Explain why the traditional collective bargaining process in the U.S. has been criticized for producing collective bargaining agreements (or union contracts) that are incompatible with today's business needs.

The traditional collective bargaining process has been criticized for producing collective bargaining agreements (union contracts) that are incompatible with today's business needs in three major ways. First, the business need for flexibility (efficiency) clashes with the lengthy contracts that spell out detailed work rules (equity). In addition, flexible compensation systems to promote and reward highly-performing employees can clash with equity if the systems are perceived by others as too subjective or unfair. The second major criticism is based on the business need for cooperation and employee involvement. These both clash with the traditional adversarial bargaining process in which labor and management use aggressive tactics to extract as many gains or concessions from the other side as their power allows. Third, the need for both flexibility and involvement is not well served by a process in which contracts are renegotiated every three years with little to no communication between these negotiating periods.