|
As another round of bargaining continues at the refinery, many members are understandably watching developments closely and cautiously.
The last round left a lasting impact on the workplace. A seven-month lockout tested workers and families alike, and many hard-fought union rights were stripped away through force and pressure, at a high cost to the Company. Experiences like that do not disappear when a new round of bargaining begins; those experiences shape expectations, emotions, and how people respond to proposals at the table.
This time around, bargaining appears to be different. Less direct. Less confrontational. But that does not necessarily mean the underlying strategy has changed. Sometimes, the most effective pressure does not come through open aggression. Sometimes it comes through managing expectations.
One of the oldest tricks in the book is to begin with something extreme, proposals so unreasonable that they create outrage, fear, and uncertainty among members. Then, after reactions settle in, the employer walks portions of it back and presents the revised proposal as balanced or fair.
The objective is not always to achieve the original demand, but to shift the definition of what workers consider acceptable.
“Is this deal actually good for us?” is the most important question workers should ask. But if expectations are pushed low enough, workers may begin comparing a bad deal to a worse deal.
That distinction matters. A proposal does not become fair simply because something harsher was floated earlier. Members should never feel pressured to settle for less simply because the alternative is worse.
Understanding Common Bargaining Tactics
Recognizing bargaining tactics helps workers evaluate proposals more clearly rather than emotionally.
The “Extreme Opening” Strategy
As discussed above, the Company tables major concessions or aggressive language designed to shock the membership. Later, some of those demands are softened or withdrawn. The hope is that members feel relief instead of recognizing that the remaining concessions may still be unacceptable. This is sometimes called “anchoring”, establishing an extreme starting point to pull expectations downward.
Divide and Conquer
Another common strategy is creating tension between groups of workers:
- senior employees vs newer hires
- process vs maintenance
- shift workers vs day staff
When workers begin blaming each other instead of focusing on the bigger picture, solidarity weakens, and weakened solidarity benefits the employer.
Fatigue Bargaining
Long bargaining rounds create stress, frustration, and exhaustion. Over time, people naturally come to want resolution at almost any cost. That pressure can lead members to ask: “Can we just get this over with?” However, fatigue should never replace careful evaluation of what is actually being agreed to.
Friendly Messaging While Advancing Concessions
Not every hardline bargaining approach comes with open hostility. Sometimes concessions are delivered with positive language, collaborative branding, or assurances that everyone is “working together.” Professional relationships and respectful communication matter. But workers should always evaluate the actual language being proposed, not just the tone used to present it.
A handshake can hide bad intentions.
What Effective Bargaining Actually Looks Like:
There are important principles that should guide any meaningful negotiation process. One useful framework is the “Five C’s” of negotiation:
Collaboration: Bargaining should involve genuine problem-solving, not manufactured crises designed to force concessions.
Communication: Members deserve honest and transparent communication about proposals, priorities, and long-term impacts.
Compromise: Real bargaining requires movement from both sides. But compromise is not the same thing as conditioning workers to accept less and less each round.
Creativity: Solutions do not always have to come through rollbacks or takeaways. Strong bargaining often involves finding creative ways to address concerns while preserving rights and protections.
Credibility: Trust matters. Credibility is built when actions match words, not when cooperative messaging is paired with proposals that weaken workers’ positions behind the scenes.
Staying Focused on the Right Questions
As bargaining continues, members should evaluate proposals carefully and critically.
Ask the questions that matter:
- Would we have accepted this proposal before expectations were intentionally lowered?
- Does this strengthen or weaken our position long-term?
- Are we making decisions based on fairness, or based on fear and exhaustion?
- If this becomes the new standard, what happens next round?
- Does this agreement protect future members as well as current ones?
Our strength is not proven by how many concessions the membership can absorb. It is proven when we recognize a bad deal for what it is and refuse to accept less than we deserve.
A bad deal does not become a good deal simply because we were threatened with something worse. Members should not judge proposals against the worst possible outcome. They should judge them against what is fair.
No matter how difficult bargaining becomes, one thing should never be forgotten: our union is immune to fear and fatigue. We are built on the collective strength, experience, and resolve of the membership that has transcended generations. When workers remain informed, engaged, and united, there is always reason to be optimistic, as we are well-positioned to take on the challenges that lie ahead.
In Solidarity,
Richard Exner, President
| 
