Grievance mediation

Conclusion In sum, grievance mediation is a highly successful alternative to labor arbitration. It shares with expedited arbitration the capacity to reduce the time and cost of arbitration, and is more likely to produce mutually acceptable outcomes than is a conference procedure in which the neutral retains decisional authority. It is also more likely than either of those procedures to improve the parties' dispute resolution ability and ultimately their entire relationship.To be sure, not all grievances can be successfully resolved through mediation. Still, its advantages are so great, and its costs so low that an effort to resolve grievances at mediation should be a required step preceding arbitration in all collective bargaining contracts. Stephen B. Goldberg is Professor of Law at Northwestern University Law School, Chicago, Ill., 60611. He is a member of the National Academy of Arbitrators and president of Mediation Research and Education Project, Inc.This article draws in substantial part on material contained in the author's recent book (with William L. Ury and Jeanne M. Brett),Getting Disputes Resolved: Designing Systems to Cut the Costs of Conflict (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1988).     

Police patrol and the deterrence of crime

A nonrecursive model of the deterrent effect of police presence was formulated and tested for 26 cities. Victimization data were employed as measures of crime, unpublished FBI data on the number of police patrol units as the measure of levels of police presence, and data for 11 exogenous variables were derived from FBI and census reports. It was found that per capita, police are a positive function of rates of violent crime and that clearance rates are a positive function of police presence. However, some offenses that have traditionally been thought to be deterrable are not inversely related to clearance rates. The equations were re-estimated using official measures of crime and found to be more consistent with the deterrent hypothesis. It is suggested that official data may generate a spurious correlation. Finally, caution is suggested in consideration of alternative forms of police presence.     

Metaphor and Imagination in James Wilson's Theory of Federal Union

"Through metaphor, the past has the capacity to imagine us, and we it." -Cynthia Ozick, in "The Moral Necessity of Metaphor"
American federalism is nothing more-und nothing less-than a metaphor.
This was how lames Wilson, the most prominent lawyer at the Philadelphia Convention, came to approach the novel problem of understanding and conveying what federalism in a modern republic should mean. The Federal Republic created in 1787 was, for Wilson, more than a mutter of ingenious political design, more than a mutter of the "new science of politics," and more than a mutter of constitutional law or constitutionalism itself-unless the Constitution were seen to "comprehend" the moral purpose and moral promise of the new nation.
To Wilson, this view of the importance of the moral content of republican federalism was entailed by the "knowledge" that he took to be the necessary foundation of the Republic. It was this knowledge of certain fundamental principles- of "moral science,'I human nature, and the nature of language, and, more generally, of "cultivation" us a political and social process that was also an end in itself-that ultimately justified "the People" us the "sublime" metaphor governing American constitutional theory.
Yet, for all Wilson's faith in figurative "comprehensiveness," his distinctive approach to securing the New Republic through a federal union of the American People seems to have proved less and less compelling to his contemporaries the more he tried to pursue it as far us his vision of a politics of cultivation directed.