The UPS strike of 1997 will go down in history as the largest and most successful strike of the 90’s. During this strike the two types of negotiations used were the avoidance and compromise methods, both parties used these tactics at different times of the strike. The avoidance strategy is used as a response when it is clear that the negotiations have failed and ether party would reject any possible outcome. Normally, lack of cooperation will characterize this strategy immediately. No resolution will be the outcome of this particular strategy. The compromising strategy was used at the very end of the strike when UPS had no other choice. A compromising approach to negotiation is the most appropriate way to settle with all parties, this strategy only works when all parties have some power to sway the outcome. This method can be used for both for temporary and permanent solutions, granted the approval of both parties.

The reason these negotiations worked so well for the employees of UPS was because of how they played offense against the governing agency. By making the part-time situation public and pointing out how UPS was mistreating workers in that respect, this publicly justified a strike and in turn forced UPS to compromise with demands from employees. Even after UPS tried to threaten workers with termination and replacement, in the end they were forced to meet demands or risk losing everything. Initially UPS tried the avoidance method in hopes the workers would not push the issue. This move would inevitably continue to keep profit margins high and neglect the overall problem. As the world quickly found out, there is a higher power in numbers and treating employees well is not an option