Conflict Identification and Resolution: General Motors and Government Involvement

images (1) During the General Motors bailout crisis the public sentiment was one of enragement concerning government intervention. Notably, for some the outcry was [seemingly] there goes the government again sticking their nose in where it does not belong, however, for many with jobs at stake the intervention was one of relief from vast layoffs within the company. Hence, the government’s intervention, although not popular brought relief for many. Conversely, the outcry might be one of ignorance for some. It is the case, that the government has always been involved, not solely with General Motors, but with the transportation industry collectively as a shareholder, and this is the reason for their intervention to protect their investment. Baack (2012) concerning the nature of negotiations and bargaining stated two points of interest, that negotiations are a ‘give and take decision’; and negotiations can be a ‘win-win’ for both parties [The Nature of Negotiations and Bargaining Processes; para 2]. Therefore, the General Motors Company allowance, or rather, acceptance of intervention government diverted further injury to the public, the transportation industry as a collective industry; as well as, the government who were shareholders[and who] negotiated with General Motors, rather than a so called barge-in type scene as the public regarded.

Baack (2012) wrote there are three areas to consider in a negotiation; and asks the question concerning preconditions, “Does negotiation present the best option?” The thoughts to consider in this instance are: (a) the psychological climate, (b) the availability of resources, and (c) the characteristics of the bargaining issue. Hence, all these combined should lead to what Baack (2012) considers to be a win-win solution, or rather, an ‘Integrative Negotiation’ process.” [The Nature of Negotiations and Bargaining Processes; para 4].

Considering the availability of sources, becoming a stakeholder allows that the government experts have input into safety standards which for GM obviously were an issue, those along with financial problems. Notably, armed with resources needed, as like money, the US government’s help was well needed. Additionally, it is a give and take type scenario which took place which said, You [General Motors] allow me [US Government] to buy shares in your stock and I [US Government] will in turn bail you out of trouble to avoid a bankruptcy; a win-win. In the article, “5 Keys of Dealing with Workplace Conflict,” Mike Myatt (2012), a contributor to the Forbes blog wrote, “Don’t fear conflict; embrace it – it’s your job.” While you can try and avoid conflict (bad idea), you cannot escape conflict. The fact of the matter is conflict in the workplace is unavoidable. It will find you whether you look for it (good idea – more later) or not. The ability to recognize conflict, understand the nature of conflict, and to be able to bring swift and just resolution to conflict will serve you well as a leader – the inability to do so may well be your downfall. (Myatt, 2012. para.1).  General Motors faced bankruptcy as a solution to its problems. Notably, filing bankruptcy can denote one of two things, (a) relief for businesses and individuals who have no other recourse from creditors, and (b) a means of escape from creditors for those who have acted irresponsible. Hence, for General Motors a bankruptcy would not be a good idea because of shareholders, employees, or the public citizens in regards to purchase of cars out on the street.

In the article, “Government fines GM maximum $35 million for delayed safety recall’, author wrote:

GM will pay a $35 million penalty — the maximum allowed, and the largest ever imposed on an automaker — and will be required to make wide-ranging changes to its safety practices that will be supervised by the government, another first for an automaker. “What GM did was break the law,” Anthony Foxx, the secretary of transportation, said at a news conference. (Wire Reports, para. 2).

Notably, in the instance in the industry of transportation the government as a saving factor is seen all around, because not only was GM in trouble financially, but the public as well. This analysis is great because clandestine activity is brought into the light and presumably had it not been for the government’s intervention some activities might never have been seen. In addition to fines, there is also note in the article about employee training going forth which is great for public safety.

