The Pros And Cons Of The Workplace Relations Act

Conflict management is identifying and handling the situation in a fair sensible manner. Skills required are effective communication, problem solving and negotiating with a focus of interest.

Given the culture these days of “No Win - No Fee” solicitors, the majority of employers have legal expenses cover that allows them to be guided through all employment issues by professionals who have the expertise in employment law. Owners/managers are advised to use this service for even the smallest employment issue as not following due process can prove costly for employers. In addition, these experts and the advice they give are non-biased and in accordance with current employment legislation.

It is difficult to say what Pao’s experience would have been had she sought (or been able) to resolve the issue through private channels; Alternative dispute resolution in today’s non-union employment environment takes many different shapes. Despite this

Disputes between individuals can be resolved through mediation, tribunals and courts are sought depending on the complexity and nature of the dispute. Their effectiveness in achieving justice for and between individuals to varying extents will be assessed by their ability to uphold notions of fairness, equality, access, timeliness, enforceability and resource efficiency.

“Grievance mediation is an alternative dispute resolution procedure which promises many of the advantages of arbitration in less time and at lower expense” (Roberts, Wolters, Holley, & Field, 1990). Mediation is less time consuming and the least expensive method of resolving a complaint than going forward with the arbitration process. If chosen by the complainant, grievance mediation is a completely voluntary step. This is the step prior to going forward to the arbitration process. The mediation step provides an opportunity for a

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his

I feel the labor relations system as currently constituted is effective for resolving disputes as long as both parties are committed to negotiating in good faith. Although, I feel the current system is effective a further explanation of the systems strengths and weaknesses will better explain the effectiveness of resolving disputes. It is in both the companies and the labor interest to negotiate with as little third party interaction to come up with an agreement. In times when there are disputes their different course of action that start from a least costly without giving up power in the decision to the possibility of becoming more costly to either party and give up the power in the decision. As discussed in the text when an organization and labor cannot come up with an agreement a third party may be asked to come in to negotiations to resolve a dispute which includes mediation, fact-finding, and interest arbitration.

More companies are turning to alternate dispute resolution (ADR) as an alterative to the judicial system for settling employee disputes. There are some clear advantages and disadvantages to ADR for both employers and employees. The best-designed ADR programs are those that are fair and impartial. A good ADR program should seek to find the best possible outcome for both parties while saving time and money and preserving relationships. The least effective ADR programs tend to be unfair and perpetuate the imbalance and bargaining power discrepancy frequently found in employer-employee relationships.

In the 2013 case, R v Gittany, the accused, Simon Gittany, requested for a judge-only trial. This was due to the complexity of his murder case and the media coverage which Gittany believed would have influenced the jury’s perspectives and outcome. The complexities and intricacies of a trial that took barristers and solicitors years of expertise to understand and interpret cannot be expected to be completely understood from a group of twelve members from the public. This can be seen in a recent 2013 report from the Sydney Morning Herald, ‘Jurors Need More Direction’ where the NSW Law Reform Commission (LRC) found that the directions given to juries from judges ‘are not working, overly complex and need to be clearer’. However, their imperfections aren’t enough to have them off the trial process as juries allow the public to be involved in the judicial system. Public participation in the criminal trial process creates more confidence in the legal system. Juries are the most democratic aspect of the criminal trial process and are a crucial aspect in representing the interests and needs of the community.

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial

Despite the harmonious nature of Japanese people, there are still conflicts that cannot be resolved within the enterprise union and the firm. Most of these unresolved conflicts occur because many firms are conducting restructuring and retrenchment during this period of economic uncertainty. When these conflicts happen, they can approach the local government mediation body to help conciliate and make a decision. Most decisions made are generally accepted; however, should the conflicts still exist, they can opt for arbitration in the Labour Tribunal System, or legislation in court. For arbitration, the judges involved are tripartite in nature: 1 professional judge, 1 union representative and 1 employer representative. All 3 judges must have professional knowledge and experience in labour issues, and there are no more than 3 hearings, verdict based on majority. If the verdict is rejected by either party, they may proceed to legislation (Elbo 2004).

However, it can hear almost every employment law matter since its jurisdiction increased. Before 1994, Employment Tribunals could only hear statutory claims while after the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994, Employment Tribunals' role has drastically changed that they can now hear common law claims(Richard Kinder,1999). But there are some law matters of common law they cannot cope with like matters relating to moral tights and copyright, patents, designs rights, trade marks; breach of restraint of trade covenants; breach of confidence; breach of a contract terms requiring the employer to provide for the employee; personnel injury claims. From this regard, certain employment matters still have to be tackled in the civil courts.

I am firmly opposed to the right-to-work legislation because these laws are designed to reduce the economic and political power of unions by forcing unions to represent non-dues paying members equally with dues paying members. Lawmakers on both sides of the issue make strong but not necessarily equal arguments for and against the right to work laws. During a contentious and unsuccessful union-led recall campaign of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker over collective bargaining rights, two of the strongest arguments made by right-leaning supporters was that right to work laws spur income growth and higher pay. While there may be a modicum of truth to those arguments, the fact of the matter

This essay will provide a detailed examination of what Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is, particularly mediation, the various techniques of ADR, the advantages and disadvantages of ADR; and whether or not courts should have the authority to compel individuals into undertaking mediation or other forms of ADR. This essay argues against courts having the power to compel litigants into mediation but may be afforded powers to encourage parties to go through mediation at first instance. This essay will base its arguments on whether courts should compel civil litigants to follow the ADR route upon the perceived advantages of ADR and its success rate. The contention of this essay is not that mediation is inappropriately used to settle