DOCSLIB.ORG

Information to Users

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The legislated adjustment of labor disputes: An empirical analysis, 1880-1894. Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Gotkin, Joshua Abraham. Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 11/10/2021 08:24:56 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/187207 INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript ,has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedtbrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely. event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note wiD indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continujng from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations ( appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A 8ell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. MI48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800:521·0600 THE LEGISLATED ADJUSTMENT OF LABOR DISPUTES: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS, 1880 TO 1894 by Joshua Abraham Gotkin Copyright © Joshua Abraham Gotkin 1995 A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 1995 UMI Number: 9603354 Copyright 1995 by Gotkin, Joshua Abraham All rights reserved. OMI Microform 9603354 Copyright 1995, by OMI Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 2 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE As members of the Final Examination Committee, we certify that we have read the dissertation prepared by Joshua Abraham Gotkin entitled The Legislated Adjustment of Labor Disputes: An Empirical Analysis, 1880 to 1894 and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the Degree of __________________________________________ 2-7-%5 Date ;-7-9S Date Date Date Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate's submission of the final copy of the dissertation to the Grad~ate College. read this dissertation prepared under my it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation 2-:5 I-Jr, Dissertation Director Date 3 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the copyright holder. ' ~. / SIGNED:~~&~'- -----..... 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Price V. Fishback, Gary D. Libecap, Leslie S. Stratton, and Stanley S. Reynolds, the members of my committee, for their helpful comments and encouragement as this work evolved. My wife, Vivienne Sharton-Gotkin, deserves a medal for putting up with me, and for her many hours of reading and editing expertise. I . owe a great debt of thanks to all the people, both friends and colleagues, who believed in and supported me during my graduate school years. 5 DEDICATION To my wife Vivienne who fills my life with love and laughter, and my father Dr. Lassar G. Gotkin, he would be very proud and pleased with how my life has turned out. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ...... ........................ .......................... ..... ..................... ........................ 8 LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ 9 ABSTRACT .. ........... ............................................ ............... ................. ........... ............... 10 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 12 2. THE LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT FOR THE ARBITRATION ACT OF 1888 ....... 17 2.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 17 2.2 State Legislation .................................................................................................. 20 2.3 Federal Legislation .............................................................................................. 23 2.4 Conclusion....................................................................................... ................... 34 3. THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF THE ARBITRATION ACT OF 1888 ............. 35 3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 35 3.2 Legislative Activity ............................................................................................. 37 3.3 Determinants of Voting Behavior ....................................................................... 43 3.3.1 Modeling Voting Behavior ........................................................................ 43 3.3.2 Constituent Interests ................................................................................... 44 3.3.3 Representative Self-Interest ....................................................................... 52 3.4 Voting Data ......................................................................................................... 55 3.5 Econometric Modeling of Voting and Abstention Behavior .............................. 57 3.6 Estimation and Results ........................................................................................ 64 3.7 Examination of Non-Voting House Members .................................................... 74 3.8 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 78 4. THE ARBITRATION ACT AND ITS EFFECT ON RAILROAD SECURITIES. 81 4.1 Introduction .................. .......... ........ .................................................................... 81 4.2 Event Study Methodology .................................................................................. 84 4.3 Financial Data and Alternative Estimation ......................................................... 86 4.4 Further Discussion of Alternative Methodology................................................ 93 4.5 Events and Results .............................................................................................. 96 4.5.1 The Impact of Strikes on Stock Returns .................................................... 96 4.5.2 The Impact of the Interstate Commerce Act on Stock Returns ................ 101 4.5.3 The Impact of Arbitration Legislation on Stock Returns ......................... 104 4.5.4 Regression Analysis of the Events and Excess Returns ........................... 108 4.6 Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 111 5. THE ARBITRATION ACT AND ITS EFFECT ON STRIKE ACTIVITy ........... 113 5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 113 5.2 Dispute Resolution Procedures .......................................................................... 116 5.3 Theory and Empirical Literature Review ........................................................... 118 5.4 The Data ............................................................................................................. 131 5.5 Modeling and Empirical Results ........................................................................ 145 5.6 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 154 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued 6. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 156 APPENDIX A: STATE AND FEDERAL MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION LEGISLATION ................................................................................ 160 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 175 8 LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1, Number of Strikes and Lockouts in the United States ................................. 19 Table 2.2, State Laws by 1900
Recommended publications
  • RTHERHOOD of Tite O Extension Division

    RTHERHOOD of Tite O Extension Division

    /RTHERHOOD OF ILR I BRQ!EROOD OP LOCOMOTIVE Pi _tite o .elatons, Extension Division - University alifornia 55 Laguna Street San Frantisco, California May 6 and 7, 1959 7tABOR LA",,Th TH- RAfIRM0 INDiSTRY FRO1. LECT JRBS BY J. J. CORCORN;'GEERAL C NAIRMAN BROTIWTHOOD OF RAILROAD TRAIflEN SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY (PACIFIC LIIbWS) TI-T4, RATWAY LABOR ACTa The Railway Labor Act plays an important role in daily railroad labor- management relations. The b!tter the individual, and particularly tlhe represen- tative, understands it, the better he will be equiipped to intelliger.tly cope waith the rnany complex problems in labor-management relations that arise in our daily w,ork on the railroad. The present Act is the culmination of over sixty years of experience with Federal Legislation in the railroad industry. Before going more thoroughly into the Railway Labor Act we should deal brieRly with so.ae of the various railrway labor acts which preceded thle present law. Prior to Federal Legislation in the railroad labor field, the employees, members of the operating brotherhoods, were able to dispose of some of their grievances through union representatives meeting with management on the railroads where managerment voluntarily or otherwise entered into contracts wvith these or- ganizations. The great majority of railroad employees, outside of tihe operating groups, were unorganized prior to 1920 and, of course, grievances were handled on an individual basis, usually on management's terms. Notwithstanding these handicaps, many grievances wo3re settled in line with the standards of labor- management relations as they prevailed on the particular individual railroad. In some instances a form of voluntary arbitration or conciliation was resorted to, embodiying the principles as established by the Arbitration Act of 1888.
  • Records Relating to North American Railroads

