 |
|
The single best dividend for negotiators is the opportunity to participate in the crafting of better rules and the first-hand understanding of the pressures that yield the rules we finally get. |
Features ...  Individuals with an interest in being a negotiator must
first be nominated by an organization. Typically, the
organization nominates both a primary and an alternate
negotiator, both of whom have standing so that if the
primary is not available, the alternate is permitted to sit
"at the table" and participate in his or her stead. The sessions
involve significant preparation time and outside
conferencing, so the actual time "at the table" is only part of the commitment. Negotiators need to be available
to travel to Washington DC for several days per
week for four or five weeks over several months.
Obviously, being a negotiator takes considerable time
away from your usual employment responsibilities and
requires the nominated person to undertake something
akin to an academic assignment – reading and studying,
discussing and researching, and finally debating and
writing on topics being debated. Negotiating representatives
have to know a great deal about how the various
constituents in their respective communities actually
operate, what their problems and issues are, and what
sort of solutions actually represent reduced burden or
greater fairness to the schools or the students that they
serve.I have been a negotiator on behalf of NASULGC, the National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges, and the experience has been most similar to engaging in a very intense, protracted, and expensive graduate seminar! Prospective negotiators will need enormous support from their employers and their families, as the commitment takes the negotiator away from regular work assignments and family activities for the better part of several months at a stretch and costs the individual, their employer, and the nominating organization money and time. The Department of Education subsidizes the participation of only a few negotiators, including the student representatives and the attorneys from public interest law groups. My employer, the University of California, was my chief sponsor. If you think that you’d like to be a negotiator at some point in the future, you might profitably undertake a close study of current regulations and their structure. Also, you might find it useful to study formal strategies for coming to consensus and crafting compromises. While the ability to think quickly "on your feet" is useful, clever debating skills are not as needed or as productive as excellent, clear drafting abilities and a keen eye for foresight as to the "real world," practical implications of some proffered suggestion! Being good at your job as an aid administrator may not be enough to make you an effective negotiator, just as being a Washington-based spokesperson for a higher education advocacy group may not afford you enough practical wisdom to make good calls with respect to improved regulations. Some groups invited to the negotiating table invite representatives from member institutions to be present to advise them, in an attempt to provide the missing practical perspectives. Being an advisor to a nominated negotiator is an important role that doesn’t have to involve the same level of financial and time commitment typically demanded of a negotiator. This is particularly true in cases where the advisory role is targeted to only certain topics that are under debate – areas where the advisor is particularly well versed. The single best dividend for negotiators is the opportunity to participate in the crafting of better rules and the first-hand understanding of the pressures that yield the rules we finally get. The Department staff lays out the reasons that they resist some of our suggestions and, under the best of circumstance, we enter into a joint effort to craft regulations that address their policy and practical concerns without imposing as much burden on our respective constituent communities. I have come away with several observations. One of the main sources of bad laws is high profile misuse of the program funds or abuse of the welfare of students – a powerful negative anecdote will overwhelm the genius of good rulemaking hands down! The second observation is that a great deal of the really bad rulemaking is tied to ill-considered statute. More attention to the crafting of statute would improve the implementation of the regulations by orders of magnitude. Serving as a negotiator has heightened my awareness of the need to be vigilant as laws are drafted and finalized. We who work on legislative review have our work cut out for us! |
|
|
  table of contents |
|