Gender Crucial to Talks

While wages have been at the center of recent negotiations between the Harvard Union of Clerical and Technical Workers and the University management, gender differences and questions of sexual equality are also playing a large role in both the substance and style of the bargaining.

Gender is "a really significant factor in the negotiations, partly because of the composition of the union and its leadership, partly because Harvard has traditionally been a male-dominated place," said Susan C. Easton '79, a fellow at Radcliffe's Bunting Institute who studies several labor unions for the past year.

A few statistics serve to illustrate how large a role women play in the ongoing negotiations:

. The 3500 member union, Harvard's largest, has a membership of 83 percent women.

. The union's president and lead organizer are both women.

. Of the five-members management negotiation team, four are women.

. Of four additional workers the union brought to a negotiation session last week to tell their stories, all were women.

. Of three financial administrators management brought to a negotiating session later week to tell their stories, all were women.

Gender is an important variable for those onboth sides of the bargaining table to consider.Participants and observers say the predominance ofwomen in the room influences the negotiation in avariety of ways.

For one, thing, many of the issues on thetable, like child care funding and equal pay, weretraditionally considered women's issues.

"A lot of women's issues have always beenimportant to this union," said Deborah M. Kolb,executive director of the Harvard Law SchoolProgram on Negotiation.

Union President Donene M. Williams said suchissues can be "common ground" in the negotiations.She said women on the management negotiating teampay attention when union members talk about thedifficulties of being a working mother, the "toughchoices relating to what to de with you kids.

Still, Williams said that for the most part,women negotiating for Harvard has taken the"traditional stance of management--hold the lineagainst women".

Union leaders have portrayed a sexist Harvardadministration with a patronizing attitude towardwomen. "This struggle centers on sex...discrimination," union leaders said at a rallylast month. "This negotiation is a test of theUniversity community's commitment to real equalityfor women."

The substantive nature of gender issues in theunion negotiations is fairly clear. More murky isthe impact of gender on the deliberationsthemselves. on the way the negotiations negotiate.

At least some think there is an impact.

"I think women approach things differently,"said Labor Relations Consultant Lianne C.Sullivan, a member of the management negotiatingteam. Sullivan said she doesn't know if thedifferent approach has to do with negotiation inparticular or "just life in general."

Sullivan refused to comment further, citing alabor-management agreement not to discuss thenegotiations. The other women on the managementnegotiation team failed to return repeated phonecalls.

Unusual Numbers

Observers in the national labor movement say itis "somewhat unusual" for a management negotiatingteam to be so heavily composed of women.

The placement of so many women on themanagement negotiation team may have been anattempt by University higher-ups to preempt unioncharges of sexism. Others said human resourcesmanagement is simply a field that women have beenparticularly attracted to recently.

Kathryn D. McKee, a past chair of theVirginia-based Society for Human ResourcesManagement, said many women have gender-basedqualities that affect human resources managementand labor negotiations.

"Many women take advantage of intuitiveskills," McKee said. "We are by biology caregivers and nurturers. We tend to be betterlisteners."

McKee, who has 35 years of labor managementexperience, said "women don't have their egos inthe room with them" during labor negotiations. Asa result, she said, with women on both sides ofthe table, the parties should be able to reach andagreement more quickly.

Eaton said that with "the feminization ofleadership." a more collaborative labornegotiation style is coming into favor to replacethe old fashioned "machismo" and "table-pounding."

Sources close to the negotiations say thatDavid M. Bray, executive dean for administrationat Harvard Medical School and the only man on themanagement bargaining team, engages in suchheavy-handed tactics and is a major obstacle to anagreement.

The coming weeks will tell whether the womenaround the negotiation table will be able tohammer out a bargain between the union andmanagement to replace the previous contract, whichexpired June 30

Gender is an important variable for those onboth sides of the bargaining table to consider.Participants and observers say the predominance ofwomen in the room influences the negotiation in avariety of ways.

For one, thing, many of the issues on thetable, like child care funding and equal pay, weretraditionally considered women's issues.

"A lot of women's issues have always beenimportant to this union," said Deborah M. Kolb,executive director of the Harvard Law SchoolProgram on Negotiation.

Union President Donene M. Williams said suchissues can be "common ground" in the negotiations.She said women on the management negotiating teampay attention when union members talk about thedifficulties of being a working mother, the "toughchoices relating to what to de with you kids.

Still, Williams said that for the most part,women negotiating for Harvard has taken the"traditional stance of management--hold the lineagainst women".

Union leaders have portrayed a sexist Harvardadministration with a patronizing attitude towardwomen. "This struggle centers on sex...discrimination," union leaders said at a rallylast month. "This negotiation is a test of theUniversity community's commitment to real equalityfor women."

The substantive nature of gender issues in theunion negotiations is fairly clear. More murky isthe impact of gender on the deliberationsthemselves. on the way the negotiations negotiate.

At least some think there is an impact.

"I think women approach things differently,"said Labor Relations Consultant Lianne C.Sullivan, a member of the management negotiatingteam. Sullivan said she doesn't know if thedifferent approach has to do with negotiation inparticular or "just life in general."

Sullivan refused to comment further, citing alabor-management agreement not to discuss thenegotiations. The other women on the managementnegotiation team failed to return repeated phonecalls.

Unusual Numbers

Observers in the national labor movement say itis "somewhat unusual" for a management negotiatingteam to be so heavily composed of women.

The placement of so many women on themanagement negotiation team may have been anattempt by University higher-ups to preempt unioncharges of sexism. Others said human resourcesmanagement is simply a field that women have beenparticularly attracted to recently.

Kathryn D. McKee, a past chair of theVirginia-based Society for Human ResourcesManagement, said many women have gender-basedqualities that affect human resources managementand labor negotiations.

"Many women take advantage of intuitiveskills," McKee said. "We are by biology caregivers and nurturers. We tend to be betterlisteners."

McKee, who has 35 years of labor managementexperience, said "women don't have their egos inthe room with them" during labor negotiations. Asa result, she said, with women on both sides ofthe table, the parties should be able to reach andagreement more quickly.

Eaton said that with "the feminization ofleadership." a more collaborative labornegotiation style is coming into favor to replacethe old fashioned "machismo" and "table-pounding."

Sources close to the negotiations say thatDavid M. Bray, executive dean for administrationat Harvard Medical School and the only man on themanagement bargaining team, engages in suchheavy-handed tactics and is a major obstacle to anagreement.

The coming weeks will tell whether the womenaround the negotiation table will be able tohammer out a bargain between the union andmanagement to replace the previous contract, whichexpired June 30