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 statement above best suport 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 public-sector workers are outlawed, no acceptable substitutes for the services provided by any of those workers are avaiable.
c) Bindng arbitration tends to be more advantageous for public-service workers when it is the only available means of settling labor disputes with such workers.
请楼主标明出处，题号；方法见置顶帖。
发问前先查看前辈的讨论；前辈讨论在置顶帖。
谢谢。
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |