Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1095111
 
 

Footnotes (129)



 


 



From Court Surrogate to Regulatory Tool: Re-Framing the Empirical Study of Employment Arbitration


Mark C. Weidemaier


University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill - School of Law


University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, Forthcoming
UNC Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1095111

Abstract:     
A growing body of empirical research explores the use of arbitration to resolve employment disputes, typically by comparing arbitration to litigation using relatively traditional outcome measures: who wins, how much, and how quickly. On the whole, this research suggests that employees fare reasonably well in arbitration. Yet there remain sizeable gaps in our knowledge. This Essay explores these gaps with two goals in mind.

The first and narrower goal is to explain why it remains exceedingly difficult to assess the relative fairness of arbitration and litigation. The outcome research does not account for a variety of "filtering" mechanisms that influence the relative merits of the cases adjudicated in each system. This Essay explores these filters, focusing on one in particular: most employee grievances are resolved within the workplace through relatively informal procedures. Workplace structures thus filter out most employee grievances before they reach arbitration. This fact has significant implications for efforts to interpret the arbitration outcome research. It also highlights the significance of the workplace as a locus of dispute resolution activity. Indeed, a growing body of research focuses directly on workplace compliance and grievance procedures.

Recognizing the significance of workplace dispute resolution leads to this Essay's broader goal. That goal is to expose, and hopefully bridge, an artificial conceptual divide that separates the arbitration research from research into workplace dispute resolution. Many researchers view internal compliance and grievance procedures as a means of harnessing the employer's own regulatory capacity. This conception drives a research agenda that explores the role of workplace structures in generating private norms and in implementing (or subverting) public norms like anti-discrimination. By contrast, the arbitration outcome research conceives of arbitration narrowly as a court surrogate, one that should ideally yield equivalent outcomes at lower cost. Although legitimate to a degree, this conception artificially separates arbitration from other employer-structured disputing procedures and yields an empirical agenda that leaves fundamental questions unanswered. This Essay closes by discussing two of these questions: First, do arbitrators play a meaningful regulatory role, either by shaping other arbitrators' practices or by shaping the terms of arbitration contracts? Second, under what circumstances do arbitrators effectively generate and enforce norms?

Number of Pages in PDF File: 24

Keywords: arbitration, contracts, dispute resolution, employment

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: February 21, 2008  

Suggested Citation

Weidemaier, Mark C., From Court Surrogate to Regulatory Tool: Re-Framing the Empirical Study of Employment Arbitration. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, Forthcoming; UNC Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1095111. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1095111

Contact Information

Mark C. Weidemaier (Contact Author)
University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill - School of Law ( email )
Van Hecke-Wettach Hall, 160 Ridge Road
CB #3380
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3380
United States
919.843.4373 (Phone)

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 990
Downloads: 82
Download Rank: 172,164
Footnotes:  129

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.500 seconds