Explaining Rights Arbitrator Willingness to Accept Public Sector Interest Arbitration Cases

Vest, Michael J.; O'Brien, Fabius P.; Vest, Jusanne M.

doi:10.1177/009102609001900309

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As union membership in the public sector has grown, the spread of collective bargaining has created an increased reliance on arbitration (Vest, O'Brien, and Vest, 1990). The study examines the last step of the grievance process--arbitration.…”

Section: Grievance Arbitration In the Public Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the empirical research on grievance arbitration in the public domain is scarce, recent literature does provide some empirical evidence supportmg the distinctive nature of arbitration in the public domain (e.g., Katz and LaVan, 1991;LaVan, 1993;LaVan, Katz, Sendelbach, and Stonebraker, 1987;Magnusen and Renovitch;1989;Rueschhoff, 1991;Stewart and Davy, 1992;Vest, O'Brien, and Vest, 1990). In a series of studies conducted by LaVan and her colleagues, significant differences were found between public and private sector arbitration cases.…”

Section: Grievance Arbitration In the Public Sector: A Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Grievance Arbitration in the Public Sector

Mesch¹

1995

Review of Public Personnel Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines differences between public and private sector grievance arbitration outcomes. The research question addressed in this study is whether or not differences in win, lose, or compromise outcomes exist between the public and private sector and if differences exist regarding discipline cases. Archival data were analyzed from a total of 1127 public and 2822 private arbitration cases for the period 1987 through 1993. Contingency analyses were conducted to test all hypotheses. Results indicate a higher winning percentage and fewer discharge cases in the public as compared to the private sector. Additionally, fewer public sector cases result in long suspensions. The results are discussed in terms of hypothesized public-private differences. ver the past twenty years, much attention has been devoted to comparing public and private organizations (see Perry and Kraemer, 1983; Perry and Rainey, 1988; Rainey, Backoff, and Levine, 1976 for reviews of this literature). The literature suggests several theoretical and practical reasons for gaining a better understanding of these differences, including increasing our confidence of generalizablity of empirical research across settings (e.g., Perry and Rainey, 1988). This stream of research proposes several important distinctions between the two sectors in terms of their ex-ternal environment, organizational structure, incentive system, legal issues, managerial roles, and culture which need to be incorporated into both theory and practice.The early literature examining grievance models in public organizations also supports the distinctive nature of the public sector grievance process when compared to private organizations (e.g.

show abstract

Section: Grievance Arbitration In the Public Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Grievance Arbitration In the Public Sector: A Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grievance Arbitration in the Public Sector

Mesch¹

1995

Review of Public Personnel Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More than one-third of state government employees belong to unions as do almost one-half of people employed by local governments and schools (Coleman, 1990). Ac companying this growth has been the spread of collective bargaining into the public sector and an increased reliance on arbitration (Vest, O'Brien, & Vest, 1990). Many states have passed legislation mandating arbitration and have given arbitrators sole responsibility for settling collective bargaining agreement disputes with binding arbitration provisions (Coleman, 1990;Dunn & Overton, 1988).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Arbitration in Practice: A Profile of Public Sector Arbitration Cases

Mesch¹,

Shamayeva²

1996

Public Personnel Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this paper is to describe the types of cases typically brought to arbitration in the public sector and to analyze the pattern of case resolutions-in what areas is the grievant or management more likely to win, ose, or reach some compromise. Addihonally, compari sons of public versus private arbitration cases are examined. The authors analyzed 994 public sector arbitration cases from Labor Arbitration Reports: Dispute Settlements over a seven year period of time (1985)(1986)(1987)(1988)(1989)(1990)(1991)(1992). Each case was coded according to the parties involved in the dispute, the type of case, and case resolution. The results of this study suggest that a wide variety of cases are brought to arbitration in the public sector and, depending on the type of grievance, the outcome is quite different. Furthermore, although more cases are found in favor of the union in the public sector rather than private sector, management in both the public and private sectors experience a higher winning percentage. Finally, the results indicate that significantly more termination and fewer suspension cases are brought to arbitration in the private than public sector.

show abstract

Explaining Rights Arbitrator Willingness to Accept Public Sector Interest Arbitration Cases

Cited by 2 publications

References 7 publications

Grievance Arbitration in the Public Sector

Grievance Arbitration in the Public Sector

Arbitration in Practice: A Profile of Public Sector Arbitration Cases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About