The recent NJ Transit engineers' strike that brought rail service to a halt for three days offers a compelling case study in how understanding underlying motivations—what RED BEAR calls "buying motives"—can make or break high-stakes negotiations. While the immediate issue appeared to be wages, the real drivers behind both sides' positions reveal deeper psychological and strategic motivations that skilled negotiators must uncover to reach breakthrough agreements.
On the surface, the NJ Transit strike was about money: locomotive engineers demanding wage parity with neighboring rail systems, and management citing fiscal constraints. But applying RED BEAR's buying motives framework reveals more complex drivers at play.
The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) wasn't just seeking financial gain—though that was certainly a factor. Their deeper motivations included:
Social Approval and Status: The union's consistent emphasis on "parity" with Long Island Railroad, Metro-North, and Amtrak engineers reveals a strong desire for professional recognition and respect. As one striking engineer told NBC News, "A lot of our guys could go across the platform and make 10, 12 dollars more an hour." This isn't just about money—it's about feeling valued relative to peers.
Emotional Benefits: The union's focus on retention and job satisfaction indicates deeper emotional drivers. With membership dropping from 500 to 450 engineers in just five months, the union was motivated by preventing the emotional toll of watching colleagues leave for better opportunities.
Well-being and Security: After six years without raises while inflation eroded purchasing power, engineers faced genuine concerns about maintaining their standard of living and ability to support families. One engineer on the picket line expressed this clearly: "I do want to start a family. I do want to buy a home. Is NJ Transit the place for me to do that?"
NJ Transit leadership's motivations extended beyond simple cost control:
Financial Responsibility: CEO Kris Kolluri repeatedly emphasized fiscal responsibility to taxpayers, citing that the union's demands would cost $1.363 billion over five years and require either 17% fare increases or 27% corporate fee hikes.
Organizational Equity: The "me too" clauses in 14 other union contracts created a patronage motive—maintaining loyalty and fairness across all employee groups. Giving engineers significantly higher raises without similar increases for other unions could damage internal relationships.
Long-term Viability: Management's concern about the agency's future sustainability reflected deeper strategic thinking about maintaining service for nearly 200,000 daily commuters.
Both sides initially focused on rational arguments—wage comparisons, fiscal projections, and operational data. But these surface-level discussions missed the underlying emotional and psychological drivers that were actually steering the negotiation.
The union demanded specific dollar amounts while management countered with fiscal limitations. This created a classic negotiation impasse because neither side was addressing the other's true motivations:
Using RED BEAR's framework of conscious versus dormant buying motives, we can see that many of the real drivers weren't initially visible:
Dormant Union Motives:
Dormant Management Motives:
RED BEAR's approach to uncovering buying motives through strategic questioning could have transformed this negotiation. Instead of immediately jumping to wage figures, skilled negotiators would have explored deeper motivations through what RED BEAR calls Stage 2 questions.
For the Union:
For Management:
Understanding the full range of buying motives could have led to more innovative solutions:
Addressing Social Approval Motives:
Meeting Emotional Benefits Needs:
Satisfying Financial and Security Motives:
The public nature of this negotiation also reveals how different communication styles impacted the process. CEO Kolluri's data-driven, analytical approach clashed with the union's more relationship-focused communication style.
Union Communication Style: Emphasized relationships, fairness, and emotional connections to the work. Their messaging focused on serving commuters and feeling undervalued.
Management Communication Style: Relied heavily on fiscal data, operational metrics, and analytical comparisons. Their approach was fact-based and process-oriented.
This mismatch created communication barriers that could have been avoided by:
The strike ended when both sides finally began addressing underlying motivations rather than just surface positions. The tentative agreement reached after three days reflected compromises that addressed multiple buying motives:
The NJ Transit strike offers valuable insights for any organization facing labor negotiations:
Before presenting offers or making demands, invest time in understanding what's really driving each side. Use strategic questioning to uncover both conscious and dormant motivations.
Don't assume negotiations are only about financial terms. Consider:
Tailor your communication style to your counterpart's preferences. Data-driven negotiators need facts and analysis, while relationship-focused negotiators respond to stories and emotional connections.
Understanding buying motives enables creative solutions that address multiple needs simultaneously, rather than zero-sum compromises.
While this case study focuses on labor negotiations, the principles apply to any high-stakes negotiation:
Sales Negotiations: Understanding whether your buyer is motivated by cost savings, professional recognition, risk mitigation, or operational efficiency changes how you position your solution.
Partnership Agreements: Uncovering whether partners are driven by market expansion, risk sharing, innovation access, or competitive advantage shapes deal structure.
Vendor Negotiations: Recognizing whether suppliers are motivated by volume commitments, payment terms, relationship exclusivity, or strategic positioning informs your approach.
The NJ Transit case demonstrates why RED BEAR's focus on buying motives gives negotiators a significant advantage. By moving beyond surface-level positions to understand underlying psychological and strategic drivers, skilled negotiators can:
The three-day NJ Transit strike cost the agency $12 million and caused significant disruption for hundreds of thousands of commuters. But the real cost was the missed opportunity to resolve these issues months earlier through better understanding of the underlying motivations driving both sides.
For organizations facing their own high-stakes negotiations, the lesson is clear: invest time in understanding what your counterparts are truly trying to achieve. When you can address their real buying motives—not just their stated positions—you'll find pathways to agreements that seemed impossible when you were only negotiating on the surface.
Ready to transform your team's negotiation capabilities? RED BEAR's proven methodology has helped organizations avoid costly impasses by teaching professionals how to uncover and address the real motivations behind every negotiation.