Baack (2012) spoke about preconditions to negotiations. In this we note that the government’s pronouncement about the trade of stock and their help allowed for further examination of the companies policies, safety procedures and other issues of concern. Hence, Baack gave a list of preconditions that had to happen; otherwise, no solution will come. He calls the list psychological climate which includes:

  1. Willingness to participate in negotiations
  2. Readiness to negotiate
  3. Agreement on some issues
  4. Willingness to settle
  5. Sense of urgency [The Psychological Climate Section; para. 1]

Baack (2012) wrote, “A stakeholder is a person or group with a vested interest in the outcome of a negotiation. These individuals should tangibly demonstrate their readiness to be seated at the bargaining table. If a stakeholder group is absent or unwilling to commit to good-faith bargaining, the potential to find a viable solution is reduced.” [The Psychological Climate Section; para. 2]. One can surmise, then, that the government’s strategy to become a stakeholder gave them considerable influence in the goings on of the business. Hence, people must realize that government as a shareholder served two purposes: (a) to allow them a stake and profits, and (2) allowed them further insight in company structure. Hence, as shareholder, the government is not only entitled to financial records, but unlawful practices as well which is very good indeed; because, even after selling the stock off the stigma of unsafe practices and unlawful activity allows the government the ability to make decisions for GM’s inability to keep cars safe. Hence, the resolution is continual monitoring by the government.

It is the case, that all activity, compromise, resolution and so forth would not be possible had it been for the governments’ resources, the money, the experts and General Motors willingness to negotiate with them. Moreover, Baack (2012) wrote about the ‘Availability of resources,’ giving the means of influence in negotiation:

  1. Legitimate
  2. Reward based
  3. Coercion
  4. Expertise
  5. Charisma [Means of Influence in Negotiation Section; Table 7.2].

For this purpose, legitimate, coercion, and expertise will discussed, because of the gravity of the negotiations. Therefore, a concern in the negotiation efforts on GM’s part would be ownership and patent protection in regards to implied take over; along with their need for other expert opinion and know how, other than their own, which the government provided with analysis of the situation as a whole, that is, in the area of safety, finances and public concern were all laid out in the open. To understand coercion, one might look to the fact that had not car makers decided to take the government up on the offer there might have been a halt to the transportation industry. However, as it stands the loss revenue, damaged relations with customers all stand, because of faulty products. Additionally, had the offer not been accepted by General Motors then the government might have used coercion as a persuasive technique to investigate the company without incentive.

In conclusion, the steps of conflict resolution as Baack (2012) wrote are thus:  (a) Identify the parties involved, (b) Identify the issues, (c) Identify the positions of the parties, (d) Find the bargaining zone, and (e) Make a decision.[ The Steps of Conflict Resolution Section; para. 1]. Hence, the negotiations between the General Motors Company and the US Government are met by acceptance of the government proposal to help, and in turn allowing the government to become stakeholders; which in turn, allowed the government to bring in expertise in financial discovery, as well as, expertise in matter of safety. For General Motors, the need for continued monitoring is needed in compliance to the law and for safety of its customers. However, the matter of a government barge in is far from truth as is the impression for some Americans. It is therefore the case, that a least in this instance the government did the right thing after all.

 

Sources:

 

Baack, D. (2012) Organizational Behavior. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/books/AUBUS610.12.1/sections/sec6.1

 5 Keys of Dealing with Workplace Conflict. Forbes. 

 Government Motors no more

Government fines GM maximum of $35 million for delayed safety recall

Tax Payers, Is Your Cry Misplaced?

In Washington, a reports says teen sex and pregnancies are at an all-time high, and educators blame a new program which promotes encourages it. “A 150 percent increase in teen pregnancy rates over the past decade has led more high schools to eliminate “Fuck Your Brains Out,” a national sexual education program that encourages adolescents to have sex frequently and with as many partners as possible, sources confirmed Thursday.”“A 150 percent increase in teen pregnancy rates over the past decade has led more high schools to eliminate “*uck Your Brains Out,” a national sexual education program that encourages adolescents to have sex frequently and with as many partners as possible, sources confirmed Thursday.” (The Onion, 2013).I believe to answer the question “Are talk radio shows a good thing or a bad thing? Why?” one needs only to open their eyes to issues like the aforementioned data to see that any form of media outlet is well-founded in choosing to report on our nation’s youth being led astray.

