Negotiation Beetween the National Football League and the National Football League Players Association Case Study

Introduction

The National Football League (NFL) team owners and the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA) started negotiation on sharing the revenues. In 2006, both parties agreed upon sharing formula. However, in 2008, the NFL owners decided to opt out of the agreement which expired in March of 2011.

The following events showed the NFL owners failing to finalize the deal. Consequently, the NFLPA also failed to ratify the negotiation deal. It has raised a number of issues they consider both parties must finalize before they can reach the actual deal.

This paper shall negotiate for the players through their association, NFLPA.

There are some outstanding issues which both parties must resolve before they can announce the actual deal and enable the players resume training for the year-long league.

1. The NFLPA wants the association reestablished as a union. In addition, as the only representative of the players in negotiations. Both the board and players have agreed on this issue.
2. The NFLPA seeks an opportunity for its players to opt out the deal after the fifth year.
3. The players want to retain the current compensation rule that allows them to file for claims. On the other hand, the NFL owners want certain restriction with regard to retired players’ claims.
4. The NFLPA wants reimbursement of lost benefits the previous agreement did not require the NFL owners to pay.
5. The NFLPA wants the compensation amounts for injury guarantees increased from what the NFL owners have offered. The owners have agreed to guarantee up to one million dollars for the first season and up to a half a million dollars if the injury persists into the next season.

Definition of interests, resistance points, and alternatives

The NFLPA has interests in the above issues. The NFLPA target points and positions rotate around what it hopes to achieve from the NFLPA owners. According to NFLPA, that is fair for the players to receive and finalize those issues and reach an agreement. This will help the NFL owners understand what the NFLPA wants.

This is a relationship-based interest. It directly relates to both the current and future relationships between NFL players and NFL owners. At the same time, it also takes accounts of intangibles of negotiations both NFL owners and players wish to uphold. These include specific targets of compensations, positive thinking about the objectives, trade-offs and throwaways derived from the negotiation issues. These factors will guide both parties in achieving a settlement which is fair and agreeable to all.

When a negotiation reaches a resistance point, both parties decide absolutely not to continue with the negotiation because of what each party offers is minimally acceptable (Lewicki, Barry and Saunders, 2010). NFLPA resistance points occur when NFL owners do not wish to increase the amount of injury guarantees, when players cannot opt out from the agreement after five years, and when the owners will not agree that NFLPA reestablish as a union.

There are also alternatives that negotiating parties can achieve and still meet their needs. They will show whether the current outcome is better than another possibility.

For instance, NFLPA can settle for compensation of lost benefits, increased compensation for injury guarantees, and seek a deal for players to opt out after five years. However, it can compromise its long-term objectives such as reestablishing the NFLPA as a union, and forgoing reimbursements in lost compensations. In this manner, they will walk away with better alternatives and plan to pursue the compromised issues later.

Assessment of constituencies and the social context of negotiations

NFLPA has players and the board to represent in this negotiation. These people will evaluate and critique the outcome achieved. Constituents like observers (a couple of players and football veterans) will determine participants of the negotiation, the mediator, and who can ratify the deal. This negotiation shall also occur under rules of labor laws, sports customs and norms, business practices, and of course, in a neutral venue.

Definition of protocol for negotiation

NFLPA must establish its negotiation agenda by prioritizing necessary issues first. In addition, it must also insist on a neutral venue where the negotiators will feel comfortable and relaxed and have access to all amenities.

NFLPA must also set the time limit for its negotiation to enable players resume training at the facilities. Time must define all elements of negotiation.

In case the negotiation fails, NFLPA has the option of walking out. Then it can reevaluate its issues and identify points of contention and try a neutral approach. At the same time, it can also seek the help of expert negotiators. NFLPA must also record every point of negotiation discussions.

NFLPA must set parameters to know whether the agreement is good, negotiation has reached an end and any procedural difficulties. Then it can evaluate its issues and compare them with the outcomes, and what it can improve upon in subsequent negotiations.

Methods of preventing potential negotiation impasses

This negotiation is likely to result into impasses because of the monetary value involved. However, in order to avoid these impasses, NFLPA must prepare by deciding on important issues, define its goals, and think how to work with the NFL owners.

It must aim at building the relationship by knowing the NFL owners well, identify similarities and differences, and work towards achieving a mutually beneficial set of outcomes.

