In this study of the consistency and predictability of grievance arbitration awards, 177 arbitrators named awards and 188 management and union representatives predicted awards for six hypothetical cases—-three variants of a just-cause dismissal case and three of a contract interpretation case. The awards were quite variable: in one variant of each case, somewhat more than 70% of the arbitrators agreed on the award, but in all other instances the level of agreement was below 57%. This inconsistency does not appear to be related to the arbitrator's age, gender, educational degree, or experience. On the other hand, the authors find that the distribution of predictions by management representatives corresponded fairly well to the distribution of awards.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BankstonEddie W.1976. “Value Differences Between Attorney and Economist Labor Arbitrators.” In SternJ. and DennisB., eds., Proceedings of the 29th Annual Winter Meeting, Industrial Relations Research Association. Madison, Wis.: IRRA, pp. 151–60.
2.
BazermanMax H.1985. “Norms of Distributive Justice in Interest Arbitration.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 558–70.
3.
BazermanMax H., and FarberHenry S.. 1985. “Arbitrator Decision Making: When Are Final Offers Important?”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 76–89.
4.
BemmelsBrian. 1988. “The Effects of Grievants' Gender on Arbitrators' Decisions.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 251–62.
5.
BigonessWilliam J., and DuBosePhilip B.. 1985. “Effects of Gender on Arbitrator Decisions.”Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 485–91.
6.
BlockRichard N., and StieberJack. 1987. “The Impact of Attorneys and Arbitrators on Arbitration Awards.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 543–55.
7.
CainJoseph P., and StahlMichael E.. 1983. “Modeling the Policies of Several Labor Arbitrators.”Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 140–47.
8.
DworkinHarry. 1974. “How Arbitrators Decide Cases.”Labor Law Journal, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 200–210.
9.
ElkouriFrank, and ElkouriEdna Asper. 1985. How Arbitration Works. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of National Affairs.
10.
FarberHenry S., and BazermanMax H.. 1986. “The General Basis of Arbitrator Behavior.”Econometrica, Vol. 54, pp. 819–44.
11.
FlemingRobin W.1965. The Labor Arbitration Process. Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press.
12.
GandzJeffrey. 1976. “Grievance Arbitration: A Model for the Study of Policy Change.”Relations Industrielles, Vol. 31, No. 4, pp. 631–51.
13.
GetmanJack. 1979. “Labor Arbitration and Dispute Resolution.”Yale Law Journal, Vol. 88, No. 5, pp. 916–49.
14.
GrossJames. 1967. “Value Judgments in the Decisions of Arbitrators.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 55–72.
15.
GrossJames. 1968. “Value Judgments in the Decisions of Arbitrators—Reply.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 431–32.
16.
HaysPaul R.1966. Labor Arbitration: A Dissenting View. New Haven: Yale University Press.
17.
JonesDallas J., and SmithRussell A.. 1964. “Management and Labor Appraisals and Criticisms of the Arbitration Process.”Michigan Law Review, Vol. 62, No. 7, pp. 1115–56.
18.
KershenHarry. 1975. “How Impartial Is Impartial Arbitration When It Involves Public School Teachers?”Journal of Collective Negotiations in the Public Sector, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 217–23.
19.
KingBrian L.1971. “Some Aspects of the Active Labor Arbitrator.”Personnel Journal, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 115–23.
20.
LoftusElizabeth. 1988. “Memory and Searching for the Truth.” In Proceedings of the Fortieth Annual Meeting of the National Academy of Arbitrators. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of National Affairs.
21.
MittenthalRichard. 1979. “Credibility: A Will o' the Wisp.” In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the National Academy of Arbitrators. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of National Affairs.
22.
MuellerJohn H., and SchuesslerKarl F.. 1961. Statistical Reasoning in Sociology. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
23.
NelsonNels E., and CurryEarl M.Jr.1981. “Arbitrator Characteristics and Arbitral Decisions.”Industrial Relations, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 312–17.
24.
PetersenDonald H.1970. “Union Prediction in Arbitration.”Labor Law Journal, Vol. 21, No. 12, pp. 787–93.
25.
RezlerJulius, and PetersenDonald. 1978. “Strategies of Arbitrator Selection.”Labor Arbitration Reports, Vol. 70, pp. 1307–20.
26.
RodgersRobert C., and HelburnI. B.. 1985. “The Arbitrariness of Arbitrators' Decisions.” In DennisB., ed., Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting, Industrial Relations Research Association. Madison, Wis.: IRRA, pp. 234–41.
27.
ScottK. Dow, and TaylorStephen G.. 1983. “An Analysis of Absenteeism Cases Taken to Arbitration: 1975–1981.”Arbitration Journal, Vol. 38, pp. 61–70.
28.
SeitzPeter. 1968. “Value Judgments in the Decisions of Labor Arbitrators—Comment.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 21, No 3, pp. 427–30.
29.
SeltzerGeorge. 1977. “Impartiality in Arbitration: Its Conditions and Bench Marks.”Journal of Collective Negotiations in the Public Sector, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 29–36.
30.
ShoreRichard P.1966. “Conceptions of the Arbitrator's Role.”Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 172–78.
31.
WeekleyJeff A., and GierJoseph A.. 1989. “Ceilings in the Reliability and Validity of Performance Ratings: The Case of Expert Raters.”Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 213–22.
32.
WesterkampPatrick R., and MillerAllen K.. “The Acceptability of Inexperienced Arbitrators: An Experiment.”Labor Law Journal, Vol. 22, No. 12, pp. 763–70.
33.
ZirkelPerry A., and MacMurtrieFaith L.. 1986. “A Scalogram Analysis of Supreme Court Establishment Clause Cases in Education.”Education Law Reporter, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 1–10.
