Why don’t more firms use lockouts to break impasse? Lockout creates more problems than solving the problem that may have led the management to opt to this option in a dispute with employees. Lockouts do not help in creating the atmosphere of dialogue; instead they prevent opportunities of striking favorable deals for both parties. Negotiations are the only way to work out differences as Lockouts are costly to a firm. What are the economic and social consequences of prohibiting replacement of economic strikers? Prohibiting replacement of economic strikers denies employers the right to challenge union representations. Depending on the size of the firm, prohibition creates economic pressure to the company. The economic pressure comes with increased costs of labor and reduced productions levels. Prohibition affects smaller firms as they do not have the leverage of transferring production elsewhere. In those areas where there are a high number of unionized employees, companies are forced to rely on subcontracts which are expensive and economically draining. This sometimes may force a company to prefer opening of a production unit in a different area, other than the one it operates in. What conditions are necessary for mediation to assist in settling an impasse? The need for a mediator to help in settling an impasse brought about by two negotiating sides in an agreement failure to reach an agreement or when the negotiations hit a deadlocked. Other condition that may cause the need for mediation is when negotiations are harmfully delayed. Should the Electromation Decision be overturned? Why or why not? Electromation decisions should not be overturned and the basic reason is that, by use of these policies, companies are able to manage and take peaceful steps of increasing workers satisfaction. This, on the other hand helps the company to maintain and increase its productivity. It should not be illegal for manages and workers to sit together and discus issues of mutual interest in a company. Should management be required to consult with the union about discipline before it is imposed rather than simply providing for grievance processing after its imposition? Unions are more interested in pools of disgruntled workers, and when companies venture into making decisions without informing unions; they are in most cases dragged into costly litigations. It would be more profitable if management consulted with unions before imposing discipline decisions. What duty, if any, does an arbitrator have to the parties to see that both are competently represented? The code of conduct in any dispute arbitration requires the arbitrator to make sure all parties in a dispute are adequately represented. The arbitrator should be as neutral as possible in cases of labor arbitrations. There are codes of ethics provide by law for professional responsibility of arbitrators. The professional responsibility of an arbitrator requires them to always observe fairness and to always maintain the levels of integrity demanded by the professional code of ethic. Since arbitrators are not responsible to the electorate, should they be allowed to make binding rulings on economic issues? The law of arbitration does not require the arbitrator to be involved in the discussion of settlement of disputes between negotiating parties unless requested by the parties. If the parties to the dispute request the arbitrator to be involved in the settlement negotiations, they should make decisions that are fair and justifiable to both parties without a