Tripartitism in the National War Labor Board
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 3139575 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Robert G Dixon (0000-0003-2616-8250, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1949 |
| Volume | 2 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 372 |
| Publication date | 1949-04-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Industrial and Labor Relations Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0019-7939 • E-ISSN: 2162-271X |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/2519075 |
| OpenAlex | W4236209291, W2061485361 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
One of the unique contributions the National War Labor Board made to the growing body of data in the field of labor-management relations resulted from its experience as a tripartite organization. Under this arrangement representatives of labor, management, and the public were given equal voting strength on a board that had semicompulsive powers in regard to labor disputes. Although the Board relied on a no-strike, no-lockout pledge, and its orders were merely advisory to the President, the prospect of coercive action by the President in support of the orders virtually made the Board a tripartite compulsory arbitration tribunal. Prior to this time, tripartite boards, in labor relations or in general administration, had been confined largely to an advisory and voluntary role. (Author's abstract courtesy EBSCO.)
Administration (probate law) · Arbitration · Courtesy · Labor relations · Pledge · Political science · Tribunal · Labor Movements and Unions · Law · Military History and Strategy · Public Administration
| Citations per year | 0.14 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2019 - 2019 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |