The parties later decided to use the interest based process to negotiate a soon to expire contract. Through hard work and diligence, the parties were able to reach a voluntary agreement without using the national dispute resolution process which had been relied upon for many prior contracts. The groundwork and relationship building that occurred during the mutual gains meetings were instrumental in reaching the negotiated agreement. The contract was approved overwhelmingly by NECA members and the IBEW electricians.
Has the relationship been without problems? No. Have the parties been able to rise above those problems by using an interest based approach. The answer is an overwhelming “yes”.
Back to top ↑
In order to begin an LMC process, it is important to discuss the concept with your counterpart. It would be important to answer some of the following questions: What objectives would we have? What areas of the organization might be most receptive? What support do we need from members, supervisors, elected officials, etc?
It is important to begin with small steps. Possibly, apply the approach to your next grievance. Possibly, suggest that a small union management committee be formed to address safety issues. Possibly, agree to use this approach during your next round of negotiations. The important thing is to practice the process and build on the successes. Sometimes parties begin too broadly and are unable to respond to the problems that develop.
After discussing the concept with your counterpart, it is also important to obtain some education. This can be done by attending conferences, reading resource material and meeting with groups that have experienced success. Joint training for union and management leaders would be very helpful. Practicing the process in a training environment is beneficial for long-term success. Meeting with groups who have experienced failure can also be very insightful. Resources may be available through management associations, unions and consultants. After an educational base has been established, it is important for those involved in the process to develop ground rules, clarify commitments to the process and develop the environment necessary for success.
After these preparatory items are completed, it is important to establish a support mechanism. Often, this takes the form of a steering committee of labor and management leaders who are committed to monitoring the process and progress. This steering committee would provide leadership and address problems that occur. The steering group can also evaluate the results of group work. Through continual assessment, skill in applying the process can be gained. Part of an important support mechanism may be the use of internal or external facilitators. Oftentimes, groups can function more effectively if they use a facilitator who helps manage the process.
After the foundation has been established, it is important to communicate the initiative to the organization. This may be as informal as explaining to a grievant that we will be using an interest-based approach in an effort to address his/her concerns regarding the grievance. It could be more formal such as an organization announcement that a joint committee has been formed to respond to workplace concerns. Oftentimes, appropriate communications can be a challenge in applying cooperative strategies.
What can you do if your counterpart is not interested in or is skeptical of Interest Based Strategies? Why not take the risk and apply the process to your next dispute? This could be done by using the following statements and questions:
Can you help me better understand the issue from your perspective?
While you have identified a solution, what are your basic concerns about the issue?
My concerns about the issue are the following ____________, _____________.
What are some alternatives for addressing our concerns?
Which of the alternatives/options we have identified could be shaped into a solution that would address our concerns?
Who has the responsibility for implementing portions of this resolution?
Let’s review our results in six months to do determine whether the problem was resolved.
I am unaware of any joint efforts that began with failure as a goal. Having observed groups for many years, I have noticed that some elements and actions seem to promote failure. Lack of commitment is a primary cause. If parties begin an LMC initiative without total commitment, people will give up when progress becomes difficult. Also, if individuals begin LMC initiatives for short-term gains or to deal with “the crisis of the moment”, success becomes more difficult. Some groups fail after some initial success because they begin to take the process and each other for granted. Working collaboratively involves maintaining skills and cultivating relationships. Some groups become over-confident and feel that refresher training would be a waste of time and money. Other groups believe that steps in the process can be eliminated to save time. Often, short sighted actions cause problems that lead to failure. Also, as time goes on, the individuals involved in the initiative may change. It is important to insure that participants new to the process understand the steps, ground rules and overall expectations. It is very easy for some individuals to revert back to traditional ways. After all, most of us have great experience and practice with confrontational relationships. If new leaders do not value LMC initiatives, it is highly likely that the initiative will falter.
Groups that continue to experience success exhibit several characteristics. The interest based process becomes a way of life within the organization. The interest based approach is used with all types of problem solving and decision making opportunities. It also serves as the basis for effective conflict resolution. When membership on committees changes, new participants are trained in the process. Results of the various initiatives are communicated throughout the organization. When problems or concerns about the current based approval develop, they are addressed immediately. Earlier attention to problems helps keep them manageable. Ground rules are developed and honored. Concensus is the approach used in order to make quality decisions. Honesty, integrity and trust are principles that embody every activity and interaction.
