A Comparison of Participant Evaluation of the Procedural and Distributive Elements of Chinese Labor Arbitration Committee Mediation Versus Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Mediation

E. Patrick McDermott, Jinyue Sun, Ruth Obar
{"title":"A Comparison of Participant Evaluation of the Procedural and Distributive Elements of Chinese Labor Arbitration Committee Mediation Versus Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Mediation","authors":"E. Patrick McDermott, Jinyue Sun, Ruth Obar","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1752470","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The authors surveyed participants in U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity and Chinese Labor Arbitration Committee mediations. Similar questions relating to the mediations’ procedural due process and substantive due process elements were administered. The similarities and difference in the two dispute resolution processes are fully described. These data indicated that the Chinese LAC mediation compared favorably with the very successful EEOC mediation program. The results contribute to the broad discourse concerning workers’ rights and the development of rule of law in China. They also suggest that the heavily evaluative Chinese process leads to higher ratings on mediator performance. Finally, these results suggest that the Chinese participants’ perceptions of procedural and distributive justice are closely aligned while the U.S. participants distinguish between the process provided and outcome obtained.","PeriodicalId":177971,"journal":{"name":"Economic Perspectives on Employment & Labor Law eJournal","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economic Perspectives on Employment & Labor Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1752470","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The authors surveyed participants in U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity and Chinese Labor Arbitration Committee mediations. Similar questions relating to the mediations’ procedural due process and substantive due process elements were administered. The similarities and difference in the two dispute resolution processes are fully described. These data indicated that the Chinese LAC mediation compared favorably with the very successful EEOC mediation program. The results contribute to the broad discourse concerning workers’ rights and the development of rule of law in China. They also suggest that the heavily evaluative Chinese process leads to higher ratings on mediator performance. Finally, these results suggest that the Chinese participants’ perceptions of procedural and distributive justice are closely aligned while the U.S. participants distinguish between the process provided and outcome obtained.
中国劳动仲裁委员会调解与平等就业机会委员会调解程序要素与分配要素的参与者评价比较
作者调查了美国平等就业机会和中国劳动仲裁委员会调解的参与者。还管理了与调解的程序性正当程序和实质性正当程序要素有关的类似问题。充分描述了这两种争议解决程序的异同。这些数据表明,与非常成功的平等就业机会委员会调解方案相比,中国LAC调解方案更具优势。研究结果有助于对中国工人权利与法治发展的广泛讨论。他们还认为,中国的重评估过程导致对中介绩效的更高评级。最后,这些结果表明,中国参与者对程序正义和分配正义的看法是密切一致的,而美国参与者区分提供的过程和获得的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信