Wage Negotiation Under Good Faith Bargaining
We study the wage negotiation model of Haller and Holden (1990) and Fernandez and Glazer (1991) under the "Good Faith Bargaining" (GFB) rule, where a party may not demand more than it has previously demanded. The GFB rule significantly restricts feasible strategies, but at the same time, makes the game non-stationary and the analysis complicated. We introduce a state-dependent backward induction that generalizes Shaked and Sutton (1984) to characterize the equilibrium payoffs. We find that the GFB rule eliminates the union's credibility to strike. Without the strikes, the union's strategic opportunities during disagreement disappear, so that there is a unique equilibrium. This uniqueness contrasts sharply with the multiple equilibrium outcomes that obtain when no GFB rule is imposed.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 09 (2007)
Issue (Month): 03 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.worldscinet.com/igtr/igtr.shtml|
|Order Information:|| Email: |
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wsi:igtrxx:v:09:y:2007:i:03:p:551-564. 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: (Tai Tone Lim)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.