Workplace Justice: Does Private Judging Matter?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

A great many employers in the United States have required employees to forego judicial litigation in favor of arbitration. These employers see efficiency and legal benefits in the substitution. This development poses the question of whether private judging matters. If so, to whom, and why. Much of the resulting academic study has been empirical, addressed to the efficiency benefits in terms of differences in access and outcome. This article addresses the legal benefits employers seek, especially the absence of precedent. The springboard for analysis compares the German law of wrongful dismissal with the treatment of wrongful dismissal in American labor arbitration, using discharge for petty theft for case study. (The attached are the proofs of an article to appear in the Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft, a leading German journal in comparative law.) The article argues that a significant but rather little discussed potential consequence of the privatization of public law is the effect on the public perception of and so of public concern with the underlying issue.
Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)166
Number of pages20
JournalZeitschrift für Vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft
Volume113
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

employer
dismissal
arbitration
workplace
justice
efficiency
public law
studies (academic)
Law
larceny
substitution
privatization
employee
labor

Cite this

Workplace Justice : Does Private Judging Matter? / Finkin, Matthew W.

In: Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft , Vol. 113, 2014, p. 166.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{fd5e8b6d08294477bc7f10deeb51f9b9,
title = "Workplace Justice: Does Private Judging Matter?",
abstract = "A great many employers in the United States have required employees to forego judicial litigation in favor of arbitration. These employers see efficiency and legal benefits in the substitution. This development poses the question of whether private judging matters. If so, to whom, and why. Much of the resulting academic study has been empirical, addressed to the efficiency benefits in terms of differences in access and outcome. This article addresses the legal benefits employers seek, especially the absence of precedent. The springboard for analysis compares the German law of wrongful dismissal with the treatment of wrongful dismissal in American labor arbitration, using discharge for petty theft for case study. (The attached are the proofs of an article to appear in the Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft, a leading German journal in comparative law.) The article argues that a significant but rather little discussed potential consequence of the privatization of public law is the effect on the public perception of and so of public concern with the underlying issue.",
author = "Finkin, {Matthew W}",
year = "2014",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "113",
pages = "166",
journal = "Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft",
issn = "0044-3638",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Workplace Justice

T2 - Does Private Judging Matter?

AU - Finkin, Matthew W

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - A great many employers in the United States have required employees to forego judicial litigation in favor of arbitration. These employers see efficiency and legal benefits in the substitution. This development poses the question of whether private judging matters. If so, to whom, and why. Much of the resulting academic study has been empirical, addressed to the efficiency benefits in terms of differences in access and outcome. This article addresses the legal benefits employers seek, especially the absence of precedent. The springboard for analysis compares the German law of wrongful dismissal with the treatment of wrongful dismissal in American labor arbitration, using discharge for petty theft for case study. (The attached are the proofs of an article to appear in the Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft, a leading German journal in comparative law.) The article argues that a significant but rather little discussed potential consequence of the privatization of public law is the effect on the public perception of and so of public concern with the underlying issue.

AB - A great many employers in the United States have required employees to forego judicial litigation in favor of arbitration. These employers see efficiency and legal benefits in the substitution. This development poses the question of whether private judging matters. If so, to whom, and why. Much of the resulting academic study has been empirical, addressed to the efficiency benefits in terms of differences in access and outcome. This article addresses the legal benefits employers seek, especially the absence of precedent. The springboard for analysis compares the German law of wrongful dismissal with the treatment of wrongful dismissal in American labor arbitration, using discharge for petty theft for case study. (The attached are the proofs of an article to appear in the Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft, a leading German journal in comparative law.) The article argues that a significant but rather little discussed potential consequence of the privatization of public law is the effect on the public perception of and so of public concern with the underlying issue.

M3 - Article

VL - 113

SP - 166

JO - Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft

JF - Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft

SN - 0044-3638

ER -