The Process of Selecting the Arbitrator

After an organization has unionized, the union and organization must negotiate the terms of the agreement to reach a mutually beneficial agreement. The negotiation of these terms results in the creation or renewal of a collective agreement. A collective agreement is defined as “a labour contract that addresses a variety of issues such as wages and benefits, hours of work, working conditions, grievance procedures, safety standards, probationary periods, and work assignments. Usually negotiated between the local union’s bargaining committee and the human resource or industrial relations department” (Schwind, Uggerslev, Wagar, Fassina, & Bulmash, 2016, p. 597). The union and organization must both agree to the terms of a collective agree but if they are not able to come to an agreement conciliation, mediation or interest arbitration will often take place. Conciliation occurs when a government-appointed third party is brought in to help resolve the dispute. Mediation is similar but instead uses a neutral third party to help resolve the dispute. Arbitration is

Collective bargaining, as its name implies, is achieved when two or more parties come together to make a decision about something. Specifically, it is achieved when employers and a group of employees work together to decide important terms and conditions regarding employment. These terms and conditions include compensation as well as rights and responsibilities of employees, employers, and unions. They can also include guidelines for resolving problems such as grievances and disputes (Budd, 2010, p. 13).

Disputes between individuals can be resolved through mediation, tribunals and courts are sought depending on the complexity and nature of the dispute. Their effectiveness in achieving justice for and between individuals to varying extents will be assessed by their ability to uphold notions of fairness, equality, access, timeliness, enforceability and resource efficiency.

“Grievance mediation is an alternative dispute resolution procedure which promises many of the advantages of arbitration in less time and at lower expense” (Roberts, Wolters, Holley, & Field, 1990). Mediation is less time consuming and the least expensive method of resolving a complaint than going forward with the arbitration process. If chosen by the complainant, grievance mediation is a completely voluntary step. This is the step prior to going forward to the arbitration process. The mediation step provides an opportunity for a

I feel the labor relations system as currently constituted is effective for resolving disputes as long as both parties are committed to negotiating in good faith. Although, I feel the current system is effective a further explanation of the systems strengths and weaknesses will better explain the effectiveness of resolving disputes. It is in both the companies and the labor interest to negotiate with as little third party interaction to come up with an agreement. In times when there are disputes their different course of action that start from a least costly without giving up power in the decision to the possibility of becoming more costly to either party and give up the power in the decision. As discussed in the text when an organization and labor cannot come up with an agreement a third party may be asked to come in to negotiations to resolve a dispute which includes mediation, fact-finding, and interest arbitration.

The dispute resolution method that is most likely to be used by a regulatory agency to negotiate the provisions of the regulations with the interested groups so that there is less likelihood of a challenge once the regulations are promulgated is: regulatory negotiation

the court of last resort. However, on the basis of its past experience in negotiating settlements with

Despite the harmonious nature of Japanese people, there are still conflicts that cannot be resolved within the enterprise union and the firm. Most of these unresolved conflicts occur because many firms are conducting restructuring and retrenchment during this period of economic uncertainty. When these conflicts happen, they can approach the local government mediation body to help conciliate and make a decision. Most decisions made are generally accepted; however, should the conflicts still exist, they can opt for arbitration in the Labour Tribunal System, or legislation in court. For arbitration, the judges involved are tripartite in nature: 1 professional judge, 1 union representative and 1 employer representative. All 3 judges must have professional knowledge and experience in labour issues, and there are no more than 3 hearings, verdict based on majority. If the verdict is rejected by either party, they may proceed to legislation (Elbo 2004).

Under certain circumstance, the arbitration process is more sophisticated and knowledgeable than those in the judicial proceedings. I was intrigued to find out that the arbitrator was more knowledgeable than the judge. In my opinion, it should be the other way around whereas the judge should be more understanding and practical on the subject in question rather than the arbitrator. Moreover, the purpose of the arbitration is to have a quick, simple, and efficient method to solve disputes.

Another issue is obtainable when the parties have not decided to institutional rules providing for a truncated tribunal. In this case, the appointing authority and/or tribunal must choose, without specific approval, how to deal with an obstructive arbitrator. The major response has been to permit truncated tribunals, in which two arbitrators proceed with their regulation, without the participation of the obstructive arbitrator.64 Other tribunals have taken also same approaches, concluding that non-obstructive members of a tribunal have an responsibility to continue with the arbitral proceedings notwithstanding the absence of an obstructive

Collective bargaining is the process by which conditions of employment are negotiated between management, and the labor organization representing employees in the bargaining unit. However, “collective bargaining refers to a situation in which union members and officials meet with an intent to resolve any issues or conflicts, in an attempt to maintain relationships” (Holley, Jennings, & Wolters, 2012, p. 243). The collective bargaining process relies on four aspects: recognition of the meeting, meeting with appropriate parties, bargaining in good faith, and incorporating the reached agreement (Adam, 1997). Nevertheless, collective bargaining activities are governed by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The NLRA requires bargaining

Arbitration is legal technique used to resolve any disputes outside of the courts. Arbitration allows for speedy and cheap resolution of any disputes, the parties involved in a dispute agree to appoint a third person (arbitrator) who will hear their testimonies, and look into the evidence they provide. The arbitrator's decision cannot be challenged in a law court as it is considered final and the parties involved have to accept the decision (Brams & Merrill, 1986). There are only very limited circumstances where the decision of an arbitrator can be challenged, and this is mostly if there can be proof from one of the parties showing that the arbitrator was biased in their decision or ruling. The chosen arbitrator will be an experienced person in the area of the dispute.

Parties may include alternate dispute resolution as a pre-condition to arbitration in a separate clause or as a part of the arbitration clause. The aim of including multistep dispute resolution is to allow party representatives to understand strengths of the opponent’s case and weaknesses of their own case to reach a compromise; however, a clear reference to arbitration must be made in case of failure of this approach . Many arbitral institutes now provide optional conciliation rules that may be incorporated by parties in their arbitration clause or as a separate clause . Parties must include time frames with flexibility of extension to prevent undue delay in cases where there is lack of genuine willingness to settle.

The primary reason why the Arbitration act, 1940 was repealed was for the simple reason of minimizing court interference in the arbitration. There is thin line of difference between interference and assistance of court system in the case of arbitration. The former part could help in making arbitration strong whereas in the latter case it might ruin the basic idea of arbitration that is adjudication by the private judge, as parties could find themselves in court all over again. This paper is a quick and brief analysis as to how in the pre arbitration stage, and during arbitration what court does is not much of an interference rather assistance however there are cases where court actually interfered rather than assisting them, but the highest degree of danger/risky zone is that of the post award stage which calls for much of the interference by the courts.

In considering the union 's application, the Court must assess many factors including the level of union membership and the presence of any other unions. Often, the Court will organize a ballot among the affected workforce to decide whether recognition should be awarded. Throughout the process, the emphasis is on reaching voluntary agreement.