The Economics of Collective Negotiation in Pretrial Bargaining
This article studies the strategic use of collective negotiation in multiplaintiff litigation. Compared with one-on-one negotiation, collective negotiation can change the distribution of per-plaintiff damages in a manner that influences the defendant's bargaining incentive. Informational asymmetry among the members of collective action and delegation of bargaining to a self-interested representative can yield a tougher bargaining position. A plaintiff's decision to join the collective action can signal his type, which in turn influences the defendant's bargaining behavior. In equilibrium, some plaintiffs join the action for fear of sending a bad signal. Copyright Economics Department of the University of Pennsylvania and the Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association
Volume (Year): 43 (2002)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (215) 898-8487
Fax: (215) 573-2057
Web page: http://www.econ.upenn.edu/ier
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:|| Web: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/subs.asp?ref=0020-6598 Email: |
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ier:iecrev:v:43:y:2002:i:2:p:549-576. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)or ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.