    Records Relating to North American Railroads

    Records Relating to North American Railroads Compiled by David Pfeiffer Reference Information Paper 91 National Archives and Records Administration Washington, DC 2001 Cover: View looking across New York Central Railroad yards, Weehawken, NJ towards midtown Manhattan, 1947 (49- 6840). Copyright by the University of Louisville Library ___________________________________________________________________ Table of Contents Preface Part I Introduction Description of Records Related Finding Aids Sources of Additional Information Washington, DC, Area Regional Archives The Role of the Federal Government in the History of Railroads in the United States--A Historical Overview Acknowledgments Part II Frequently Asked Questions Where can I find documentation concerning the corporate and financial history of individual railroads? Are there track plans and other documentatione useful for model railroaders? Are there drawings, plans, construction details, and/or photographs concerning the construction of railroad-owned structures, such as railroad depots and stations? Is there documentation available which gives information concerning how railroads acquired the land adjacent to or on their right-of-way? Is there genealogical information available in the National Archives concerning railroad employees? Are there reports concerning railroad accident investigations in the custody of the National Archives? What documentation is available from the records of Federal Government agencies concerning the transcontinental railroad? What documentation exists concerning the U.S. Government control and/or supervision of the railroads during World War I and World War II? What Federal records exist for the U.S. military railroads during the Civil War? Does the National Archives have custody of any records relating to the Freedom Train? Are there any Federal records concerning personal injury claims or property ownership disputes against railroads? Part III Federal Regulation and Oversight of Railroads Part IIIA III.1 - III.47 Record Group 14 Records of the U.S.
  • Miversity of Laliforniap Berkeley August - November,1956

    Miversity of Laliforniap Berkeley August - November,1956

    The Railroad ;3rotherhoodst Seminar in Cooperation With the Institute of Industrial Relations miversity of Laliforniap Berkeley August - November,1956, Labor Law in the Railroa, Industry From Lectures by JqJ* Corcoran' eneral Chairman Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen Southern Pacific Company (?acific Lines) The Railroad Brotherhoods, Seminar in Cooperation With the Institute of Industrial Relations University of California, Berkeley August - November,1956 Labor Law in the Railroad Industry From Lectures by Jo J. Corcoran, General Chairman Brotherhood of Railroad Trai.nmen Southern Pacific Company (Pacific Lines) THE3 RAIDNAY LABOR ACT The Railway Labor Act plays ar. -important role in daily railroad labor-management relations* The better the individual, and particularly the representative, understands it, the better he will be equipped to intelligently cope with the many complex problems in labor-management relations that arise in our daily work on the railroad. The present Act is the culmination of over sixty years of experience with Federal Legislation in the rail- road industry. Before going more thoroughly into the Railway Labor Act we should deal briefly with some of the various railway labor acts which preceded the present law. Prior to Federal Legislation in the railroad labor field, the employees, members of the operating brotherhoods, were able to dispose of some of their grievances through union repre- sentatives meeting with management on the railroads where manage- ment voluntarily or otherwise entered into contracts with these organizations. The great majority of railroad employees, outside of the operating groups, were unorganized prior to 1920 and, of course, grievances were handled on an individual basis, usually on management's terms.
  • Labor Law 9-3

    Labor Law 9-3

    SECTION 9 LABOR LAW 9-3 A. INTRODUCTION rise to strikes. A national strike in 1922 revealed that the 1920 Act still was not the solution, leading Congress Although most transit systems do not operate heavy in 1926 to promulgate the RLA,7 the first legislation to rail systems, we begin our discussion with the Railway force management to recognize and bargain with em- 1 Labor Act of 1926 (RLA). The RLA was the first com- ployee representatives.8 prehensive body of labor law promulgated by Congress. The RLA is administered by the three-member Na- The RLA encompasses many of the foundational con- tional Mediation Board (NMB), each member of which cepts of collective bargaining and dispute resolution in is appointed for a 3-year term by the President with the 2 the labor/management context. Concepts such as un- advice and consent of the Senate. During their terms, fair labor practices and the union’s duty of fair repre- board members may be removed only for “inefficiency, sentation, for example, are treated similarly by courts neglect of duty, malfeasance in office, or ineligibility.” whether they arise under the RLA or subsequent labor No more than two of the three members may be affili- legislation. ated with the same political party.9 If the transit system has an interstate rail compo- Three broad issues are governed by the RLA: nent, the RLA is likely to govern. But one must be cog- nizant of the fact that if the transit system is a state or 1. Union representation; local governmental agency, its employees are likely to 2.