Hi, this is a case study about the 1984 negotiations between GM and UAW, it is a collective bargaining assignment for industrial relations:

In 1984 Canadian section of UAW (United Auto Workers Union) prepared for collective bargaining with GM. Led by independent-minded Robert White, they faced a very hard negotiation. There were multiple complexities. GM leader, Roger Smith, wanted to use this opportunity to introduce risk-sharing arrangements into GM-employee collective deal, which Canadian UAW membership bitterly opposed. As the tension between management and assembly workers grew, things got only worse when GM top brass awarded themselves ridiculously lavish bonuses. Doing that and trying to squeeze assembly workers at the same time caused outbursts of protests, also accounting for the fact that Canadian operation of GM was profitable due to, among other things, depressed wages. Trust didn't exist among parties. Also, Bob White publicly committed that there would be no lump sum payments replacing increases in the base pay on his watch.

Things were further complicated by internal political tensions in the Canadian section of UAW itself. And, most importantly, White's relationship with Owen Bieber, president of international UAW, was very difficult at the moment. Bieber didn't like the independent Canadian leader. He himself had just succumbed to GM pressure and gave up on multiple issues historically won by UAW in exchange for job security.

Now, Bob White and has team are under pressure from their enraged membership, which some of their own colleagues seek to exploit for personal political benefit launching wildcat strikes. Owen Bieber is not happy with the hardball approach of the Canadians and threatens to revoke their strike authorization, which means that Canadians will not have access to UAW strike fund. He is not yet fully ready to let Canadian members go. GM negotiators firmly set out to confirm their earlier success in the US following Chairman's personal instructions.

This negotiation was closely followed by journalists, which enabled producers to document, Final Offer. It offers a rare opportunity to dissect a complex, high-stake, high-pressure, multiple-interest negotiation and explore what was done well, what went wrong and what could have been done differently. People still debate whether the outcome of negotiation was good for the Canadians. They protected the remuneration structure they wanted, fought off risk-sharing and lump sum payments. They have given up on historical 3% annual raise, dropping it to 2.25. My friend and classmate from LSE Behavioural Science Program Duncan is very critical saying that this negotiation destroyed value. Have it? May be. But what I see personally is a perfect depiction of negotiation as a leadership skill. Facing very bad odds and under huge pressure, Bob White and his team didn't give up even when things had been truly black.

1. Describe the chronology of events during the UAW-GM negotiations.

2. Briefly explain the social, economic and political context that influenced the negotiations.

3. Draw up organizational charts of the UAW and GM, identifying the key players in the negotiations.

4. Is there evidence of accountability on the union side?

5. Describe the respective bargaining agendas of the two sides, identifying their interests, target and ideal settlement positions.

6. How would you assess the relative bargaining power of the two sides? What sanctions did both sides have? Were they prepared to use them?

7. Describe the compromises and movement that occurred from the opening of negotiations to the final settlement.

8. Explain why and how internal bargaining takes place (because the movie provides more information about the union, concentrate on the internal bargaining within the union).

9. What role did the media play in these negotiations?

10. What qualities make a good negotiator?