Responsibility for the process is fixed with the leaders of labor and management. This centralized responsibility helps insure that problems are addressed and process corrections occur promptly. This group takes the initiative to insure that participants are trained and honor the ground rules. This group also takes responsibility to insure that both labor and management renew their commitments to working collaboratively. Success is much more likely when participants recognize that working collaboratively is like maintaining any type of important relationship. It requires dedication, commitment and hard work. Continual assessment and commitment to improvement are cornerstones of success.
Labor management cooperation can do great things for individuals and organizations. Work environments and productivity can be greatly improved. Job satisfaction can increase dramatically when individuals provide meaningful input and significant contributions to the workplace. In an environment where employee loyalty is sometimes questioned and the impact of Generation “X” is a concern, why not involve the people who know the work environment the best? When parties look at the true goals of labor and management, they can be, and I suggest they should be very similar.
The interest based strategy presented in this document provides a practical and effective way to improve workplace collaboration. While the focus of this document has been on the public sector, numerous private sectors unions and management have successfully applied this approach. If you are currently working with your counterparts in a cooperative environment, Congratulations! If at one time you participated in a collaborative effort and somehow got off track, why not begin again learning from the problems and challenges you encountered previously? If you have yet to apply collaborative strategies, why not talk to your counterpart and begin to plan an initiative? You have little to lose and much to gain.
Back to top ↑
Many organizations that experience LMC success rely upon a systematic, consistent process to deal with issues and problems. The interest-based process that will be described provides structure and predictability to the relationship. If problems develop as parties apply the process, they can always refocus on the appropriate step of the process. Also, following an interest-based approach helps remove the emotion from the issue so that objective solutions can be developed.
In order to understand this concept, it is important to clarify some important terms. An issue is a subject that is under discussion or in dispute. An issue should be stated clearly and objectively. While both parties are likely to have some experience with or some understanding of the issue, it is important that background be provided so that the issue is fully understood by all.
Perhaps the most important term to understand is interest. An interest is one parties’ concern, need, desire or goal behind an issue. An interest should be expressed broadly. Another key term is position. A position is one party’s solution to an issue. Often a position is exaggerated and very specific. Other times a position not totally responsive to the issue.
An example may help clarify the differences between an interest and a position. Often health insurance becomes a heated topic of discussion during negotiations. Frequently employers will take the position that employer paid insurance contributions should be capped. Often, unions will respond by taking the position that members should not experience any increased costs or reduced benefits. These are concepts with which we are all too familiar. In using an interest-based approach, we would look at what underlies those positions. The employer actually has an interest in controlling the employer’s health insurance cost. Further discussion might also lead to the recognition that the employer also has an interest in having a competitive benefit program to attract and retain quality employees. In looking at the union positions, an underlying interest would likely be to have an effective benefit program that meets member needs. Another union interest might be to insure that employee health insurance contributions remain at a reasonable level.
When parties deal with each other on the basis of positions, effective problem solving becomes very difficult. Very often, if one party attains a position, it is at the expense of the other party. Also, satisfying a position may not actually be the best solution in the long run.
Focusing on interests, however, provides a positive climate for group problem solving. Interests are broader and therefore, there are more alternatives that may satisfy the interests. In the health insurance example, things such as redesigning aspects of the health insurance plan, changing cost components of the plan, could help address each parties’ interests. Often when groups identify interests, they are amazed to discover the many similarities. Obviously, if parties focus on the similar interests, resolution is more likely. Shifting from a position based to an interest based environment can be very challenging.
A successful interested based approach involves several specific steps. It is important that the steps be followed sequentially and completely. Often parties will get into trouble by trying to short circuit and leap toward the answer. Invariably, when the steps are omitted or not fully completed, solution quality suffers and problems develop. While steps must be followed sequentially, often it is necessary to take a step back to further refine and clarify.
