Search results

First contract arbitration (FCA) provisions are posed as a solution to the difficulties of negotiating a first contract for newly certified bargaining units. FCA is a longstanding, and no longer controversial, element of Canadian labor legislation. FCA provisions now exist in six Canadian jurisdictions and four distinct FCA models have developed (the exceptional remedy or fault model, the automatic access model, the no-fault model, and the mediation intensive model). In the United States the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) included a highly contested proposal to amend the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) to include an FCA provision similar to the Canadian automatic access model. This chapter offers a balanced assessment of FCA evidence from Canada addressing the main objections to FCA in the EFCA debates. Individual case level data from jurisdictions representing each of the four FCA models is examined. The evidence demonstrates that although FCA is widely available in Canada, it is an option that is rarely sought and, when sought, rarely granted; that parties involved in FCA are able to establish stable bargaining relationships; and, that this process does not, as critics charge, simply prolong the life of nonviable bargaining units. This chapter concludes by suggesting that the practice under Quebec's “no-fault” model and British Columbia's “mediation intensive” model merit consideration for adoption elsewhere. These models position the FCA process as a mechanism fostering collective bargaining and voluntary agreements, rather than treating it as a remedy for dysfunctional negotiations and as part of the unfair labor practice framework.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the main contract principles which govern the international arbitration contract with special emphasis to examine contract principle found of the Middle East, how international principles of contract are perceived in the region, and whether there are any dominant contract principles.

A general exploratory research procedure used to give a better grasp of various aspects of socio‐legal approaches. The paper seeks to create knowledge that can be used to retrieve some pressing social and organisational understanding in the said region. The first part of the paper examines the role of ethics and tradition in understanding Middle Eastern contract principles. The second part examines the impact of Islamic Law on commercial contract principles. The third section analyses the regional perception of international contract principles. Finally, the paper addresses some contemporary issues of international contracts in the Middle East.

The paper showed that the legal perceptions of international contract principles reflect regional legal thinking which has been influenced by a mixed understanding of regional traditions, Islamic contract law principles as well as Western contract principles when these principles match regional legal culture. Overall, it showed that still under such mixed understanding, there are strong regional legal traditions and these are found in Islamic contract principles and affects commercial contract experiences. In general, a significant difference still exists between modern international contract principles and those in the Middle East.

The paper generates a knowledge that mixed understanding in regard to international contract arbitration principles due historical and cultural reasoning. Arab States does not share common understanding of international contract principles. Thus, it is very superfluous to propose the argument that there is sole Middle Eastern regional perception which dominates every Arab State. Therefore, special understandings and considerations should be given to every international arbitration contract from certain Arab State entity to another.

The paper provides a clear understanding of the guidelines for international commercial arbitration contract in the Middle East. Legal culture should be taken into consideration if a successful contract implementation has to be achieved.

As US firms expand into Canada, it becomes necessary for them to be aware of Canadian law governing labour and employment. Unlike what many might think, the laws in the two countries are substantially different. Further, the effects of these differences have been demonstrated empirically. Considers the differences between US and Canadian labour law in seven areas: certification procedures; first contract arbitration; new technologies; strike replacements; successorship; employee participation programmes and union security. Discusses the effects of the laws in these areas.

This chapter examines the rise and fall of the Commission on the Future of Worker-Management Relations (Dunlop Commission) in the early 1990s. It uses the events surrounding the Commission to provide an insight into the dynamics of the struggle over federal labor law reform. The inability of the Dunlop Commission to get labor and management representatives to agree on proposals for labor law reform demonstrated, yet again, that employer opposition is the greatest obstacle to the protection of organizing rights and modernization of labor law. For the nation's major management associations, labor law reform is a life and death issue, and nothing is more important to them than defeating revisions to the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) intended to strengthen organizing rights. The failure of labor law reform in the 1990s also demonstrated that the labor movement would never win reform by means of an “inside the beltway” legislative campaign – designed to push reform through the US Senate – because the principal employer organizations would always exercise more influence in Congress. Instead, unions must engage with public opinion, and convince union and nonunion members about the importance of reform. Thus far, however, they lack an effective language with which to do this.

