The Implications of the ASLEF Case

The decision of the European Court of Human Rights in ASLEFv United Kingdom (27 February 2007) will require the governmentto re-visit the law relating to the right of trade unions toexclude and expel individuals because of their membership ofpolitical organisations perceived by trade unions to be hostileto their interests. It is now clear—as was pointed outat the time—that the changes made by the Employment RelationsAct 2004 do not go far enough to meet obligations under theEuropean Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). However, the casealso raises much wider questions about the compatibility ofother statutory restraints on trade union autonomy with Article11 of the ECHR, notably ss 64–67 (on unjustifiable discipline)and 174–177 (on exclusion and expulsion as a whole, andnot only the measures relating to membership of hostile politicalparties). This article considers both the immediate and thewider implications of the ASLEF decision for British trade unionlaw, in the context of what appears to be a greater willingnessof the Strasbourg Court to listen more carefully to trade uniongrievances than in the past. The article also draws attentionto the role of litigation as a trade union strategy to recoverlost rights, and again emphasises the importance of InternationalLabour Organisation Convention 87 and the Council of Europe'sSocial Charter of 1961 (as well as the jurisprudence thereunder)as important sources in the construction of the ECHR, Article11.     

Measuring Network Structure

Networks have been a research issue in public administration for many years. Because of the difficulty of measuring networks, they have often been treated as a metaphor, a conceptual scheme, or a management technique (networking). The work on networks in public administration is almost all of the case study and rarely of the comparative case variety. This article presents the results of two studies of networks using social network analysis as a technique for studying structural relationships between organizations. This technique is utilized to show both the research and practical potential of network analysis as an evaluation methodology for organizations that jointly produce a service. In the first study, the network provides mental health services to seriously mentally ill adults. In the second study, the network attempts to prevent young people from abusing drugs and alcohol. The two studies were undertaken for different reasons. The first was an elaborate comparative study of four mental health networks and the relationship between network design and performance. The second was a much simpler consulting effort to help a local prevention partnership create linkages to other community organizations. However, in both of the studies the goal was to measure the structural ties in the network based on various types of relationships that exist in a given field of practice. These linkages are ties that bind the network together and become data that can be used to compare networks on their degree and type of integration. The article makes the argument that links in a network are one way that scholars can compare networks in similar or different policy domains. At the same time, the article argues that analysing linkages in an organization's network is an effective and practical means of determining how well integrated any given organization is in a network.     

The Rehnquist Court and Indigenous Rights: The Expedited Diminution of Native Powers of Governance

The U.S. Supreme Court has long played a prominent role in defining,critiquing, and, in some cases, rearranging the political relationshipbetween indigenous peoples and the states and the federal government,and in enlarging or reducing the inherent sovereign status ofnative peoples. This article assesses the most recent SupremeCourt opinions that are systematically, and without referenceto judicial precedent, redefining the political status of tribalnations by reducing their heretofore acknowledged sovereignauthority from an internal perspective and especially from anintergovernmental standpoint. Although the U.S. Congress stilladheres to a policy of tribal self-determination, the Courtis dramatically and permanently minimizing the rights of tribesto practice political, economic, and cultural self-determinationbecause in the opinion of a majority of the justices, thereare only two sovereigns in the United States: states and thefederal government.     

Force Size for the Post-Westphalian World

The quality of the U.S. military has improved steadily since the end of the Cold War, but technological and managerial advancements cannot compensate for the inadequate size of the American armed forces. The post–Cold War years saw a shift from the Westphalian, state-ordered world to one where Western states are at war with transnational, substate terrorist groups. This requires adjustments in the American military establishment. Improvements in quality must be matched by an increase in quantity in order to meet U.S. security needs. As interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq have proven, a minimalist force may be sufficient to win a war, but where nation-building is required, it will find it difficult to win the peace.     

Is compulsory voting more democratic?

Lijphart (1997) endorses compulsory voting as a means to increase voter turnout. Considering the likely effects of the role of information (including its costs) on the decision to vote and taking an expressive view of voting, however, compels us to investigate two unexamined claims by such advocates: (i) that individuals are transformed by forcing them to vote, and (ii) that a compulsory electoral outcome is a more accurate reflection of community preferences.We argue that compelling those who are not particularly interested in, or informed about, the political process to vote increases the proportion of random votes and we show that under simple majority rule, compulsory voting may violate the Pareto principle; the less popular candidate is more likely to be elected. Our results cast doubt on the ”miracle of aggregation“ argument, which optimistically concludes that as long as uninformed votes are not systematically biased, they will have no effect on voting outcomes. We also briefly consider how information cascades can exacerbate this problem.