Step 1 is to define the problem or clarify the issue. This can be a deceptively simple step. Often parties begin the process without a clear understanding of the actual problem. In addressing a scheduling dispute with a community college, the parties framed the issue as “addressing equity matters related to a change from a 18-week semester to a 16-week semester.” In order to meet the needs of several different programs, the college had compressed certain program offerings from an 18-week format to a 16-week format. The parties recognized the need to make this change in order to be responsive to the students and accrediting agencies. The employees were very concerned that some colleagues would be receiving additional time off after the courses were completed. While addressing this problem in an interested based format, the parties began discussing the background and need to make the change. Concerns about equity and workload among the faculty were generally discussed and understood. It became evident during these discussions that the major problem was the perceived inequity caused by of some staff having two additional weeks of “vacation” after the 16 week class ended.
The college president was able to clarify that faculty working in a 16 week format would be asked to perform other college service during the 2 week period. The parties discussed the possibility of providing academic advising services, student recruitment assistance and curriculum design. After this meaningful discussion to “clarify the issue”, the parties realized that equity related to the scheduling change was truly not the issue. Rather the parties concluded that the issue related to effectively communicating the implications of the schedule change to faculty and staff. Again, what would appear to be a deceptively clear issue in the beginning, turned out not to be the issue at all.
Step 2 is to identify the interests of each group. As stated before, this requires moving beyond traditional positions and solutions to the problem. Parties have greater success in resolving issues if the interests are broadly stated. Broader interests provide greater opportunity to generate mutually accepted options that satisfy true concerns.
Two parties were dealing with concerns relating to probationary periods for new employees. The employer wished to expand the length of the probationary period so that there was more time to review performance. The union, on the other hand, wished to have the probationary period reduced so that the new employee could enjoy the full protections of the labor contract and the union could begin collecting dues.
Traditional employer positions relating to this matter could include extending the probationary period by six months and allowing for probationary period extensions as determined by management. Traditional union positions could include reducing the current probationary period by 45 days and providing total contract coverage after 30 days of employment.
When looking for underlying concerns about the issue, the employer interests were identified as:
Being able to evaluate performance on all aspects of the job.
Providing a fair chance to learn the job.
Only extend the probationary period when necessary.
Having a good fit between the people and the jobs.
Having the employees and department working well.
Union interests included:
Providing adequate training for new employees.
Insuring employees receive informal feedback regarding performance from management.
Involving the Union in performance appraisals.
Insuring the employer provides workable tools and equipment.
Insuring that probationary period extensions are appropriate.
Providing contract protection as soon as possible.
In analyzing the interests of both parties, it is clear that they both want to promote employee success, insure that individuals have a fair opportunity to learn the new jobs, and insure that quality performance occurs. Focusing on common interests is very helpful in satisfactorily resolving the issue. Parties are often surprised that they have many common interests.
Step 3 involves developing options. An option is a potential partial solution for an issue. In order to do this, brainstorming techniques should be used. Options should not be evaluated as they are being generated. Participants should be encouraged to be creative. All participants bring unique perspectives and important ideas. This diversity of input helps groups build stronger solutions. Listed below are the actual options developed by the parties addressing the probationary period issue:
Variable probationary periods based upon jobs
Offer classes if available (training new employees)
Retain current employees to train new employees
Vacant position duties are updated and information provided to new employees
Establish an extended probationary process
Develop job simulations for periodic functions
More formal feedback provided to employee
#7, more informal than formal
Establish probationary period feedback process for new employee within department (i.e., when, who is involved, communication to new employee)
Have managers meet weekly with new employee to provide feedback
Have employee group meet weekly to provide feedback.
Employee provides informal/formal feedback to manager re: job, adjustment, needs, feelings, etc.
Employee provides union representative with feedback
Union representative contacts supervisor once a month to ask how things are going
Establish a co-worker evaluation system
Establish a co-worker training or coaching process
Extend probation to 6 months
Have employee covered by contract immediately
Allow supervisor to extend probationary period for additional 3 months for a stated reason without union concurrence
Set up union/management team to discuss probationary extensions (1/2 union & ½ management)
Same as #20 to do the evaluation
Intensive training first two weeks which may not be at the work site
Provide equipment & materials needed for training promptly (first 2 weeks)
Status quo
Status quo with longer periods for unusual jobs
Shorter probationary period (2 months < 40 days > after intensive training)
Base probationary period on person’s previous experience
Establish tests that could be used to end probation early
Establish common criteria to use in determining probationary period length (evaluate experience, testing, employee skills, demands of jobs, etc., to arrive at length)
Step 4 is to evaluate the various options. Often parties use standards to evaluate options. Standards are yardsticks against which to measure the various brainstormed options. Standards that some groups have used effectively include fair, affordable, workable, and promote or maintain quality. When parties apply the standards to each option, valuable discussion occurs which helps clarify and explain the meaning of the option. During the evaluation process, additional options can be added. Using standards helps provide some degree of objectivity. Some groups have used various ranking techniques to reduce the number of options to be considered as part of a final solution. While a ranking process helps parties eliminate less viable options, ranking reduces conversation that may be helpful in reaching a more satisfactory decision.
