The determinants of NLRB decision-making revisited.

A model of decision making as done by the National Labor Relations Board was developed that distinguishes between decision making in more important, complex cases and less important, simpler cases. Using a representative sample of NLRB decisions over 1957-86, it was found that in deciding the 112 d...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Industrial & Labor Relations Review Vol. 48; pp. 237 - 258
Main Authors: Cooke, William N., Mishra, Aneil K., Spreitzer, Gretchen M.
Format: Article
Published: Cornell University January 1995
Subjects:
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=510115382&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 510115382
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00197939
        ILR
      jtl: Industrial & Labor Relations Review
      issn: 00197939
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: January 1995
      vid: 48
      pid: 140
      pub: Cornell University
    artinfo:
      ui:
        510115382
        10.2307/2524485
      ppf: 237
      ppct: 21
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: T
      tig:
        atl: The determinants of NLRB decision-making revisited.
      aug:
        au:
          Cooke, William N.
          Mishra, Aneil K.
          Spreitzer, Gretchen M.
      su:
        United States. National Labor Relations Board
        Decision making
      sug:
        subj:
          United States. National Labor Relations Board
          Decision making
      ab: A model of decision making as done by the National Labor Relations Board was developed that distinguishes between decision making in more important, complex cases and less important, simpler cases. Using a representative sample of NLRB decisions over 1957-86, it was found that in deciding the 112 disputes that were particularly important or complex, board members were influenced by their personal preferences and those of the presidents who appointed them, a finding consistent with the results of previous studies. In the 415 simpler cases, however, board members were influenced in their decisions by little more than the recommendations of regional offices and administrative law judges. Another finding that substantially modifies the conclusions of previous studies is that board members appear to have been highly influenced by their accountability to the public when deciding more important, complex cases.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N