I missed this. Probably because my attention was focused on grown people and their lustful behavior being supported by the government which claims to trust God. That trust is definitely fallacious, and misplaced when it is invested in programs which further degrade the most precious to us; that is, our children. “

I find it absolutely appalling that people can grip about tax dollars being used on federally funded programs where the majority of people in low economic status can live or at least survive; yet, there is no highlight where tax dollars are spent in this area. Absolutely appalling, and I ask who is hardest hit. Here we see programs supported which help house, feed, and pay utilities for low income, predominantly single parent homes; which include teen moms who in all likelihood may participate in such a program portrayed here. Whose fault is that?

I believe broadcasts such as television or in for the money. I ask, how is it that this type behavior was not exposed nationally or played up more as it is with gay and lesbian marriage by the media. Moreover, America faces a severe moral judgment in promoting such idolatrous behavior; it is destructive. In the broad view of this issue I say yes, because at least the public has a say and can listen while in the car and are mindful more mindful of the happenings out in the communities where they live.

Consequently, America is a morally corrupt nation but has claims with trust in God, and to further shed light here one can see laws where prostitution is illegal but yet they fund free for all sex among the young. In prostitution there is expected risk of HIV and AIDS being prevalent, but no one expects that their children are subject to these type of ideals calling that class.

On the college level more solicitation of promiscuity is at hand:

In the article, “‘Sugar Daddy’ Billboard Near UCLA Offends Students, Neighbors” further degradation of impressionable minds is seen when neighborhoods are infiltrated with lust and thoughts of sex portrayed as a means to make money for the summer. This is another form of prostitution, but under the guise of getting paid as/like a job and it’s all legal. It is not illegal to take your clothes off, but it is illegal to sell your body, but they both go hand in hand in clubs such as topless bars and other gathering places which promote sex.

Source: Teen Pregnancy Rate Prompting More High Schools To Eliminate ‘Fuck Your Brains Out’ Program
Sugar Daddy’ Billboard Near UCLA Offends Students, Neighbors
http://chicagosprogressivetalk.com/

Medicare Supplements, not government Medicare Program

English: In the United States, Medicare benefi...

English: In the United States, Medicare benefits by gender and wage levels. According to author Joseph Fried, this graphic uses information from: C. Eugene Steuerle and Adam Carasso, “The USA Today Lifetime Social Security and Medicare Benefits Calculator,” (Urban Institute, October 1, 2004), from: http://www.urban.org/publications/900746.html. Note: The calculator does not include the value or cost of the Social Security disability program. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

When a telemarketer calls saying that they want to speak to you on behalf of a insurance provider; concerning your Medicare Coverage, seniors contacted might be under the impression that the government is calling, but this is not the case. Telemarketers are hired by Independent Agents to generate leads.

I was a lead generator for more than 24 years and it was easy to persuade the people I spoke with to set up an appointment for an agent of a particular company to speak with them. Hence, we see that not all people who sign up with these supplemental insurances are informed; enough.

Notably, there is enough evidence that there is need for a subject specific word on medicare and those supplements being mistaken as Government sponsored Medicare Program, because they are not the same.

Medicare is a program for those people who when they turned 65 are placed in the program automatically by the United States Government. There is no choice to say whether you want it or not when it comes to this medical provision, and before your 65th birthday you will be notified of your pending account and reiteration of what you will receive as far Social Security Benefits and Medicare.

Is Medicare Free?

Many people do not pay a premium for Part A, as long as they have contributed to the Social Security system for a minimum of forty quarters. Since the inception of the program, there has been a premium forMedicare Part B. The initial premium was $3.00 per month and the current premium is $110.50 or higher for people who began receiving medicare during 2010. There are many more complex guidelines that would have to be examined to determine the exact cost of Medicare but it is safe to deduce that it is not free.

What is a Medicare Supplement?

As stated above Medicare Part A is free, however, Part B is not. Conversely, because of astronomical medication and hospital bills insurance companies saw a way to help; that is, by designing a supplement to your medicare coverage called Medicare Advantage, this is not government issued. They provide PPO’s, HMO‘s and PFF’s as in any other insurance policy you might own; the exception is that these are not group polices.

Medicare Advantage has many providers or underwriters, there is:

The decision is yours when it comes to which plan fits your needs; choose wisely.

For more information on the Government Medicare Program: Click Here: