Systems for resolving workplace disputes are very important to workers and firms, and have been the subject of much debate. In the United States, traditional unionized grievance procedures, emerging nonunion dispute resolution systems, and the court-based system for resolving employment law disputes have all been criticized. Much of the existing debate on workplace dispute resolution, however, has been atheoretical, with a focus on techniques of dispute resolution rather than the goals of the system. What is missing from the debate are fundamental standards for comparing and evaluating dispute resolutions systems. In this paper, we develop efficiency, equity, and voice as these standards. Unionized, nonunion, and employment law procedures are then evaluated against these three standards.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Industrial Relations Center, University of Minnesota (Twin Cities Campus) in its series Working Papers with number
0105.
Length: Date of creation: Date of revision: Handle: RePEc:hrr:papers:0105
Contact details of provider: Postal: 3-300 Carlson School of Management, 321 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55455-0438 Phone: (612) 624-2500 Fax: (612) 624-8360 Email: Web page: http://www.chrls.csom.umn.edu/ More information through EDIRC
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Mary Walker).
Related research
Keywords:
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.: