Four key assumptions about public sector interest arbitration are drawn from a review of the literature and four interest groups are identified. The degree of acceptance of these assumptions by the interest groups is measured and demographic explanations of the measured attitudes are explored. Results of the study suggest that public personnel managers can expect general acceptance of the assumptions among and between the interest groups. Results further suggest that education level is a key factor in acceptance of the use of public sector interest arbitration for impasse resolution.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonArvid“Lessons from Interest Arbitration in the Public Sector: The Experience of Four Jurisdictions.”The National Academy of Arbitration. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting. Kansas City, MO., April 23–26, 1974.
2.
AndersonJohn C.“The Impact of Arbitration: A Methodological Assessment.”Industrial Relations, XX, No. 2, (1981), 129–148.
3.
BlockHoward S.1971. “Criteria in Public Sector Interest Disputes.”The National Academy of Arbitrators. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, CA., January 27–29, 1971.
ButlerRichard J.EhrenbergRonald G.“Estimating the Narcotic Effect of Public Sector Impasse Procedures.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, XXXV, No. 1, (1981), 3–20.
6.
DillmanDon A.Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1978.
7.
FarberHenry S.KatzHarry C.“Interest Arbitration, Outcomes, and the Incentives to Bargain. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, XXXIII, No. 1, (1979), 55–63.
8.
FeuillePeter“Selected Benefits and Costs of Compulsory Arbitration.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, XXXIII, No. 1, (1979), 64–76.
9.
GrodinJoseph R.“Arbitration of Public Sector Labor Disputes: The Nevada Experiment.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, XXVIII, No. 1, (1974) 89–102.
10.
KochanThomas A.BaderschneiderJean“Dependence on Impasse Procedures: Police and Firefighters in New York State.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, XXXI, No. 4, (1978), 431–439.
11.
“Estimating the Narcotic Effect: Choosing Techniques that Fit the Problem.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, XXXV, No. 4, (1981), 21–28.
12.
LongGaryFeuillePeter“Final-Offer Arbitration: Sudden Death in Eugene.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, XXVII, No. 2, (1974), 186–203.
13.
News USDA—5604, “Address before the National Academy of Arbitrators — Willard Wirtz, Chicago, February 1, 1963”, (February 2, 1963), 10.
14.
SPSS Inc.Spssx User's Guide. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1983.
WellingtonHarry H.WinterRalph K.Jr.The Unions and the Cities. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute, 1971.
18.
WheelerHoyt N.OwenFrank“Impasse Resolution Preferences of Fire Fighters and Municipal Negotiators.”Journal of Collective Negotiations, V, No. 3, (1976), 215–224.
