Looking fair or being fair: Remedial voice procedures in nonunion workplaces

Feuille, Peter

doi:10.1016/0149-2063(95)90032-2

Cited by 25 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These conclusions—and implicit calls to action—apply equally well to nonunion workplace dispute resolution procedures. As just one example of the imperfect metrics in this domain, research on the due process elements of nonunion procedures is quite limited (Colvin 2003a,b; Feuille and Chachere 1995). The lack of good metrics within areas of workplace dispute resolution research means a lack of metrics for undertaking comparative analyses across different procedures.…”

Section: The Lack Of Good Dispute Resolution Metricsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other research examining employment arbitration has investigated biases in decision making (Bingham 1997) and consistency of outcomes (Bingham and Mesch 2000; Klaas, Mahony, and Wheeler 2006; Wheeler, Klaas, and Mahony 2004) as important equity indicators. In constructing a due process index to compare nonunion grievance procedures, Feuille and Chachere (1995) included equity measures, such as the independence of the decision maker, and voice measures, such as the ability to have representation at hearings. Comparing outcomes of nonunion grievance procedures, Colvin (2003b) used voice and equity measures including the rate of appeals and employee success rates.…”

Section: Efficiency Equity and Voicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whereas open door policies typically lack a formal structure for appealing grievances, more formal nonunion grievance procedures often include multistep appeal procedures that superficially resemble the multistep grievance procedures of unionized workplaces, but at each stage of the procedure, managers are the decision makers. Employees also do not have independent representation, except perhaps the assistance of an HR staff (Colvin 2004; Feuille and Chachere 1995). Formal hearings with presentation of evidence, examination of witnesses, and presentation of arguments are relatively rare (Feuille and Delaney 1992).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Improved Metrics for Workplace Dispute Resolution Procedures: Efficiency, Equity, and Voice

Budd

Colvin

2008

Industrial Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many debates surround systems for resolving workplace disputes. In the United States, traditional unionized grievance procedures, emerging nonunion dispute resolution systems, and the court-based system for resolving employment law disputes have all been criticized. What is missing from these debates are rich metrics beyond speed and satisfaction for comparing and evaluating dispute resolutions systems. In this paper, we develop efficiency, equity, and voice as these standards. Unionized, nonunion, and employment law procedures are then qualitatively evaluated against these three metrics.

show abstract

Section: The Lack Of Good Dispute Resolution Metricsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Efficiency Equity and Voicementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Improved Metrics for Workplace Dispute Resolution Procedures: Efficiency, Equity, and Voice

Budd

Colvin

2008

Industrial Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If we start with this relatively basic definition, survey evidence suggests that a majority of American non-union workplaces have some type of grievance procedure (Berenbeim, 1980;Delaney, Lewin, and Ichniowski, 1989;Edelman, 1990;Feuille and Chachere, 1995;Colvin, 2003a). The simplest of these are open door policies, which typically involve a statement of organizational policy so that employees should feel free to bring concerns or complaints to management who will then attempt to address the problem (Feuille and Delaney, 1992;Wheeler, Klaas, and Mahony, 2004;Colvin, Klaas, and Mahony, 2006).…”

Section: A Typology Of Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grievance Procedures in Non-union Firms

Roche¹,

Teague²,

Colvin³

2014

Oxford Handbooks Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[Excerpt] This chapter examines the structure, adoption, usage, and impact of non-union grievance procedures. Non-union grievance procedures vary widely in their structure from informal open door policies to elaborate peer review and arbitration based procedures. Adoption of these procedures is driven by a range of factors including union substation, litigation avoidance, and as part of human resource strategies focused on promoting high commitment from employees. Non-union grievance procedures tend to be used less frequently that their union counterparts, but usage levels vary based on the structure of the procedure with those incorporating non-managerial decision-makers exhibiting higher usage levels. Although non-union grievance procedures are often put in place with the goal of enhancing organizational justice, a common problem is retaliation within the organization against grievants who use the procedures.

show abstract

“…Employee perceptions of fairness influence a variety of workplace behaviors, such as employee theft and job performance (Lind, Kulik, Ambrose, & Park, 1993), as well as a willingness to use various legal procedures to remedy unfairness (Lind et al, 1993). Feuille and Chachere (1995) found that the perceived fairness of workplace decisions and the channels used to make such decisions influenced employee job satisfaction, whereas Koys (1991) cited research suggesting that such perceptions were related to organizational commitment. Perceptions of workplace fairness are important to consider because fairness influences employee behaviors such as theft, job performance, and job satisfaction, and, according to Colella, Paetzold, and Belliveau (2004), outcome satisfaction, evaluation of the decision maker, performance, withdrawal, organizational citizenship behavior, and trust.…”

Section: The Psychological Impact Of Stigma and Its Effect On Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors influencing perceptions of locus, blame, justice, and behavioral intentions among persons with disabilities

Barnes¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study explored how factors associated with legal claiming (gender, age, ethnic/racial status, education level, disability type, multiple disabilities, income level, employment status, claiming thoughts, claiming history, and disability orientation) impacted the psychological constructs of locus, blame, justice, and behavioral intentions among persons with disabilities. The study also investigated whether locus, blame, and justice predicted behavioral intentions such as seeking legal counsel in employmentrelated scenarios. Results found that age, ethnic/racial status, employment status, education level, disability type, claiming thoughts, and claiming history influenced respondents' reports that they would contact a legal agency if they were in the same situation as the actors in the hiring and termination scenarios. With regard to the predictive nature of locus, blame, and justice regarding behavioral intentions, results indicated that higher external locus scores predicted an increased likelihood for respondents to consider contacting legal aid in the employee termination scenario. Internal blame scores showed a negative relationship with contacting legal aid in the employee termination scenario. Justice negatively and significantly predicted that respondents would contact legal aid in both the hiring and the employee termination scenarios. The findings of the current study are important because they can help rehabilitation counselors and other professionals develop interventions that will aid in reducing the increased incidence of employment-related legal claiming among persons with disabilities.

show abstract

Looking fair or being fair: Remedial voice procedures in nonunion workplaces

Cited by 25 publications

References 0 publications

Improved Metrics for Workplace Dispute Resolution Procedures: Efficiency, Equity, and Voice

Improved Metrics for Workplace Dispute Resolution Procedures: Efficiency, Equity, and Voice

Grievance Procedures in Non-union Firms

Factors influencing perceptions of locus, blame, justice, and behavioral intentions among persons with disabilities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About