Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

1994

Dispute Resolution and Arbitration

Union

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Union Walks In The Sixth: The Integrity Of Mandatory Non-Binding Grievance Procedures In Collective Bargaining Agreements - At & (And) T V. Communications Workers Of America, Afl-Cio, The, Mark Riley Kroeker Jul 1994

Union Walks In The Sixth: The Integrity Of Mandatory Non-Binding Grievance Procedures In Collective Bargaining Agreements - At & (And) T V. Communications Workers Of America, Afl-Cio, The, Mark Riley Kroeker

Journal of Dispute Resolution

There are many mechanisms short of industrial action which labor unions and employers use to resolve disputes. Anticipating conflict, but aiming to avoid industrial action, the two parties might place an arbitration agreement or other mandatory grievance adjustment procedure into their collective bargaining agreement. This agreement will reflect the parties' understanding as to how disputes are to be resolved. This Note examines the limited circumstances in which the federal courts will enjoin union protest activity carried out in violation of a collective bargaining agreement's provisions regarding dispute resolution. It focuses on the analytic inconsistency of the judicial refusal to ...


Michigan's Binding Summary Jury Trial: Reward Or Punishment - Farleigh V. Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1251, Thomas G. Glick Jan 1994

Michigan's Binding Summary Jury Trial: Reward Or Punishment - Farleigh V. Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1251, Thomas G. Glick

Journal of Dispute Resolution

In 1988, the Michigan Supreme Court added the summary jury trial to its arsenal of settlement devices available to trial judges.' Unfortunately, the summary jury trial employed in Farleigh v. Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1251 failed to meet its goal, and no settlement was reached by the parties.6 Nevertheless, the Michigan Court of Appeals chose to enforce the summary jury verdict,7 thereby drawing into question not only the ability of the summary jury trial to meet the preliminary goal of promoting settlement, but also the larger goal of the accomplishment of justice