Q & A Table of Contents
The Staff In The Home Office Feel They Are Getting A Bad Deal
From: José Barcelona, Spain
Question: I have to negotiate some issues (money and schedules) with some personnel in the organization. They all have the same job but very different situations:
Some of them work (and live) more than 1,000 kilometers away and they have nothing to lose if negotiations go wrong because I do not have replacements for them (and they know it).
I have already done my work with personnel closer to me. They are not very happy in this new situation. Neither I am. This is the game.
I must go now to negotiate with the others who are located away from the main office. My fear is that if negotiation goes wrong with them I will have to reconsider the agreements reached here.
Perhaps the main error has been not to try to discuss with all at the same time, but is quite difficult for geographical reasons.
What do you think?
Thank you
Response: Is the only difference between the two groups of people with whom you need to reach agreement about money and schedules is that Group A works in the Barcelona home office area and the people of Group B work far away from the home office? If that is the case, why is there any reason to have different sets of rules for each group?
If one group has to travel or has other operating costs based on their location(s), then reimbursing them for those expenses should not be considered as an improvement in their deal compared with those who do not have those costs.
When you have your discussions of these issues, do you talk with each person individually or are the negotiations with people who represent those two different groups of personnel? If you are dealing with representatives you should consider the costs of bringing distantly-located people into the same negotiation process so there is less likelihood the two groups will be working against each other -- and, in the long run, against you.
There are many ways to communicate: telephone, fax, email, video conferencing, etc. It may also be possible for you to travel. Perhaps the home office group would be much happier if some of them could travel with you to a distant location to participate in the negotiations.
In your question you do not mention the number of people involved. If the total number of personnel is small, and if you do have individual negotiations, then you must still have consistent standards for dealing with everyone.
If they all do the same job, it can be perfectly appropriate to provide incentives for greater productivity, rewards for loyalty to the company, or other ways to recognize the value each person or group adds to your organization. Treating them differently just because of their location can only get you into trouble.
It is risky, as well, to let the difficulty of finding replacements away from the home office appear to put you in a weaker position. You need to consider how easy it would be for them to find other jobs that are equally rewarding if they do not reach agreement with you. Who needs whom more?
In the end, I agree with your final point: discussing the situation with the different groups at different times is probably not a good idea. While this year's negotiations may be finished with the distant people, but not yet finished with the home office people, you should communicate to everyone that from now on you will treat everyone according to the same standards. Otherwise this situation can keep repeating itself -- and drive you crazy.
Good luck,
Steve
| 
