Skip to main content
Log in

Due Process Procedures in Faculty Grievance Codes

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to analyze what some private universities are doing in the area of mediation and other alternative ways of solving faculty complaints – what some term "alternative dispute resolution." Special attention will be given to one of the most important ethical issues in this area at the operating level of individual universities – the due process procedures with respect to the processing of the grievances of individual faculty members in nonunionized colleges. The paper concludes with recommendations for university administrators and faculty senates, as well as recommendations for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bakaly, C. G.: 1990, ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution of Employer-Employee Disputes in a Non-Union Setting’, Arbitration Journal 45, 47–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bickner, M. L., C. Ver Ploeg and C. Feigenbaum: 1997, ‘Developments in Employment Arbitration’, Dispute Resolution Journal 52, 8–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, L. B.: 1996, ‘Emerging Due Process Concerns in Employment Arbitration: A Look at Actual Cases’, Labor Law Journal 47, 108–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaes, R. and R. Burch: 1994, ‘The Future of Employment Arbitration in the Nonunion Sector’, Labor Law Journal 45, 627–635.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blancero, D. and L. Dyer: 1996, ‘Due Process for Non-Union Employees: The Influence of System Characteristics on Fairness Perceptions’, Human Resource Management 35, 343–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohlander, G. W., R. Deeny and M. Marshall: 1996, ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution Policies: Current Procedural and Administrative Issues’, Labor Law Journal 47, 619–626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giovagnoli, M. L.: 1966, ‘To Be or Not To Be? Recent Resistance to Mandatory Arbitration Agreements in the Employment Arena’, UMKC Law Review 64, 547–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorden, W. I.: 1988, ‘Range of Employee Voice’, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 1, 283–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, W. B.: 1988, ‘Stemming the Wrongful Discharge Tide: A Case for Arbitration’, Employee Relations Law Journal 13, 404–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruenberg, G. W.: 1966, ‘Employer-Promulgated Arbitration: Non-Statutory Application’, Labor Law Journal 47, 508–510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klass, B. S. and D. C. Feldman: 1994, ‘The Impact of Appeal System Structure on Disciplinary Decisions’, Personnel Psychology 47, 91–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, J. K. L.: 1996, ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution: Legal Developments, Drafting Guidelines and Psychological Benefits’, Labor Law Journal 47, 384–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malin, M. H.: 1996, ‘Arbitrating Statutory Employment Claims in the Aftermath of Gilmer’, Saint Louis University Law Journal 40, 77–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. M.: 1988, ‘Grievance Processing: Non-Union Setting - Peer Review Systems and Internal Corporate Tribunals: A Procedural Analysis’, Labor Law Journal 34, 496–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. M.: 1989, ‘Corporate Nonunion Grievance Arbitration Systems: A Procedural Analysis’, Labor Law Journal 40, 432–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. M.: 1990, ‘Corporate Nonunion Grievance Procedures: Open Door Policies - A Procedural Analysis’, Labor Law Journal 41, 551– 557.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. M.: 1994, ‘Non-Union Grievance Procedures: A Strategic Analysis of Organizational Due Process’, Employee Rights and Industrial Justice: Bulletin of Comparative Labour Relations 28, 101–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, C. J.: 1987, ‘EGAPS - Arbitration Plans for Nonunion Employees’, Pepperdine Law Review 14, 827–837.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, E. W. and S. Robinson: 1977, ‘When Employees Feel Betrayed: A Model for How Psychological Contract Violation Develops’, Academy of Management Review 22, 226–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, R. B.: 1994, ‘Organizational Governance and the Grievance Process: In Need of a New Model for Resolving Workplace Issues’, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 7, 9–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinones, R. L.: 1991, ‘The Need to Improve the Formation of the Modern Academic Employment Contract’, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 4, 137–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robins, E.: 1984, ‘Unfair Dismissal: Emerging Issues in the Use of Arbitration as a Dispute Resolution Alternative for the Nonunion Workforce’, Fordham Urban Law Review 12, 437–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, B. D.: 1992, ‘Considering Grievance Mediation’, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 5, 143–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M.: 1989, ‘Psychological and Implied Contracts in Organizations’, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 2, 121–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A. and D. Blancero: 1966, ‘Open Door Policies: Measuring Impact Using Attitude Surveys’, Human Resource Management 35, 269– 291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, D. L. and B. Rosen: 1994, ‘An Investigation of Managerial Interventions in Employee Disputes’, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 7, 37– 51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, G. H.: 1966, ‘Employing Alternative Dispute Resolution: Working at Finding Better Ways to Resolve Employer-Employee Strife’, North Dakota Law Review 72, 299–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stratton, K.: 1988, ‘Performance Appraisal and the Need for an Organizational Grievance Procedure: A Review of the Literature and Recommendations for Future Research’, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 1, 167–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strong, K. C.: 1991, ‘Employment Rights: A Lockean Perspective’, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 4, 175–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Youngblood, S. A., L. K. Trevino, and M. Favia: 1992, ‘Reactions to Unjust Dismissal and Third-Party Dispute Resolution: A Justice Framework’, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 5, 283– 307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zack, A. M.: 1966, ‘Bringing Fairness and Due Process to Employment Arbitration’, Negotiation Journal 12, 167–173.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McCabe, D.M. Due Process Procedures in Faculty Grievance Codes. Journal of Business Ethics 17, 1653–1662 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006075604010

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006075604010

Keywords

Navigation