Volume 18 of Advances in Industrial and Labor Relations contains seven chapters that analyze key aspects of employment relationships, ranging from strategic choice and first contract arbitration to worker participation, employee well being and work-life conflict to union engagement in regional economic development and international labor standards enforcement. Preliminary versions of several of these chapters were presented at Advances in Industrial Relations (AILR)/Labor and Employment Relations Association (LERA) “Best Papers” sessions held at the 2009, 2010, and 2011 meetings of the LERA.

A certification attempt involving an incumbent union is known as a raid. Very little is known about union raiding, yet a large number of workers are affected by raiding and unions continue to debate the process. This paper tests various hypotheses of the nature of union raiding using unique data on raiding attempts over the 1978–1998 period in the Canadian province of British Columbia. The principal findings are (1) raiding attempts are much more likely to succeed when the incumbent union has underachieved in collective bargaining, and are often used in such circumstances; (2) employers favor the incumbent union, are effective in influencing the outcome, but use very different tactics than in regular certification; (3) independent unions fare better in raid contests relative to the national and international unions; and (4) there is a modest amount of inter-affiliation raiding, but much of this is between AFL–CIO affiliates who apparently disregard their no-raiding agreements when operating in Canada.

Examines the deliberations, conclusions and recommendations of the US Commission on the Future of Worker‐Management Relations on the issues of employee involvement and collective bargaining. Draws on the two reports published by the Commission and testimony given by employer and union representatives. Notes the Commission′s failure to discuss non‐union forms of employee representation. Suggests that little legal change is likely to result and any that does occur is unlikely to be favourable to trade unions.

In many countries trade unions faced major problems in the 1970s and 1980s. Total membership declined as did the proportion of the working population unionised. This picture is by no means universal and, as Kelly has argued, if the figures are considered carefully, then the problems may be less significant than often imagined. One of the countries where unions appear to have been able to escape almost unscathed is Canada. They have done so, despite facing many of the problems that have been largely responsible for creating the difficult environment in which unions have had to operate in other countries. In particular, they had to face difficult economic conditions and shifts in the make‐up of the labour force with an increasing emphasis on service sector employment. The apparent success of Canadian unions is even more interesting when it is recalled that over the same period union membership in the USA has declined sharply and to some extent the same unions organise in both the USA and Canada. This paper seeks to examine the recent trends in trade union membership in Canada and reviews possible explanations.

A “new” interpretation of Section 7 in the National Labor Relations Act could serve as the basis of union renewal, in enabling and supporting non-majority, non-exclusive representation as an alternative to the difficulties of union certification. One potential shortcoming of this form of representation is interunion conflict associated with ongoing competition between unions trying to attract each other's members in the same bargaining units. However, interview evidence collected from union executives in New Zealand, where non-majority, non-exclusive representation already exists, suggests that such conflict is normally limited. Focusing representation on areas that make the most sense (for both unions and workers) and following union federation protocols, when conflicts occur, have both contributed to the overall low conflict level. Lessons for US unionism are explored.

For over thirty years, one of the most overt forms of employer opposition to unionization has been anti-union campaigns conducted by union avoidance consultants. As a result, both union and employer associations have attempted to influence the provisions of the LMRDA that cover consultant activities. This article provides the first comprehensive historical analysis of the LMRDA's reporting and disclosure requirements covering employers and consultants. The first section examines consultant reporting policy from the late 1950s to the late 1970s, a period when unions filed relatively few complaints and the DOL initiated few investigations, but the consultant industry expanded significantly. Section two examines developments in the 1980s – the period of greatest congressional and judicial activity on consultant reporting since the 1950s. The final section looks at post-1980s events and examines why organized labor has persisted with its campaign to reform government policy on consultant reporting, despite its inability to make progress on the issue over the past four decades.