Since the late 1980s there has been a growing concern among employers in New Zealand that employees take advantage of personal grievance provisions to make more claims and gain higher compensation when problems arise in employment relationships. The current study used data from a national sample of employers within the private sector and found that the cost of resolving employment problems for employers was relatively low, particularly when disputes were resolved in-house. Further it was found that employers' satisfaction with the dispute resolution was mostly affected by the method by which the resolution was achieved, rather than by the cost or benefits resulting from the disputes. Possible explanations for this phenomenon are discussed.
Abramson, H.J. (1988) Making Sense of Data. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
2.
Barry, M. and Wailes, N. (2004) `Contrasting Systems?: 100 Years of Arbitration in Australia and New Zealand', Journal of Industrial Relations46(4): 430-47.
3.
Bemmels, B. and Lau, D. (2001) `Local Union Leaders' Satisfaction with Grievance Procedures', Journal of Labor Research22(3): 653-67.
4.
Bingham, L. (2004) `Employment Dispute Resolution: The Case for Mediation' , Conflict Resolution Quarterly22(1-2): 145-74.
5.
Bray, M. and Walsh, P. (1998) `Different Paths to Neo-liberalism?: Comparing Australia and New Zealand', Industrial Relations37(3): 358-87.
6.
Budd, J.W. and Colvin, A. (2005) Balancing Efficiency, Equity and Voice in Workplace Dispute Resolution Procedures. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
Corby, S. (2000) `Unfair Dismissal Disputes: A Comparative Study of Great Britain and New Zealand', Human Resource Management Journal10(1): 79-92.
9.
Deeley, S. (2000) An Alternative Dispute Resolution Louisville Metropolitan Area Company and Attorney Survey. Louisville, KY: University of Louisville.
10.
Department of Labour (2007a) Personal Grievance Determinations in the Employment Relations Authority. Wellington: Department of Labour.
11.
Department of Labour (2007b) Report on Findings from Focus Groups. Wellington: Department of Labour.
12.
Employers and Manufacturers Association Northern (2006) `Grievance Gravy Train Picking up Speed', accessed 25 July 2007http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU0606/S00067.htm
13.
Gardiner, J. (2003) `Radio Budgets $1/4m for Staff Disputes', The New Zealand Herald (5 December), http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=3537770
14.
Gibbons, M. (2007) Better Dispute Resolution: A Review of Employment Dispute Resolution in Great Britain. London: Department of Trade and Industry.
15.
Goldberg, S.B., Rogers, N.H. and Sander, F.E.A. (1992) Dispute Resolution Negotiation Mediation and Other Processes. Boston, MA: Little Brown & Company.
16.
Harbridge, R. and Crawford, A. (1997) `The Impact of New Zealand's Employment Contracts Act on Industrial Relations', California Western International Law Review Journal28(1): 235-51.
17.
Hebert, L.C. (1999) `Establishing and Evaluating a Workplace Mediation Pilot Project: An Ohio Case Study', Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution14: 415-80.
18.
John, W.Z. (1996) `Employment Dispute Resolution Systems: Experience Grows but Some Questions Persist', Negotiation Journal12(2): 151-65.
19.
Lewin, D. (2006) `Management Responses to Non-union Dispute Resolution Outcomes: A Political Analysis', paper presented at the Labor and Employment Relations Association, Boston , January.
20.
Lipsky, D. and Avgar, A. (2004) `Commentary: Research on Employment Dispute Resolution: Toward a New Paradigm', Conflict Resolution Quarterly22(1-2): 175-89.
21.
Martin, M. and Woodhams, B. (2007) Personal Grievance Mediations Conducted at the Department of Labour: A Snapshot. Wellington: Department of Labour.
22.
Miller, D. (2006) `The True Cost of Personal Grievance?', accessed 27 July 2007http://www.cma.org.nz/index.cfm/media_releases/061221_personal_grievance.html
23.
Pavlak, T., Clarck, P. and Gallagher, D. (1992) `Measuring Attitudes Toward Grievance Systems: A Procedural Justice Perspective Applied to the Workplace', Social Justice Research5(2): 173-94.
24.
Pierre, C. (2006) Perceptions of Procedural Justice in Workplace Dispute Mediations: Bargaining in the Shadow of Justice. Washington, DC: The George Washington University.
25.
Plapinger, E. and Stienstra, D. (1996) ADR and Settlement in the Federal District Courts: A Sourcebook for Judges and Lawyers. Washington, DC: Federal Judicial Center and CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution.
26.
Potts, H. (2003) The Prevalence of Mediation/Conflict Resolution in the Workplace. Houston, TX: The University of Houston-Clear Lake.
27.
Rasmussen, E. (2004) Employment Relationships: New Zealand's Employment Relations Act. Auckland: Auckland University Press.
28.
Romero, B. (2004) Workplace Mediation: Benefits, Function and Policy . New York: State University of New York.
29.
SPSS Inc. (2002) SPSS for Windows (Version 11.5). Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.
30.
Stitt, A.J. (1998) ADR for Organizations: Alternative Dispute Resolution for Organizations: How to Design a System for Effective Conflict Resolution . Toronto: Wiley.
31.
Subrin, S.N. (2002) `Traditionalist Looks at Mediation: It's Here to Stay and Much Better than I Thought, A Symposium: Perspectives on Dispute Resolution in the Twenty-First Century', Nevada Law Journal2: 196-231.
32.
Van Gramberg, B. (2003) ADR and Workplace Justice: Just Settlement?Melbourne: Victoria University.
33.
Van Gramberg, B. and Men, J. (2005) Grievance Procedures in Organisations: Why Do They Fail?Melbourne: School of Management, Victoria University.
34.
Woodhams, B., McDermott Miller Ltd, Howard, C., Johri, R., Shulruf, B. and Yee, B. (2007) Economic and Social Costs and Benefits of Employment Relationship Problems and How They Vary According to Mechanisms Used for Resolution. Wellington: Department of Labour.
