About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


18 Arb. J. 1 (1963)

handle is hein.journals/dsptrjr18 and id is 1 raw text is: EXPLORING NEW USES FOR LABOR-MANAGEMENT ARBITRAI4 N An Editorial ASwe go to press, New York may again have its wspapers, altdr almost four months of hiatus. Few labor disputes in re s have so troubled the conscience. At first glance, one might wonder why this stoppage, which caused hardship to some and inconvenience to all, but did not involve the health or safety of the public, should have created doubt about the adequacy of present procedures for resolving disputes. The reason, perhaps, is that newspaper publishing is not just another business; the Constitution of the United States singles out the press for special protections, and thoughtful persons always respond instinctively in defense of the press. But whatever the reason for public concern, all agencies- governmental and private-have been compelled by events to re- examine their policies and consider whether they are doing all they can to prevent labor-management disputes from doing the greatest harm not to the parties themselves, but to the public. The American Arbitration Association also shares the common obligation to re- consider its policies. Our object here is not to make a definitive pro- nouncement, but to set forth the Association's traditional attitude and to initiate an objective discussion within the labor-relations com- munity. It is hoped that out of such an exchange of views, AAA may be able to perform a greater public service. The Association's traditional policy has been to let the labor- management community know, through educational work and pub- licity, that AAA facilities are available at all times. However, it has also been our policy not to intrude directly and publicly in existing strike situations, unless invited to do so by both parties. Often, in labor disputes, one party seems favorably inclined toward arbitra- tion, while the other is reluctant. The reason for this difference may be that one is more sensitive than the other to the public interest, but that is not necessarily the reason in all cases. On occasion, it is an imbalance of economic power that gives one side cause to prefer determination by third parties. In any event, AAA has always been conscious of the possibility that an offer of arbitration services might become part of one side's attack on the other, thereby retarding the settlement which must eventually occur. I