Baywood Publishing Company
2167-7816
2167-7824
Journal of Collective Negotiations (formerly Journal of Collective Negotiations in the Public Sector)
BWCN
300318
http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=journal&id=300318
30
1
1
0
0
0
000030000120030301
Number 1/2003
877K229NTMU8
http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=issue&id=877K229NTMU8
10.2190/76KK-UT1R-HFEU-N4CQ
76KKUT1RHFEUN4CQ
77
AN EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS OF THE SELECTION OF ARBITRATORS IN COMPULSORY INTEREST ARBITRATION PROCEEEDINGS: THE MICHIGAN EXPERIENCE
77
90
20030123
20030123
20030123
20030123
76KKUT1RHFEUN4CQ.pdf
http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=76KKUT1RHFEUN4CQ
1
MARIS STELLA (STAR)
SWIFT
BRIAN R.
JOHNSON
RICK
POSTHUMA
Grand Valley State University, Grand Rapids, Michigan
University of Texas at El Paso
This research provides a review of the compulsory arbitration process in Michigan. It first provides a qualitative description of how arbitrators are selected as members of the arbitration panel maintained and administered by the Michigan Employment Relations Commission (MERC). Using official data from MERC, this study also examined the background characteristics of all arbitrators (n = 54) listed as members of the panel. It found that the members of MERC's arbitration panel are predominately white males who have over 11 years of experience and possess law degrees. Using a multivariate model to explore what background characteristics are predictors of the selection of a neutral arbitrator by the parties in dispute, it was found that age, gender, years of experience, and education were not significant variables affecting the selection of arbitrators.
B. Bemmels, Arbitrator Characteristics and Arbitrator Decisions, Journal of Labor Research, 11:2, pp. 181-192, Spring 1980.
M. C. Bernstein, Alternatives to the Strike in Public Labor Relations, Harvard Law Review, 85, pp. 459-478, December 1971.
MCLA 423.235.
R. A. Posthuma and J. B. Dworkin, A Behavioral Theory of Arbitrator Acceptability, International Journal of Conflict Management, 11:3, pp. 249-266, 2000.
L. Kanowitz, Alternative Dispute Resolution and the Public Interest: The Arbitration Experience, Hastings Law Journal, 38, pp. 239-303, January 1987.
MCLA 423.233.
N. L. Kauffman and W. L. McKee, Labor Arbitrator Selection and the Theory of Demand, Arbitration Journal, 42:1, pp. 35-42, March 1987.
J. Delaney and P. Feuille, Police Interest Arbitration: Awards and Issues, The Arbitration Journal, 39:2, pp. 14-24, June 1984.
R. N. Block and L. Stieber, The Impact of Attorneys and Arbitrators on Arbitration Awards, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 40:4, pp. 543-555, July 1987.
S. Hoffman, Mandatory Arbitration: Alternative Dispute Resolution of Coercive Dispute Suppression? Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, 17, pp. 131-157, 1996.
H. G. Heneman and M. H. Sandver, Arbitrators' Backgrounds and Behavior, Journal of Labor Research, 4:2, pp. 115-125, Spring 1983.
D. E. Bloom and C. L. Cavanagh, An Analysis of the Selection of Arbitrators, The American Economic Review, 76:3, pp. 408-423, June 1986.
C. A. Olsen and B. L. Rau, Learning From Interest Arbitration: The Next Round, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 50, pp. 237-251, January 1997.
C. J. Coleman, The Arbitrator's Cases: Number, Sources, Issues and Implication, in Labor Arbitration in America, M. F. Bognunno and C. J. Coleman, (Eds.), Praeger, New York, pp. 85-107, 1992.
E. J. Spelfogel, New Trends in the Arbitration of Employment Disputes, The Arbitration Journal, 48:1, pp. 6-11, March 1993.
D. Nolan, Labor and Employment Arbitration: What's justice Got To Do With It? Dispute Resolution Journal, 53:4, pp. 40-49, November 1998.
S. S. Briggs and J. C. Anderson, An Empirical Investigation of Arbitrator Acceptability, Industrial Relations, 19:2, pp. 163-174, Spring 1980.
N. Buonocore, Resurrecting a Dead Horse--Arbitrator Certification as a Means to Achieve Diversity, University of Detroit Mercy School of Law, 76, pp. 483-500, Winter 1999.
R. G. Howlett, Interest Arbitration in the Public Sector, Chicago-Kent Law Review, 60, pp. 815-837, 1984.
A. Bloom, M. Dempsey, I. S. Rothchild, S. Roca, and J. L. Hall, Altemative Dispute Resolution in Health Care, Whittier Law Review, 16, pp. 61-86, 1995.
D. J. Peterson and M. Katz, Male and Female Arbitrator Perceptions of the Arbitration Process, Labor Law Journal, 39:2, pp. 110-119, February 1988.
M. F. Hill and E. DeLacenserie, Interest Criteria in Fact-Finding and Arbitration: Evidentiary and Substantive Considerations, Marquette Law Review, 74, pp. 399-449, Spring/Summer 1991.
W. M. Howard, The Evolution of Contractually Mandated Arbitration, The Arbitration Journal, 48, pp. 27-38, September 1993.
N. E. Nelson, The Selection of Arbitrators, Labor Law Journal, 37, pp. 703-711, October 1986.
O. Ashenfelter and D. Hyslop, Measuring the Effect of Arbitration on Wage Levels: The Case of Police Officers, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 54:2, pp. 316-329, January 2001.
F. Elkouri and E. A. Elkouri, How Arbitration Works, Bureau of National Affairs, Washington, D.C., 1985.
MCLA 423.506.
E. M. Meth, Final Offer Arbitration: A Model for Dispute Resolution in Domestic and International Disputes, American Review of International Arbitration, 10:3, pp. 383-421, 1999.
H. T. Edwards, Alternative Dispute Resolution: Panacea or Anathema? Harvard Law Review, 99:3, pp. 668-684, January 1986.
E. J. Costello, Selecting a Neutral, Arbitration Journal, 48:3, pp. 42-46, September 1993.
M. W. Hawkins, Alternative Dispute Resolution: An Alternative for Resolving Employment Litigation and Disputes,Northern Kentucky Law Review,20, pp. 493-503, Winter 1993.
E. G. Wrong, Selecting an Arbitrator for a Discrimination Grievance, The Personnel Administrator, 28:1, pp. 58-61, January 1983.