Clarence R. Deitsch

Getting absent workers back on the job : an analytical approach

This book offers a comprehensive analysis of the nature, causes, dimensions, and effects of absenteeism and gives professionals specific guidelines for determining how it affects their particular organization. Economic, psychological, and sociological dimensions are discussed in clear, nontechnical terms. Readers will learn how to analyze absenteeism and measure its direct and indirect costs; how to collect, test, and evaluate data; how to formulate a workable personnel policy; and how to implement effective absenteeism control procedures. The analyses and prescriptions offered are applicable to union and nonunion, blue collar and white collar occupations in virtually any type of industry, agency, or institution. Incorporating the recommendations of arbitrators who have evaluated a wide variety of problems in this area, the authors provide concrete examples of workable and unworkable approaches and bring a wealth of practical expertise to bear on a probelm that continues to pose a major obstacle to greater efficiency and productivity.

Factors affecting pre-arbitral settlement of rights disputes: Predicting the method of rights dispute resolution

Every arbitrator has had a scheduled arbitration hearing cancelled because the disputants have privately resolved the matter. This article identifies and examines those characteristics of grievance impasses that are associated with pre-arbitral dispute settlement — that is, settlement of a grievance dispute after submission to arbitration but before an award is issued — and those that are associated with arbitral dispute settlement — that is, settlement of a grievance dispute through issuance of an arbitration award. The study concludes that the primary determinant of pre-arbitral settlement is the degree of private, outside, legal representation.

The arbitration literature: Who contributes?

Who shapes, fashions, and molds the body of labor arbitral thought? This article answers this question and identifies the characteristics of those who contribute to the arbitration literature. Factor analysis was applied to and descriptive statistics calculated for data on 540 authors whose works the Committee on Research of the National Academy of Arbitrators believes constitute the most complete compendium of important arbitration literature available. The study concludes that members of the National Academy are more productive than nonmembers; for both members and nonmembers, practicing attorneys publish more arbitration awards than do professors; and practicing attorneys publish more articles, books, and monographs than do professors.

To Cut Casual Absenteeism: Tie Benefits to Hours Worked

A major reason for excessive casual absenteeism, say the authors, could be eliminated by removing contractually structured and/or administered incentives to stay away from the job.

The Phillips Curve: Evidence of a “lady or tiger dilemma”

Abstract This study examines the relation between inflation and unemployment. Granger Causality was applied to U.S. data since the end of the Vietnam War. The results support the conclusion that there is a unidirectional causation running from inflation to unemployment. This result has important policy and research implications. The natural rate hypothesis is not supported for the time period examined. It cannot be determined, however, whether the slope coefficient for the Phillips Curve characteristic of this period is positive or negative. This result, together with the existence of policy lags, implies that there is inherent risk in any policy perscription. Further, the results support Irving Fishers specification of regression models used to estimate posited relations between inflation and unemployment.

The tests of just cause: What price predictability in arbitral decision making?

The “common law” of just cause consists of the accumulated decisions of the arbitration profession rendered on the basis of commonly accepted principles of right and wrong. It constitutes the rules of the arbitration game pertaining to just cause, and, as such, guides decision making in disciplinary dispute resolution. Presumably it brings predictability to this aspect of arbitral decision making much as the principles of contract law bring predictability to nondisciplinary contract construction disputes. The best known component of this body of law is the checklist of seven tests devised by Carrol R. Daugherty. This article examines this element of common law, its origins, and whether it does, in fact, bring grater predictability to the disciplinary phase of arbitral decision making and, if so, at what cost. Besides questioning the degree of predictability achieved by Daughertys tests, the paper cautions that greater predictability may only be possible at an unacceptably high cost: the sacrifice of those characteristics that make arbitration the preferred dispute resolution technique.

Case characteristics affecting the method of grievance dispute settlement

In 1986, we reported the results of an attempt to model the inner, workings of grievance arbitration. We concluded that the primary determinant of whether or not a grievance is settled privately or through arbitral award is the degree of private, outside legal representation. This article extends that work. Utilizing a more sophisticated statistical technique with a better specified list of explanatory variables, it identifies two additional grievance case characteristics that influence the method of grievance settlement: case complexity and type of dispute. The probability of an arbitrated settlement is greatest where the issue is simple and involves discipline and where the parties are represented by private, outside attorney advocates.

JEKYLL AND HYDE: THE SPLIT PERSONALITIES OF A PUBLIC SECTOR ARBITRATOR

This article explores the tension between decisional arbitrational principles and the arbitrator’s basic sense of fairness, specifically, the possible conflict between the jurisdiction construction principle, requiring the arbitrator to look to the contract and not to exceed nor to contradict its language when rendering an award, and Arbitrator Daugherty’s Test 7 for just cause, requiring that the appropriateness of discipline be determined in light of mitigating or extenuating circumstances—that is, be judged against the backdrop of the seriousness of the infraction and the quality of the employee’s service record. It details how some arbitrators have resolved such conflicts and provides some guidance to practitioners confronted by the very sensitive issue of fairness versus strict constructionism.