IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/indrel/v55y2024i3p185-204.html

The effects of the socio‐demographic factors on judgement building in arbitration

Author

Listed:
  • Maziar Jafary
  • Jules Carrière

Abstract

This study examines how the socio‐demographic characteristics of arbitrators and of plaintiffs affect arbitrators' judgement bases for arbitration decisions. Two research questions are tested quantitatively based on a data set of arbitration decisions in the Canadian university sector collected from the website of the Canadian Legal Information Institute. We created two models of independent variables related to the socio‐demographic characteristics of arbitrators and plaintiffs. Multinomial logistic regression is used to examine the possible impacts of these variables on the justifications used by arbitrators to explain their decisions. The results indicate that both models significantly influence how arbitrators justify their arbitral decisions. The following variables significantly contribute to the models: arbitrator's age, arbitrator's professional experience in management, plaintiff's gender, and support of the plaintiff by a collective entity (union or association). Young arbitrators are more likely to use “laws” and those who have professional experience in management tend to cite “evidence” to justify their arbitral decisions. Also, arbitrators are more likely to use “evidence” as their judgement basis for male plaintiffs who are supported by a collective entity. The details of these findings, limitations of the study, and future directions for research are further discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Maziar Jafary & Jules Carrière, 2024. "The effects of the socio‐demographic factors on judgement building in arbitration," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 185-204, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:indrel:v:55:y:2024:i:3:p:185-204
    DOI: 10.1111/irj.12422
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/irj.12422
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/irj.12422?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David S. Abrams & Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2012. "Do Judges Vary in Their Treatment of Race?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 347-383.
    2. Rebecca K. Helm & Andrew J. Wistrich & Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, 2016. "Are Arbitrators Human?," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 666-692, December.
    3. Frances Woolley, 2018. "The political economy of university education in Canada," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 51(4), pages 1061-1087, November.
    4. Ichino, Andrea & Polo, Michele & Rettore, Enrico, 2003. "Are judges biased by labor market conditions?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 913-944, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David Abrams & Roberto Galbiati & Emeric Henry & Arnaud Philippe, 2022. "When in Rome... On Local Norms and Sentencing Decisions," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 700-738.
    2. David Abrams & Roberto Galbiati & Emeric Henry & Arnaud Philippe, 2019. "When in Rome… on local norms and sentencing decisions," Post-Print hal-03393093, HAL.
    3. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/4jcok93a4m9d1qtc3vnp4bdefk is not listed on IDEAS
    4. David Abrams & Roberto Galbiati & Emeric Henry & Arnaud Philippe, 2019. "When in Rome… on local norms and sentencing decisions," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-03393093, HAL.
    5. Cécile Bourreau-Dubois & Myriam Doriat-Duban & Bruno Jeandidier & Jean Claude Ray, 2020. "Do sentencing guidelines result in lower inter-judge disparity? Evidence from framed field experiment," Working Papers of BETA 2020-28, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    6. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/3sb2i4b2r694sqks71jbjihput is not listed on IDEAS
    7. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/4jcok93a4m9d1qtc3vnp4bdefk is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Guido de Blasio & Daniela Vuri, 2019. "Effects of the Joint Custody Law in Italy," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 479-514, September.
    9. Kevin Lang & Ariella Kahn-Lang Spitzer, 2020. "Race Discrimination: An Economic Perspective," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 68-89, Spring.
    10. Saltari, Enrico & Tilli, Riccardo, 2011. "Firing costs and labor market tightness: Is there any relationship?," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 1-4, March.
    11. Bertrand Chopard & Eric Langlais, 2009. "Défaut de paiement stratégique et loi sur les défaillances d’entreprises," Working Papers hal-04140885, HAL.
    12. LaVoice, Jessica & Vamossy, Domonkos F., 2024. "Racial disparities in debt collection," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    13. Michel, Bastien & Hémet, Camille, 2026. "Custodial versus non-custodial sentences: Long-run evidence from an anticipated reform," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 248(C).
    14. Andrea Garnero & Claudio Lucifora, 2022. "Turning a ‘Blind Eye’? Compliance with Minimum Wage Standards and Employment," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(356), pages 884-907, October.
    15. Scott Kostyshak & Neel U. Sukhatme, 2025. "Down to the Last Strike: The Effect of the Jury Lottery on Criminal Convictions," Papers 2505.18431, arXiv.org.
    16. Shamena Anwar & Patrick Bayer & Randi Hjalmarsson, 2019. "Politics in the Courtroom: Political Ideology and Jury Decision Making," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(3), pages 834-875.
    17. Fabiano Schivardi & Roberto Torrini, 2004. "Firm size distribution and employment protection legislation in Italy," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 504, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    18. Vadim Volkov, 2016. "Legal and Extralegal Origins of Sentencing Disparities: Evidence from Russia's Criminal Courts," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 637-665, December.
    19. Laszlo Goerke & Markus Pannenberg, 2005. "Severance Pay and the Shadow of the Law: Evidence for West Germany," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 541, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    20. Stéphane Mechoulan & Nicolas Sahuguet, 2015. "Assessing Racial Disparities in Parole Release," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(1), pages 39-74.
    21. Antonio Peyrache & Angelo Zago, 2020. "The (in)efficiency of Justice. An equilibrium analysis of supply policies," CEPA Working Papers Series WP042020, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    22. Omry Yoresh & Weijian Zou, 2026. "The lifecycle of judicial bias," IFS Working Papers W26/12, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    23. Pierre Cahuc & Stéphane Carcillo & Bérengère Patault & Flavien Moreau, 2024. "Judge Bias in Labor Courts and Firm Performance," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 22(3), pages 1319-1366.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:indrel:v:55:y:2024:i:3:p:185-204. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0019-8692 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.