A Comparative Assessment of Labor Dispute Resolution in the United States & the United Kingdom
David L. Gregory
St. John's University - School of Law
affiliation not provided to SSRN
St. John's Law Review, Vol. 81, pp. 29-40, 2007
St. John's Legal Studies Research Paper No. 08-0158
After the English coalminers' strike, circa 1984, the world changed. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher crushed the miners and Scargill, as fully-indeed, perhaps more so-as her fellow conservative President Ronald Reagan crushed the striking air traffic controllers in the United States at the beginning of his first term in 1981.
In this essay, we reflect on the past quarter century of ADR in labor management relations in the United States and in the United Kingdom, critically assessing the trajectory and the evolution of ADR in labor management matters, with particular reference to the ADR of discharge and discipline grievances of unionized workers. With this platform context for the past two decades, we ruminate on the similarities and contrasts, such as they may be, in the daily working realities of labor-union-represented workers in the U.S. and in the U.K., paying particular attention to the resolution of grievances in labor management relations. We also offer some preliminary thoughts on the likely future of ADR in labor management relations in the U.S. and the U.K.
The two centerpieces anchoring this essay are the Advisory Conciliation and Arbitration Service, established via the Employment Protection Act of 1975, and the heightened due process and progressive discipline protections and standards in the Employment Act of 2002.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 13Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: October 27, 2008 ; Last revised: November 3, 2008
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.234 seconds