Controversy king

Hi all,

A detailed description of events involving the case of Darrell Hair in the Pakistan-England Test Match can be found here. I would try to keep my viewpoints in relation to the incident as much as possible. However do excuse me if I happen to bring in other relevant [of course according to me] observations.

Darrell Hair was a well established umpire elected by the ICC into its elite panel of umpires. He had been voted the Umpire of the Season in a poll carried out by The Wisden Cricketer (Link). If we consider the case of Darrell Hair, it has been indicated by him that he had been encouraged to make the offer. His bargaining power is mainly from the fact that he stood on the ICC elite panel and any reactions by the ICC on this case would attract a lot of media attention. He had not taken any decision in the incident at hand that was against the books. This had been confirmed by the ICC as well. Hence, I take the liberty of assuming that the ICC could not have terminated his contract prior to March 2008 without providing compensation as acceptable to him. Also, in this case, the consideration of Labor market does not have a very major influence. The reason for this being that the ICC is an unparalleled body and does not have major competitors in the cricketing circuit. Mr Hair could have well been contemplating a “lifestyle change” himself and he would have been reasonably satisfied even if his offer was rejected, sending a wave of negativity to the ICC and he was not selected to umpire in upcoming Test Matches during his term of employment [This is a very far-fetched possibility but I have let my imagination run wild].

Whether or not an individual would be able to make a similar non-negotiable offer to the employer would primarily depend on the terms of employment. However, such a move on the part of the employee may well have future repercussions not in favor of the employee (as had happened in the case of Darrell Hair). In the IT sector, there are occasions when employees try to negotiate for higher pay packages and increments by bargaining with the aid of better offers from other employers. Even if the employee is successful at that juncture to avail a hefty rise or increment and other perks, he may well be the first in the firing line when the organization is facing a crunch situation since he has the lost the trust and goodwill of the employer. Also, it may well happen that the employer may want to “teach a lesson” to such employees and may temporarily accept the terms and conditions of the employee but later show the door to the employee on basis of “performance issues”. A similar situation had occurred with Darrell Hair wherein he was removed from the ICC panel of umpires under the pretext of bad umpiring and poor decision making and was put onto a developmental programme for 6 months.

Majority of the organizations today have adequate lawyers staffed to deal with such situations. If an employee gives me a non-negotiable offer, I would consider the following:

• Consult the lawyers seeking possible legal actions that could be taken by both parties.
• Analyze the financial costs related to the possible alternatives of action. For instance, considering the role play that was taken up in the class, management would not like to create an imbalance in the internal equity of their organization.
• Consider the social aspect of the outcomes. I would not like to send any weak or negative signals to employees within the organization which would tempt them to approach the management with non-negotiable offers that are not in the interest of the organization

I hope I have been able to do some justice to the issue at hand with my limited understanding of the technicalities involved. Looking forward to your valuable comments and any sort of constructive feedback.

Regards,

Urv