Dispute Resolution

Look at the impact that adversarial legalism has played in the context of management-union relationships within the University setting, more specifically, York University. Argue that, the rise of legalism within the Alternative Dispute Resolution framework has hindered the ability for negotiators to use a more integrative rather than distributive approach to bargaining. In addition, Consider the domestic relevance of socio-cultural factors that have led to European countries such as New Zealand achieving much greater management-union co-operation than their North American counter-parts. Discuss some of the arguments in favor as well as possible counter-arguments to my position. The main argument in support of thesis is that adversarial systems inherently involve a winner and a loser. In the context of management-union disputes where both parties are inter-dependent, such a framework can prove to be very problematic. Despite calling for an integrative approach in my paper, I do acknowledge that some issues are distributive in nature and cannot be settled in a manner that would be ideal for both parties. However, by focusing on interests rather than positions, I would argue that parties would be better equipped to find more creative solutions to issues that may have otherwise seemed at a dead-end. Some of the counter-arguments to my position include; our legal system, which is a means to provide justice is based on an adversarial system. Furthermore, the purpose of ADR is to serve as faster and more efficient means to resolve disputes. As such, the focus should be on resolving the issue, and not attaining the most just and fairest outcome.