FR
Thanks for the inspiration. I thought I had said more than enough already but obviously not judging by the burst of recent posts.
Indeed, what ought one do?
When the company and the GC were first whispering in ears, I dragged out the GUILT/BLAME matrix that I used to use to negotiate with the kids when they were teens. I reached the conclusion that a settlement was indeed possible, as long as both emotion and the AOA stayed outside once the door started to open.
Basically, for this case, the matrix goes like this:
(the numbers are based on my assessment)
GUILT: (each party allocates themself a score out of ten)
CX Mgt 2,AOA GC/GenSec 3,49ers 1
If we have accounted for 50% of the guilt and everyone has a score on the board, then we move forward.
BLAME: (each party allocates to themself and the other parties a score that must total 10)
CX Mgt - CX 1/AOA 5/49ers 4
AOA - CX 6/AOA 2/49ers 2
49ers - CX 6/AOA 2/49ers 2
In this case, if the 49ers get less than 50% of the blame but also have a score, then we move forward again.
Obviously this is a very in-exact science with a lot of moving parts, but I trust you get the drift.It is basically about realising that in most conflict situations, the guilt and blame are actually shared.
Since 2001, a lot of the original cast has moved on, and many that haven't, have their own form of selective amnesia.
So all parties feel some guilt and all would blame themselves for some of the problem. Therefore a solution must be possible.
Who then should now be involved? IMHO, the 49ers and the company...end of story. You are united enough and organised enough to walk alone if you want real closure.As I said earlier, take your position to the company directly.The AOA cannot act as an honest broker in this.
If and when you can move, remember the following:
-All the business school theory about negotiating does not apply. The company is not offering to settle because of pending court cases or potentially bad publicity. They have provisioned for any court settlements. Any negative
PR will have only a very small audience and soon become tomorrow's fish wrapper. Indeed using the reputation argument could very well blow up in your face.
- Lawyers know nothing of the real world. They only understand litigation and torts. The legal process may bring a settlementof some kind, it cannot bring closure.
- Old Mohawk Indian Proverb - "It is hard to see the future with tears in your eyes". Emotion will not get it done for you. If you want closure, put what you want succinctly on paper and take it quietly to those I suggested.
If I see this thread go quiet, progress is afoot. Good luck
PS:
Tamalai
I hope time will show you that the AOA was never, is not and will never be a union. It pretended to be and look what happened.
Next time you open your wallet, think about how much of your credit rating is due to who you work for in HK and not what your profession is. On paper the bank may hold the mortgage but they do so only in escrow for the guarantor. Only then will you understand that the AOA pretended to be something it wasn't and could never be.There simply is not the leverage available to exercise industrial muscle, it must be done the hard way by lobbying and negotiating ad nauseum.
That is why many voted with their feet, not out of petulance but out of a basic philosophical difference that arose when we started paying someone to tell us we were fools and that good old fashioned union muscle would get us what we wanted.