Abstract
This study examines how two aspects of formalization of grievance procedures affect grievance procedure effectiveness: written versus oral presentation of grievance and the level of union and management authorized to resolve grievances at the first step. Several demographic variables were controlled for: size of bargaining unit, percentage of organization represented, number of grievances filed, and industry. A sample of 46 firms, representing a broad cross-section of unionized companies in the private sector, was obtained with the help of the American Arbitration Association. Results indicate that more formal grievance procedures (e.g., written presentation) are positively related to resolution rates at the first step. The number of grievances field and the size of the bargaining unit were positively related to total resolution rates prior to arbitration.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen, Robert, and Timothy Keaveny.Contemporary Labor Relations 2d ed. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1988.
Barbash, Jack.The Practice of Unionism. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1956.
Begin, James. “The Private Grievance Model in the Public Sector.”Industrial Relations 10 (February 1971): 21–35.
Bohlander, George. “Fair Representation: Not Just a Union Problem.”Personnel Administrator 25 (March 1980): 36.
Briggs, Steven. “The Grievance Procedure and Organizational Health.”Personnel Journal 60 (June 1981): 471–74.
Catlett, Judith L., and Edwin L. Brown. “Union Leaders’ Perceptions of the Grievance Process.”Labor Studies Journal (Spring 1990): 54–65.
Dillon, William, and Matthew Goldstein.Multivariate Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York: John Wiley, 1984.
Gordon, Michael E., and Sandra J. Miller. “Grievances: A Review of Research and Practice.”Personnel Psychology 37 (1984): 117–45.
Graham, H., and B. Heshizer. “The Effect of Contract Language on Low-level Settlement of Grievances.”Labor Law Journal 30 (July 1979): 427–32.
James, L. “The Unmeasured Variables Problem in Path Analysis.”Journal of Applied Psychology 65 (1980): 415–21.
Kennedy, Van D. “Grievance Negotiation.” InIndustrial Conflict, Edited by Arthur Kornhauser, Robert Dubin, and Arthur M. Ross. New York: Arno Press, 1977, pp. 280–91.
Kerr, D.Correlation and Causality. New York: John Wiley, 1979.
Knight, Thomas R. “Feedback and Grievance Resolution.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review 39 (July 1986): 585–98.
_____ “Toward a Contingency Theory of the Grievance-Arbitration System.” InAdvances in Industrial and Labor Relations Vol. 2. Edited by David B. Lipsky. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press, 1985, pp. 269–318.
Lewin, David, and Richard B. Peterson.The Modern Grievance Procedure in the United States. New York: Quorum Books, 1988.
Ng, Ignace, and Ali Dastmalchian. “Determinants of Grievance Outcomes: A Case Study.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review 42 (April 1989): 393–403.
Peach, David A., and E. Robert Livernash.Grievance Initiation and Resolution. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1974.
Peterson, Richard B., and David Lewin. “A Model for Research and Analysis of the Grievance Process.”Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Industrial Relations Research Association. Madison Wisc.: IRRA, 1981, pp. 303–12.
Sayles, Leonard R., and George Strauss.The Local Union. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World, 1967.
Thomson, A.W.J.The Grievance Procedure in the Private Sector. Ithaca: New York School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University, 1974.
_____ and V.V. Murray.Grievance Procedures. Westmead, England: Saxon House, 1976.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
We thank the American Arbitration Association for making this study possible.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Davy, J.A., Stewart, G. & Anderson, J. Formalization of grievance procedures: A multi-firm and industry study. Journal of Labor Research 13, 307–316 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02685488
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02685488