WISCONSIN'S MEDIATION-ARBITRATION LAW: WHAT HAS IT DONE TO BARGAINING?

DAVID R. FRIEDMAN AND STUART S. MUKAMAL

---

DOI: 10.2190/J1TW-UD39-MFBH-TP3H

Abstract

The authors contend that Wisconsin's form of impasse resolution for public employees, while accomplishing the goal of preventing strikes, has seriously weakened collective bargaining. Mediation-arbitration attempts to combine the elements of bargaining, mediation, and arbitration, and this combination often proves unstable. A strong emphasis is placed on mediation, as the law requires mediation by both a state agency and the mediator-arbitrator. If the dispute is not resolved, the arbitrator is required to pick one or the other of the parties' offers judged on the basis of certain statutory standards. The authors believe that reforms need to be made to the current law if collective bargaining is to remain a viable means of promoting labor peace in the public sector. Suggestions are included to stimulate discussions on revitalizing the collective bargaining process in Wisconsin and to allow other states to benefit from Wisconsin's experience.

---

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.