Disputant Preferences for Mediated or Adjudicated Processes in Administrative Agencies: The Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission Settlement Part Program

If you need an accessible version of this item, please submit a remediation request.
Date
2017-11
Language
English
Embargo Lift Date
Committee Members
Degree
Degree Year
Department
Grantor
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Found At
Cornell
Abstract

Previous research examining disputants’ preferences for mediation over more formal adjudicative proceedings is limited and mostly experimental. Moreover, this work has not examined preferences in relation to repeated experience with various types of proceedings. We surveyed disputants who have experienced different types of proceedings in administrative adjudication and administrative law judge mediation in the Settlement Part Program at the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC). We find that the higher the perceptions of procedural justice, the greater the preference for use of mediation. In addition, the more total experience disputants have in the OSHRC dispute system (including both adjudication and settlement judge mediation), the greater their preference for mediation.

Description
item.page.description.tableofcontents
item.page.relation.haspart
Cite As
Malatesta, D., Amsler, L. B., & Scott, S. F. (2017). Disputant Preferences for Mediated or Adjudicated Processes in Administrative Agencies: The Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission Settlement Part Program. Conflict and Its Resolution in the Changing World of Work: A Conference and Special Issue Honoring David B. Lipsky. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/lipskycrconference/10
ISSN
Publisher
Series/Report
Sponsorship
Major
Extent
Identifier
Relation
Journal
Conflict and Its Resolution in the Changing World of Work: A Conference and Special Issue Honoring David B. Lipsky
Source
Author
Alternative Title
Type
Article
Number
Volume
Conference Dates
Conference Host
Conference Location
Conference Name
Conference Panel
Conference Secretariat Location
Version
Author's manuscript
Full Text Available at
This item is under embargo {{howLong}}