For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers is a costly mistake, because all its labor disputes must then be settled by binding arbitration, without any negotiated public-sector labor settlements guiding the arbitrators. Strikes should be outlawed only for categories of public-sector workers for whose services no acceptable substitute exists. The statements above best support which of the following conclusions? (A) Where public-service workers are permitted to strike, contract negotiations with those workers are typically settled without a strike. (B) Where strikes by all categories of pubic-sector workers are outlawed, no acceptable substitutes for the services provided by any of those workers are available. (C) Binding arbitration tends to be more advantageous for public-service workers where it is the only available means of settling labor disputes with such workers. (D) Most categories of public-sector workers have no counterparts in the private sector. (E) A strike by workers in a local government is unlikely to be settled without help from an arbitrator.
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2003-10-23 03:58:00
楼主