NFLPA must also gather information regarding what it needs to know about the negotiation, NFL owners and their needs, feasibility f the possible deal, and any consequences in case failed negotiation.

NFLPA must make its bid from make moves from its initial, ideal position (opening offers) to the actual outcome. At this stage, both NFLPA and NFL owners must state their issues and make moves towards a neutral middle ground.

NFLPA must prepare to close the deal. The aim is to make a commitment to the agreement reached in the previous phase. Both parties must assure each other that they are happy with the outcomes, or to some extent accept them.

NFLPA must prepare to implement the agreement. Both parties must fulfill the agreement reached. They must also be aware of flawed agreement, missing key issues, changing situation, and arising new issues. Any flaws and new issues may force the parties to reopen negotiation, look for a negotiator, arbitrators, or to some extent the courts.

Description of methods of managing potential impasses

First, all parties must focus on what they share in common in fostering a climate of collaboration i.e. they must establish main goals. Focusing on shared goals improve relations among the parties in conflict, and sensitize the parties about the merits of resolving their differences in order to avoid jeopardizing their mutual goals. They must establish common goals to provide context for their discussions. This is particularly useful between NFLPA players and NFL owners.

Second, the parties must separate people from the problem. Once, the parties have established common interest among them, and the need to resolving negotiation issues, it is useful to focus their attention on the real issues at hand. This is solving a problem. NFL owners should not use avoidance as an approach to solving existing issues between them and NFLPA players.

Biased negotiations are likely to result in mutual satisfaction if the parties remove people from their disagreement by suppressing their personal desires for revenge or one-upmanship. Parties must not look at each other as rival, but rather as the advocate of a point of view. For instance, NFLPA should focus on seeing unreasonable position rather than unreasonable person.

Third, the parties must focus on interests, and not positions. Positions create demands or assertions, whereas interests constitute the reasons behind the demands. It is easy to create agreement on interests because interests are broad and multifaceted. The parties must redefine and broaden the problem to make it tractable.

Therefore, varieties of issues must be examined to enable parties understand each other’s point of view and put their own forward. For instance, NFLA owners may ask NFLPA players that, Help me understand why you advocate your position.

Fourth, the parties must create options for mutual gains. Parties must generate unusual and creative solutions to the conflict. All parties must focus on brainstorming alternatives and mutually agreeable solutions. Consequently, parties change their positions from competitive to collaboration approach.

Many alternatives create many positions of finding a common ground for all parties. For instance, the mediator may tell the parties “we understand each other’s underlying concerns and objectives, let us now brainstorm ways of satisfying all our needs”.

Fifth, the parties must use objective criteria in evaluating alternatives. Even collaborative process has some elements of incompatible behavior and interests. Therefore, the parties should use this opportunity to determine what is fair for them. However, the parties must remain cautious on how they must judge fairness.

For instance, NFLA players may shift their positions from getting what they want to making sense through fostering open, reasonable attitude. This approach encourages parties to drop their initial adamant positions. Parties must ask what is a fair way to evaluating the merits of the arguments.

Sixth, parties must define success in terms of real gains, and not imagine their losses. For instance, NFL owners may accept three crucial demands of NFLPA players, and NFLPA players forgo the rest of the issues, or postpone to later negotiations. NFL owners’ first interpretation must focus on their gains rather than their losses. Satisfaction with an outcome varies depending on standards we set to judge them.

Mediators must recognize that a collaborative approach facilitates resolution by evaluating the value of proposed solutions against reasonable standards. Therefore, the parties’ perspective must reflect an outcome that constitutes a meaningful improvement over the current situations.

Conclusion

According to Lewicki, Barry and Saunder, negotiation epitomizes lifelong learning. Best negotiators continue to learn from their past experiences. They recognize that every negotiation is different. Thus, they must continue to learn from their experiences (Saunders, Lewicki and Barry, 2010).

Negotiators must remain sharp and stays focused, and continue to learn and practice the art of negotiation continuously.

At the same time, best negotiators always take time to reflect the outcomes of negotiations to review what transpired and lesson learnt, and action points. This case must also apply to both NFLPA players and NFLPA owners.

References

Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B. and Saunders, D. M. (2010). Negotiation, 6th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Saunders, D. M., Lewicki, R. J. and Barry, B. (2010). Negotiation: Readings, exercises, and cases, 6th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.