This thesis uses worldview conflict theory to examine an unsuccessful lobbying campaign of the Coalition for Change for Caregivers and Temporary Foreign Workers. Using Nudler (1990, 1993), Blechman, Crocker, Docherty, and Garon (2000) and Docherty (1996, 2001), a worldview conflict analysis was developed and applied to the campaign. This research addresses two questions: 1) Is communication between the parties being impeded by the negotiation of reality? 2) Could the application of a worldview conflict analysis show the parties a way to communicate without negotiating reality? Data collected from publically available documents (Coalition, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada, and Minister of Human Resources and Skill Development Canada) were analyzed using content analysis, Lakoff and Johnson's (1980) metaphor analysis, and worldview conflict analysis. Similarities between the parties’ worldviews (regarding what is valuable, construction and structure of the world, and enforcement of ethic) indicated ways they could communicate without negotiating reality. / Graduate