The Mandatory-Permissive Distinction and Collective Bargaining Outcomes

Abstract

The authors use union contract and laboratory experiment data to assess whether the distinction between mandatory and permissive bargaining subjects affects collective bargaining outcomes. In general, the findings suggest that the distinction has an impact. The contract analysis suggests that bargaining differs across contracts that include permissive items and contracts that exclude permissive items. Further, an analysis of the potential impact of the distinction in a controlled setting indicates that unions negotiate less favorable nonwage bargaining outcomes when an issue's legal status is permissive or unknown than when it is mandatory.