the mandatory permissive distinction and collective bargaining outcomes l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 5

- PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 987 Views
  • Uploaded on

The Mandatory-Permissive distinction and collective bargaining outcomes Delaney and Sockell (1989) Industrial and Labor Relations Review Mandatory-Permissive subjects Key differences between categorizations Mandatory Must be negotiated Can be cause to strike/lockout legally Permissive

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about '' - Ava


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
the mandatory permissive distinction and collective bargaining outcomes

The Mandatory-Permissive distinction and collective bargaining outcomes

Delaney and Sockell (1989)

Industrial and Labor Relations Review

mandatory permissive subjects
Mandatory-Permissive subjects
  • Key differences between categorizations
    • Mandatory
      • Must be negotiated
      • Can be cause to strike/lockout legally
    • Permissive
      • Need not be negotiated
      • Unilateral changes can be made
    • Do negotiations bias away from perm. Items?
    • Are duplicitous negotiations used?
contract data analysis
Contract Data Analysis
  • Items classified as permissive
    • Labor-man. Committees
    • Point productivity committees
    • Wage garnishment
  • 16% of contracts had permissive issues
  • Mand/Perm issues index calculated
  • Bargaining over mandatory issues apparently similar over subsamples
    • More union power needed for favorable outcomes on permissive issues.
laboratory experiment
Laboratory Experiment
  • Three contract issues used
    • Hourly pay
    • % workers guaranteed employment
    • Advertising expenditures
  • Different treatments described each of these topics as mandatory, permissive, or unknown to MBA student subjects.
  • Results shown in Table 3
    • Unknown status hurts union outcome
    • Permissive status hurts union outcome
why care
Why Care?
  • NLRB determines status of issues
  • Changes in legal status may also add uncertainty as to the status of an issue
  • This may affect bargaining outcomes