Judicial arbitration of unfair dismissal cases: The role of peer effects

Freyens, Benoit; Gong, Xiaodong

doi:10.1016/j.irle.2020.105947

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A recurring theme in our investigation of the claims and payouts is that the institutional details and administrative procedures matter, a finding also of Colvin (2006). The effects of changes in the Commission's composition and procedures analysed by Booth and Freyens (2014) and Freyens and Gong (2017, 2020) appear to have had a greater impact on reported claimant success rates at arbitration than any of the politically contentious changes in unfair dismissal laws. The invariance of compensation amounts to large changes in unfair dismissal rules, and their bunching around particular amounts under all three regimes is another example.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of unfair dismissal regulation: Evidence from an Australian natural experiment

Freyens

Oslington

2021

Labour

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper assesses the outcomes of a unique Australian natural experiment with dismissal regulation introduced in 1996, radically reformed in 2006 and reregulated in 2009. Drawing on a large database of unfair dismissal cases, we assess the impact of dismissal regulation on unfair dismissal claims, how they are resolved, and on the determination of compensation amounts. Regulatory changes affect claims and success rates, but there is little change in compensation payments across the three regimes as legal conventions about their calculation were unaffected by the regulatory changes. One theme through all our findings is the large impact of administrative procedures on outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of unfair dismissal regulation: Evidence from an Australian natural experiment

Freyens

Oslington

2021

Labour

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They noted the challenge of definitively categorising the work histories so that only arbitrators with an overt employer history were assigned as ‘management’ and arbitrators with an overt union history assigned as ‘union’, otherwise they were categorised ‘neutral’ (we refer to this category as ‘blended’). Southey and Fry's classification of work histories have subsequently been used by Freyens and Gong (2017, 2020) and Booth and Freyens (2012).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Award orientation is thought to be moderated by an arbitrator's work history (Simpson and Martocchio 1997), a salient point for the investigation at hand as these two prior studies theoretically link the potential for work history to influence decision making. In addition to the Australian‐based work by Freyens and Gong (2017, 2020), other studies have identified influential relationships between an arbitrator's background and their arbitration decision, although different measures of an arbitrator's background have been applied, returning mixed results. Bingham and Mesch (2000) found that arbitrators with a legal background were less likely to reinstate a dismissed worker, compared to arbitrators with an academic background.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The potential influence of prior work experience on unfair dismissal arbitration decisions related to employee misconduct: an exploratory study of decision styles

Southey

Lynch

Rose

et al. 2023

Asia Pac J Human Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reports on an exploratory aspect of a larger study that examines unfair dismissal arbitration decisions relating to misconduct derived dismissals made by Australia's federal industrial tribunal. The central proposition explored is that an association occurs between the arbitrator's work history and their decision to overturn a dismissal. The arbitrators' previous occupations were classified based on their alignment with unitarist (employer harmony) and pluralist (worker interests) frameworks, or the ‘blended’ place in between. Subsequent logistic regression modelling allowed us to identify three types of arbitral decision styles: systems‐driven, evidence‐based and restorative‐voice. These decision styles offer our readership a descriptive framework that consolidates statistically significant decision factors. Australian media reports and professional forums scrutinise the appointment of members to its national industrial tribunal and the decisions that they make. The decision styles presented here can inform organisational stakeholders, including workers, HR managers, supervisors, unions and industry bodies who need to apply and/or respond to misconduct‐driven dismissal processes or formulate relevant policies, processes and systems such as codes of conduct or performance management.

show abstract

Using Artificial Intelligence Tools in the Judicial Domain and the Evaluation of their Impact on the Prediction of Judgments

Yassine

Esghir

Ibrihich

2023

Procedia Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Judicial arbitration of unfair dismissal cases: The role of peer effects

Cited by 3 publications

References 50 publications

The impact of unfair dismissal regulation: Evidence from an Australian natural experiment

The impact of unfair dismissal regulation: Evidence from an Australian natural experiment

The potential influence of prior work experience on unfair dismissal arbitration decisions related to employee misconduct: an exploratory study of decision styles

Using Artificial Intelligence Tools in the Judicial Domain and the Evaluation of their Impact on the Prediction of Judgments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About