Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

Hesitancy of Arbitrators to Accept Interest Arbitration Cases: A Test of Conventional Wisdom

I. B. Helburn and Robert C. Rodgers
Public Administration Review
Vol. 45, No. 3 (May - Jun., 1985), pp. 398-402
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Society for Public Administration
DOI: 10.2307/3109967
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3109967
Page Count: 5
  • Download ($25.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Hesitancy of Arbitrators to Accept Interest Arbitration Cases: A Test of Conventional Wisdom
Preview not available

Abstract

Literature suggests a "conventional wisdom" that arbitrators generally are reluctant to accept interest arbitration cases. We examined factors which influenced the acceptance of such cases by experienced arbitrators. Of 285 members of the National Academy of Arbitrators who responded to our survey, 72 percent said that they would hear interest cases, time permitting. Twenty-two percent said that they would "sometimes" hear such cases, while only 6 percent indicated that they refused to hear interest cases. The decision to accept such cases was systematically related to arbitrators' knowledge of union, management and other arbitration panel members to be involved, to single-arbitrator or tripartite arbitration and last-offer or traditional arbitration, and to the type and number of issues involved.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
398
    398
  • Thumbnail: Page 
399
    399
  • Thumbnail: Page 
400
    400
  • Thumbnail: Page 
401
    401
  • Thumbnail: Page 
402
    402