Making Friends of Foes: Bringing Labor and Management Together through Integrative Bargaining

Collective bargaining\u27s unique history and structure make it an ideal setting for integrative bargaining ( LB ).1 First, most collective bargaining agreements have a set expiration date, which causes the parties to constantly return to the bargaining table to negotiate new terms. Second, collective bargaining in the labor-management setting has a long history in the United States, and unions and management tend to form long-lasting relationships. Finally, collective bargaining agreements address complex interests and are designed to meet the needs of a variety of constituents. These factors combine to produce a relationship involving several individuals, going back multiple generations, who are sure to negotiate with each other in the future. This differs from a distant negotiating relationship, such as the sale of a car, where the parties\u27 interactions are not likely to be ongoing. Overall, collective bargaining negotiations are often situated amid a long acrimonious history between labor and management, and involve multiple constituents who represent a wide range of interests

State Legislative Update

The purpose of this Bill is to provide an alternative approach for individuals with a cause of action against a municipality.\u27 Rather than the costly and time-consuming traditional method of hiring an attorney and filing a lawsuit, House Bill 2631 offers individuals an opportunity for Alternative Dispute Resolution ( ADR ) in the form of arbitration. The Bill would allow any individual with a claim in contract or tort against a municipality to require the municipality to submit to the arbitration of the claim. The purpose of House Bill 2631 is to facilitate the resolution of individual claims against a city. However, a fundamental principle of arbitration is that it is a matter of contract, and no party should be forced into the arbitration of a claim which they have not agreed to arbitrate

Recent Efforts to Make Nebraska Juries More Representative of Their Communities

According to the Minority and Justice Task Force Report (2003), “the majority of Nebraskans believe that it is important that juries reflect the racial and ethnic makeup of the community.” Preliminary data obtained as part of the Task Force’s inquiry into representation of minorities on petit juries call into question whether Nebraska juries are representative of their communities. This concern has prompted several statewide policy reforms that are designed to increase representation of minorities on juries regardless of whether there has been a problem in the State. The first reform involved regular refreshing of jury pool lists (LB 19 and LB 402). A second reform will provide insight into whether there actually is a problem: It provides the authority to conduct an analysis of the jury compilation process to determine to what extent (if any) minorities are structurally excluded from serving on juries (LB 105). These efforts are intended to address both the possibility of an actual problem and the fact that Nebraska’s minorities have less faith in the justice system and are more likely to perceive that minorities are underrepresented on juries. It was the concern about the trust and confidence in the system that prompted the Minority and Justice Implementation Committee to conduct at statewide campaign to promote jury service by everyone in Nebraska, with a special focus on, the state’s most diverse communities

Making Friends of Foes: Bringing Labor and Management Together through Integrative Bargaining

Collective bargaining\u27s unique history and structure make it an ideal setting for integrative bargaining ( LB ).1 First, most collective bargaining agreements have a set expiration date, which causes the parties to constantly return to the bargaining table to negotiate new terms. Second, collective bargaining in the labor-management setting has a long history in the United States, and unions and management tend to form long-lasting relationships. Finally, collective bargaining agreements address complex interests and are designed to meet the needs of a variety of constituents. These factors combine to produce a relationship involving several individuals, going back multiple generations, who are sure to negotiate with each other in the future. This differs from a distant negotiating relationship, such as the sale of a car, where the parties\u27 interactions are not likely to be ongoing. Overall, collective bargaining negotiations are often situated amid a long acrimonious history between labor and management, and involve multiple constituents who represent a wide range of interests