U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Med-Arb: An Alternative to Interest Arbitration in the Resolution of Contract Negotiation Disputes

NCJ Number
112867
Journal
Ohio State Journal of Dispute Resolution Volume: 3 Issue: 2 Dated: (1988) Pages: 385-398
Author(s)
K L Henry
Date Published
1988
Length
14 pages
Annotation
In the area of labor law, there are five traditional methods of dispute resolution: negotiation, mediation, arbitration, strike, and lockout.
Abstract
However, each of these has both costs and benefits. An alternative to them, mediation-arbitration (MA), combines elements of both methods in an attempt to maximize the positive effects of both. In MA, the parties to the dispute agree that the dispute will be heard by a mediator having the authority to arbitrate any unresolved issues and determine a binding settlement. This element increases the parties' incentive to determine their own agreement through mediation. By eliminating the judicial nature of arbitration, MA is less formal, costly, and protracted. The adversarial nature of arbitration also is substantially decreased in MA, and parties are more likely to be honest in their demands. Effective MA must be voluntary, disputants must agree to forego the use of strikes or lockouts if mediation is unsuccessful, and mediator-arbiter must have authority to fashion the most appropriate solution. The voluntary nature of MA weakens arguments that it is a threat to fair adjudication of disputes. Statutorily mandated MA has withstood constitutional challenges and is likely to continue to withstand judicial scrutiny. While not appropriate to all types of labor grievances, MA has proven to be an effective method for resolving certain types of labor disputes in both the public and private sector. 82 footnotes.