Arbitration: Determination of Arbitrability in Collective Bargaining Contracts

1958 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 462
Author(s):  
Arthur L. Hillman
2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 409-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Erik Dølvik ◽  
Paul Marginson

We examine changes in collective wage regulation in five northern European countries since 2000, with a focus on coordination across sectors, articulation between levels and determination of wage floors. Earlier change in the functioning of wage bargaining arrangements in Germany placed pressure on other northern countries. In Finland, employers recently instigated a shift from tripartite incomes policy to manufacturing-led pattern bargaining, with increased scope for decentralized negotiations. This made Finnish arrangements more similar to their Nordic counterparts, which have been marked by modest adaptations. Divergence continues in wage floor regulation. Increased statutory generalization of collectively agreed minimum wages has moved Germany and Norway closer to Finland, while Denmark and Sweden still rely solely on collective bargaining. The multi-faceted employer and state approaches to wage regulation are not consistent with recent claims of a neoliberal transformation across the northern coordinated economies.


1989 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Casey Ichniowski ◽  
Richard B. Freeman ◽  
Harrison Lauer

1998 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Molatlhegi

The year 1992 saw significant reforms to the Botswana labour law and industrial relations system. Before then, as was the case elsewhere in Africa, the Botswana government had adopted highly interventionist policies with respect to industrial relations. The changes introduced in 1992 were aimed at shifting labour relations to the market place. State intervention, though not completely eliminated, has been greatly reduced as a result. The changes in labour law and the industrial relations system have brought to the fore the debate about the nature, content and extent of workers' freedom of association in the country. The changes mean that more than ever before collective bargaining will play a significant role in the determination of wages, terms and conditions of employment.


2005 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 776-785
Author(s):  
D. D. Carter

In this paper, the author describes the major features of the legal structure for collective bargaining in the Ontario public sector. The emphasis is mostly placed upon the Crown Employees Collective Bargaining Act which applies to a sub-stantial portion of the Ontario public sector labor force. The basic issues dealt with include : disputes settlement, scope of bargaining, determination of bargaining units, representation elections and political activities.


1966 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 93-97
Author(s):  
Richard Woolley

It is now possible to determine proper motions of high-velocity objects in such a way as to obtain with some accuracy the velocity vector relevant to the Sun. If a potential field of the Galaxy is assumed, one can compute an actual orbit. A determination of the velocity of the globular clusterωCentauri has recently been completed at Greenwich, and it is found that the orbit is strongly retrograde in the Galaxy. Similar calculations may be made, though with less certainty, in the case of RR Lyrae variable stars.


1999 ◽  
Vol 190 ◽  
pp. 549-554
Author(s):  
Nino Panagia

Using the new reductions of the IUE light curves by Sonneborn et al. (1997) and an extensive set of HST images of SN 1987A we have repeated and improved Panagia et al. (1991) analysis to obtain a better determination of the distance to the supernova. In this way we have derived an absolute size of the ringRabs= (6.23 ± 0.08) x 1017cm and an angular sizeR″ = 808 ± 17 mas, which give a distance to the supernovad(SN1987A) = 51.4 ± 1.2 kpc and a distance modulusm–M(SN1987A) = 18.55 ± 0.05. Allowing for a displacement of SN 1987A position relative to the LMC center, the distance to the barycenter of the Large Magellanic Cloud is also estimated to bed(LMC) = 52.0±1.3 kpc, which corresponds to a distance modulus ofm–M(LMC) = 18.58±0.05.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document