The Ascendancy of Employment Arbitrators in US Employment Relations: A New Actor in the American System?

Abstract

In this paper, we survey the underpinnings of the trend towards employment arbitration in the United States, and its implications for the broader industrial relations system. Specifically, we address the question of whether or not employment arbitrators have been substituted for collective bargaining by the government to an extent that warrants their inclusion as an actor in the industrial relations system. We review developments in workplace dispute resolution in the United States, the literature that attempts to explain these developments and posit an assessment of the stability of employment arbitration, and employment arbitrators, as a central feature of the US industrial relations system. Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd/London School of Economics 2006.

From legalism to strategic HRM in India? Grievance management in transition

“…There are two types of procedures: First, compulsory procedures-those imposed by the state through regulations-and second, voluntary procedures-those agreed by the parties concerned, including for example, those agreed between the employers, employees/trade unions and those adopted by the firms with/ without consultation with the employees. This is essentially a procedural approach, and the efficiency and relevance of the schemes in operation have been widely questioned in different national contexts (e.g., Roche & Teague, 2012a;Seeber & Lipsky, 2006).…”

“…With a few exceptions (e.g. Antcliff & Saundry, 2009), most of the studies on grievance management have focused mainly on the existence and effectiveness of procedures (see Antcliff & Saundry, 2009;Bingham, 2004;Budd & Colvin, 2008;Harlos, 2010;Mahony & Klaas, 2008;Roche & Teague, 2011;Seeber & Lipsky, 2006;Van Gramberg, 2006). The role of key stakeholders such as HR managers, line managers, and union representatives in grievance handling was often studied implicitly as part of standard, structural procedures.…”

Transnational Governance of Workers’ Rights: Outlining a Research Agenda

“…Similarly, industrial relations literature has so far only paid scant attention to the CSR trend, the role of NGOs in industrial relations, and similar matters (cf. Kaufman, 2004;Riisgaard, 2005;Heery and Frege, 2006;Seeber and Lipsky, 2006;Waddington, 2006;Egels-Zandén and Hyllman, 2007). In the next section, I outline a research agenda that combines these disparate research streams and outlines promising avenues for future research.…”

The Chinese Medical Doctor Association: A New Industrial Relations Actor in China’s Health Services?

“…In the US, the continuous decline of union membership has created opportunities for alternative institutions to flourish. For example, Employment Rights organizations have been expanding their networks in recent decades (Heckscher and Carre, 2006), while Employment Arbitrators are more active in mediating workplace disputes (Seeber and Lipsky, 2006). The emergence of these institutions offers multiple arenas for industrial relations research, such as the specific form of employee representation and its comparisons with conventional trade unionism (Heery and Frege, 2006: 602).…”