The collective bargaining dispute revolves around pay packages. A hundred New Yorker workers failed to attend to their duties. These included fact-checkers, web producers, and editorial employees. Discussion sessions with the managerial level were unable to bore any fruits. The New Yorker union employees wanted the company to raise their pay to $65,000 (Robertson, 2021). However, the company did not heed the call because it believed that this did not align with their needs and interests. The workers believed that the company underpays them. Thus, they decided to walk out of their duties for a day to raise their concerns.
Underlying Causes of Dispute
Inadequate pay exists as the key cause of the dispute. The workers feel that the company underpays them and should consider increasing their pay package. They term the current salary as an “initial offer,” calling for the management to consider raising it to their expectations. The company argues that the union should bargain in good faith and return a counter-proposal that covers the workforce needs. However, it has failed to address the issues raised before. There have been similar discussions that have been unable to generate viable outcomes. The company has met with the union representatives a couple of times to discuss this issue. However, none of these negotiations have led to potential results that can boost workers’ motivation and job satisfaction. Undoubtedly, salaries and wages have a significant effect on job satisfaction. As Judge et al. (2010) reveal, high pay leads to high workplace satisfaction levels. It shows that a worker who receives a higher salary or wage is likely to deliver optimal results than one who achieved a limited pay package. Thus, the long day walkout is linked to reduced job satisfaction due to the inadequate pay offered to the employees and the failed prior negotiations.
Economic or Ethical Pressures Evident
The workers’ decision to walk out of their jobs for a day is an economic and ethical pressure that they adopt to ensure their disputes are addressed. First, it leads to the misuse of company time. This is a major unethical issue in the workplace where rather than workers attending their duties, they decide to form demonstrations to ensure their issues are heard. Also, the company stands to lose its productivity when the workers walk out of their jobs. It attracts reduced economic growth because the firm fails to meet its financial goals and objectives. As for the company, it bases its argument on the wrong pay study undertaken by the union. The firm disputes the union’s pay study by arguing that it is devoted to fair pay and an equitable agreement. It expects the workers union to avoid such adverse actions and resort to bargaining in good faith. The company representatives argue that the pay increase is unsustainable and “insulting” (Robertson, 2021). This portrays that the business cannot sustain the expected pay increase and that the union should come up with a tenable proposal for their pay demands.
Evidence of any Illegal or Unethical Conduct on Either Side
On the side of the company, it evidences unethical conduct due to its failure to come up with a potential pay solution amidst frequent discussions. Corporate leaders are expected to make decisions that meet and address existing issues in the workplace. As Selart (2010) highlights, leaders should always make decisions even when faced with difficult situations. They create a fair and just environment when they make quality decisions. The employees and the union fail to attend to their duties without informing the management prior. This is illegal as it goes against the company’s organizational policy. They would have issued a statement to notify the management of their expected move to enable it to make strategic decisions to avoid the long day walkout from their duties.
Resolving the Dispute
The management did not solve the pay dispute in this situation. However, the company agreed to include the “Just Cause” provision that has attracted longstanding debate between it and the workers. This provision ensures that the employer should meet particular standards to discipline or fire workers. As for the pay dispute, the best resolution is to have a discussion with the union and agree on a progressive salary update over time. This can allow the firm to meet worker pay expectations without creating financial pressures.
The Presence of a Third Party
The New Yorker Union represented the workers in the pay dispute. Its role revolved around undertaking a pay fact-checker and presenting the information to the management. This process helped ensure that New Yorker’s management familiarized itself with the existing pay variations and the rationale behind the expected pay rise. Overall, the New Yorker Union provided credible data that supported the worker’s demand for a pay rise.
Effective Handling of the Dispute
The best way of resolving the dispute would have been to form a meeting between the union representatives to find a common area of agreement. The representatives have the interests of the workers at hand, and the company should take the opportunity to liaise with them to find the best way forward. The process should have been done immediately to solve the pay dispute once and for all.