Step 5 is to agree on a tentative solution. Often, categories (groupings) emerge that are helpful in reviewing the feasibility of options. For example, several categories proved helpful for organizing options for the probationary period issue. These categories included training for new employees, probationary period timeframes, evaluation/appraisal process and probationary period extension. The parties placed options that satisfied three or more of the standards into one of these various categories. After these options were grouped in the categories, the team reviewed the categories and reached consensus regarding each.
After consensus was reached within each category, the following solution was created.
Length of Probation
All newly hired employees shall be considered probationary for the first 66 days worked. This probationary period may be extended by mutual agreement of the employer and the union. Probationary employees shall not have recourse to the grievance procedure if dismissed during the probationary period.
Completion of Employment
Continued employment beyond the probationary period shall be evidence of satisfactory completion of the probationary period.
Letter of Understanding (not to be placed in the contract)
Modify probationary employee evaluation form.
Add a reference to probationary period extension option.
Add Instructions to form.
Include scheduled meeting date and a statement that the Union may attend as an observer.
Supervisors should be encouraged to regularly provide performance feedback to new employees.
Provide an area on the form to identifying additional training needs.
Create a new document to accompany employment confirmation letter.
Encourage early meeting to review duties.
Mutually develop training plan.
Identify Human Resources support staff and union as a resource.
District will advise union of new hire.
New employee committee will contact new employee, welcome, mentor, provide assistance where needed
Step 6 involves developing an implementation plan for the agreed upon solution. This involves answering several basic questions. Who? What?, When?, Where and How? It is important at this point to capture what will be done, when it will occur and who is responsible for insuring that it happens. Groups feel frustrated if ineffective action occurs after the hard work of addressing the issue. A thorough implementation plan with specific accountabilities helps guard against inaction. Often a part of the implementation plan is to report progress to the group that developed the solution. This can be part of an ongoing assessment of the result.
Regarding our probationary period example, individuals with specific responsibilities were identified and timetables established for each activity. The forms to be developed were scheduled to be reviewed by the negotiating committee at a future meeting. Other deliverables were also to be presented to the committee. The group also decided to review the results one year after implementation in order to make needed modifications. By creating this implementation plan, the group was assured that the appropriate follow through would occur.
Step 7 is to evaluate the results. As was mentioned earlier, the definition of consensus involves the understanding that the solution reached is the best solution for us at this time. As such, it is important to recognize that the results need to be reviewed and potentially modified in the future, if necessary. Many times, a solution will yield unanticipated results. As such, there needs to be a way to address the problems. Often times minor fine-tuning can dramatically strengthen the decision. It is important that consensus, once again, be reached with the group to authorize these modifications.
The parties working on the probationary period issue were pleased with the results that provided the following: Reduced concerns about absenteeism, as days absent did not count towards the completion of probation.
Probationary period extensions needed mutual agreement which helps insure that management takes evaluation responsibilities seriously.
A modified evaluation form which covered many important areas.
Union representatives attendance at evaluation sessions as observers.
A training plan for each new employee.
Assurance that all important components of the job were evaluated.
A new employee welcoming committee that provided mentoring technical assistance.
The group agreed to meet 6 months after the implementation to review the results. The parties agreed to make necessary changes prior to the next round of negotiations.
The job market had become very difficult which made the retention of new employees even more important. The welcoming committee and use of mentors is a good example of how an interested based process can provide unanticipated dividends. While the parties initially focused on the probationary period issue, it became obvious that improving employee retention benefited everyone and was crucial for organizational success.
While the steps of the interest based process seem simplistic and clear, parties need to exercise great judgement and control in working through the process. Often there is a temptation to skip ahead in the process. This invariably causes problems and reduces the quality of the decision.
Back to top ↑