IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/brjirl/v44y2006i4p719-756.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Ronald L. Seeber
  • David B. Lipsky

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Ronald L. Seeber & David B. Lipsky, 2006. "The Ascendancy of Employment Arbitrators in US Employment Relations: A New Actor in the American System?," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 44(4), pages 719-756, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:44:y:2006:i:4:p:719-756
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8543.2006.00521.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.2006.00521.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-8543.2006.00521.x?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ian Kessler & Stephen Bach, 2011. "The Citizen‐Consumer as Industrial Relations Actor: New Ways of Working and the End‐user in Social Care," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 49(1), pages 80-102, March.
    2. Fang Cooke & Debi Saini, 2015. "From legalism to strategic HRM in India? Grievance management in transition," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 619-643, September.
    3. Benoit P. Freyens, 2011. "Dismissal Disputes and the Incentives to Bargain: Estimates of the Contract Zone," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 64(3), pages 576-598, April.
    4. Benoît Pierre FREYENS, 2010. "Measuring firing costs: The case for direct methods," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 149(3), pages 287-313, September.
    5. Christine A. Riordan & Alexander M. Kowalski, 2021. "From Bread and Roses to #MeToo: Multiplicity, Distance, and the Changing Dynamics of Conflict in IR Theory," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 74(3), pages 580-606, May.
    6. Mark D. Gough & Alexander J. S. Colvin, 2020. "Decision-Maker and Context Effects in Employment Arbitration," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 73(2), pages 479-497, March.
    7. Niklas Egels-Zandén, 2009. "Transnational Governance of Workers’ Rights: Outlining a Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 87(2), pages 169-188, June.
    8. William K. Roche, 2015. "The emergence of a dual system of dispute resolution: private facilitators in Irish industrial relations," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 293-311, July.
    9. David B. Lipsky & J. Ryan Lamare & Abhishek Gupta, 2013. "The Effect of Gender on Awards in Employment Arbitration Cases: The Experience in the Securities Industry," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52, pages 314-342, January.

    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:brjirl:v:44:y:2006:i:4:p:719-756. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    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.