Industrial Dispute Essay

This is a 2000 word RBI on Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) and Article 86 (Absence without leave)

Employers within the private sector organizations in these provinces do not want First Contract Arbitration imposed on them, as this takes away their management rights and power. They have capitalistic mentalities and employees are a cog in the wheel of monetary gain. ()

The second argument concluded from BP Refinery Pty Ltd v Shire of Hastings is that 'it is not necessary to imply a term in the form of c11(a) for reasonable or effective contract of employment in all circumstances.'

“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.

To hold hearings upon complaints relating to violations of different areas of this act and guidelines and stipulations incorporated in relation to this act and pursue prosecution of and enjoinder of all said violations.

In this case of Toronto Transit Commission v. A.T.U., the union grieved foreman, Mr. Vito Stina’s harassment as it provides an unhealthy work environment. Union sought his removal, however, employer did not accuse the foreman with any harassments. The arbitrator was noted that foreman has harassed griever with criticisms and public humiliation, that crossed the boundary. The harassments continued on a regular basis, which showed ignorance and disrespect. At the end of the day, foreman has ripped apart griever’s dignity. Griever had filed a hand to the employer explaining the harassments he has been experiencing, however, not much was done. When the arbitrator was informed about this issue, arbitrator had to conclude that the negative influence and the impact on the griever was too big to ignore. Therefore, it provided griever $25 000 for the hardships. Then, arbitrator stated new rules surrounding this problem in order to minimize the may arise: (1) the employer now has to ensure the griever had a harassment free workplace, (2) employer was to not work the the griever in the same area, and (3)

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).

The role of the tribunal and court systems in enforcing employment law is to ensure that cases brought before them are dealt with in a fair and consistent manner. Delivering an outcome that is consistent with the facts put before them. They have to consider the evidence placed by both the employee and the employer. In most cases it is for the employer to prove that they handled the case appropriately taking account of their internal procedures and ensuring that they were not in breach of any relevant employment legislation related to the employee and their circumstances.

However, it can hear almost every employment law matter since its jurisdiction increased. Before 1994, Employment Tribunals could only hear statutory claims while after the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994, Employment Tribunals' role has drastically changed that they can now hear common law claims(Richard Kinder,1999). But there are some law matters of common law they cannot cope with like matters relating to moral tights and copyright, patents, designs rights, trade marks; breach of restraint of trade covenants; breach of confidence; breach of a contract terms requiring the employer to provide for the employee; personnel injury claims. From this regard, certain employment matters still have to be tackled in the civil courts.

This essay will provide a detailed examination of what Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is, particularly mediation, the various techniques of ADR, the advantages and disadvantages of ADR; and whether or not courts should have the authority to compel individuals into undertaking mediation or other forms of ADR. This essay argues against courts having the power to compel litigants into mediation but may be afforded powers to encourage parties to go through mediation at first instance. This essay will base its arguments on whether courts should compel civil litigants to follow the ADR route upon the perceived advantages of ADR and its success rate. The contention of this essay is not that mediation is inappropriately used to settle

In order to avoid an Employment Tribunal, which can prove expensive to the complainant and the respondent, cases may be settled before and during formal legal proceedings. This is often arranged by a mediator.

An agreement to mediate future disputes means that the parties want to present their side to a mediator, a third party who is neutral. This mediator’s

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.

Occasionally disagreements do occur, and in these cases the union may decide to take industrial action. If the problem cannot be resolved amicably, the matter may go to an industrial tribunal. The purpose of industrial tribunals is to make sure that employee and employers conform to employment laws. They are made up of people outside the workplace who make a judgment about the case, based on the employees and employers point of view. Cases that go to industrial tribunals are usually about pay, unfair dismissal, redundancy or discrimination at work. The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) is often used to help find a solution to a dispute, which is acceptable to both sides. Its duty under the Employment Protection Act is to promote the improvement of industrial relations and in particular to encourage the extension of collective bargaining and also to develop collective bargaining machinery (Mclean, 2007). Its main functions are: advisory work, collective conciliation, individual conciliation, arbitration, and extended investigation into industrial relations problems.