Years ago, the colorful and controversial leader of the International Brotherhoo
ID: 1222217 • Letter: Y
Question
Years ago, the colorful and controversial leader of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Jimmy Hoffa, explained his adamant opposition to arbitration as follows: Even if it takes one or two hours or longer [for the management and the union] to work out a [grievance] settlement among ourselves we are better off, knowing the business as we do from both sides, than to submit a grievance to some third party who attempts to please both sides and who actually pleases nobody. In my opinion, the best method of settling grievances is to leave open the end for final settlement and, if we cannot mutually agree, either for the employer to lock out the union or for the union to strike the employer. If we don't come out with a completely satisfactory settlement we come out with a settlement both sides can live with and one which doesn't change the terms of the contract. what do you think of this argument?Explanation / Answer
I agree with Jimmy Hoffa,mutually agreeable settlement is beneficial for both the management and the union and if both cant agree on common terms then it is best to part ways because approaching a third party for settlement will only things worse as the third party may make you agree on terms which will ultimately still keep you unsatisfied. Its better to solve things internally without the interference of third party as it also exposes your conflict to the outside world.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.