Reviews

Arabic Edition of the British Council Map of Europe and the Middle East. Scale 1: 11,000,000. Royal Geographical Society

Iraq Irrigation Handbook: Part I. Euphrates. Compiled by Ahmed Sousa, under the direction of J. D. Atkinson. Published at Baghdad by the Government of Iraq, 1944. 10” × 7”. Pp. in, with 35 tables, 18 figures and 1 plate, also, in a portfolio 15” × 14”, 16 other plates. Price not stated.

Jenghis Khan. By W. Yan. Hutchinson International Authors, Ltd. 9s. 6d.

From Tunisia to Normandy. By Major‐General H. Rowan‐Robinson, C.B., C.M.G., D.S.O. Hutchinsoh.

Defence is Our Business. By Brigadier J. G. Smyth, V.C., M.C. Hutchinson and Co. 10s. 6d.

Anna and the King of Siam. By Margaret Landon. Illustrated by Margaret Ayer. John Day Co., New York. Pp. 391.

The Modern Prison System of India. By Lieut.‐Colonel F. A. Barker, C.I.E., O.B.E., M.A., M.D., B.C., I.M.S. (Retd.).

Fabian Colonial Essays. With an Introduction by A. Creech Jones, M.P., and edited by Dr. Rita Hinden. Geo. Allen and Unwin. Pp. 261. 8s. 6d. 1945.

Modern Exploration. F. Kingdon Ward. 124 pp. Published by Jonathan Cape at 6s.     

Prisons or Problem-Solving: Does the Public Support Specialty Courts?

ABSTRACT

Recently, “problem-solving” courts have been developed as an alternative to imprisonment. They are often called “specialty” courts because they process and divert into treatment programs offenders who are seen as different from the general criminal population, such as those with mental health or drug problems, those who are homeless or veterans, and those who engage in domestic violence. Based on a 2017 national survey of 1,000 respondents, the current study examines overall public support for rehabilitation as a goal of corrections and then focuses specifically on support for different types of specialty courts. The analysis reveals that the American public endorses not only the rehabilitative ideal but also the use of problem-solving courts. Further, with only minimal variation, strong support for these courts appears to exist regardless of political orientation and sociodemographic characteristics.     

Final position arbitration

Abstract. The tremendous upsurge in public-sector collective bargaining in the last decade has prompted a search for new types of dispute settlement, particularly in so-called essential services. The right to strike for public employees has not been accepted in many jurisdictions, particularly in the United States. Compulsory arbitration is rejected widely by both union and management representatives hecausc it fails to take into account the dynamics of the negotiating process, stultifying rather than encouraging bargaining. Final offer Selection is presented as a possible alternative to strikes and arbitration. The process has been utilized effectively in the United States, particularly in Michigan and Wisconsin. It has not received popular acceptance thus far in Canada, although the committee established to propose new labour legislation in hlanitoba has recommended it. The University of Alberta has used it for determination of faculty disputes and the Ontario Hydro Engineers have also used it. The Finkelinan Report on suggested changes in the federal public service legislatioii refers to it as a possible dispute-settling device. There are many variations of final offer arbitration but, in general, it requires that after negotiations have reached an impasse, an arbitrator, upon hearing the final positions of the parties, would select the ‘most reasonable’ offer. The arbitrator would not be free to compromise hut would be required to accept one pusition or the other in toto. The attractiveness of the process stems from the impetus given to reach agreement on as many issues as possible so that the gamble of convincing the arbitrator is lessened and he has fewer items to consider when making his choice. Thus, the theory stresses the importance of the parties being ‘reasonable’ in their demands. Critics of the system believe that it turns the adjudication process into a poker game and have referred to it as ‘industrial relations roulette.’ With all its disadvantages, to an organization like Michigan Firefighters Union, which cannot countenance a strike, or to the public, which must endure the inconvenience and expenses of strikes in the public service, final position arbitration has much to be said in its favour. Sommaire. L'énorme multiplication des négociations collectives dans le secteur public au cours de la dernière déennie a suscité des recherches pour trouver de nouveaux moyens de resoudre les différends, surtout en ce qui concerned les services dits ‘essentiels.’ De nombreuses juridictions, en particulier aux Etats- Unis, ont refusé le droit de grève aux employés du secteur public. L'arbitrage obligatoire est trés souvent rejeté par les syndicats comme par les employeurs, parce qu'il ne tient pas compte de la dynamique du processus de négociation et tend à restreindre les échanges plutôt qu'à les encourager. Le choix entre des offres définitives est considéré comme une possibilité par rapport à la gré ou à l'arbitrage. Ce processus a été utilisé efficacement aux Etats-Unis et plus particuliérement dans le Michigan et le Wisconsin. II n'a pas eu jusqu'à présent beaucoup de succès au Canada, bien qu'il ait été recom-niandé au Manitoba par la Commission chargée de proposer une nouvelle législation du travail. L'Université de I'Alberta s'en est servie pour résoudre des dif-férends avec le corps enseignant, mmme dailleurs les ingénieurs de l'Ontario Hydro. Le rapport Finkelman qui a proposé des modifications àA lég législation fédérale répissant la fonction publique le mentionne également comme un inoven possible de résoudre des différends II v a toutes sortes de variantes de l'arbitrage des offres définitives mais en général, cette méthode exige que l'arbitre, lorsque les parties àB la négociation se trouvent dans une impasse, et que leurs offres sont définitives, choisisse la ‘plus raisonnable.’ L'arbitre n'est pas libre de faire un compromis entre les deux, il doit accepter I'une ou l'autre des offres in toto. L'intérét de ce processus est qu'il incite les parties à faire tous les efforts pour arriver à un accord sur le plus de questions possibles de façon à réduire la discrétion de l'arbitre. Les parties ont ainsi intérêt àêtre ‘raisonnables’ dans leurs demands. Les critiques du système ont peur que ce genre d'arbitrage transforme le processus d'adjudication en une partie de poker et certains ont appelé l'arbitrage des positions définitives ‘la roulette des relations industrielles.’ Malgé tous ces inconvénients, l'arbitrage des offres définitives demeure attrayant pour le svndicat des pompiers du Michigan qui ne peut pas envisager la grève et pour le public qui doit supporter les désagréments et !es coûts des gréves dans le service public.     

Differential taxation of nonprofits and the commercialization of nonprofit revenues

The effects of the favorable tax treatment of nonprofit commercial activities are best understood in a framework that explicitly accounts for a number of interactions. These involve differential taxation of nonprofits and for-profits and of nonprofits’ “related” and “unrelated” activities; the preferences of nonprofit executives who may be averse to commercial activity; donors whose giving may be sensitive to nonprofit organization commercial activity; and cost-complementarities between nonprofit core mission-related activities and their secondary money-raising efforts. Differential taxation encourages nonprofits to pursue otherwise avoided commercial ventures by providing excess financial returns that nonprofits can exploit because of their tax-exempt status. Data from the 1992 Statistics of Income (SOI) public use file of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Form-990 returns indicate that the propensity of nonprofit organizations to undertake both tax-exempt and taxable activities depends on their primary mission-related output and size, the relative importance of government versus private contributions, and the size of the excess return created by differential taxation of nonprofit and for-profit business. Additional analyses of SOI data also show that organizations that engage in taxable commercial activities are likely to allocate joint costs in ways that reduce, and in most cases eliminate, their taxable income.