I don't know what allowing observers would really accomplish in negotiations. For one. As 700UW noted at post #46. When confidential information is being discussed observers are asked to leave the room from what I would assume is his AMFA experience. Secondly I don't know what would restrict the parties from having those who wish to observe sign confidentuality statements, so what would you gain from having them there in the first place? I see it as only complicative to the end result and not essential to the outcome to have non-participants observing talks. Besides, lets say observers were allowed and the parties decide to have future negotiations in Tulsa, you fella's would be crying foul because you would fear your issues on the line would go ignored, or if negotiations were to be held in New York then the Tulsa folks would again cry foul for the same because they would fear their issues were being ignored. Also, those only being allowed to attend would most likely be from the negotiation host city and I don't think the company would be willing to fly folks all over the place, take them off the clock, just to sit there and be a non-particpant's. We elect our leaders to represent us and I don't think they need 24/7 day care to get the job done....just my spiel
i dont think tulsa will be hosting negotiations next time. tulsa will be kind of insignificant by then. if there are 2000 peolpe in tulsa in 4 years i would be suprised.