For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers

girlmatrix

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 public-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 whit 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 form an arbitrator.

the correct answer is c. apprecite to be enlightened why C is right. Why not B? thanks!

agnesliu

两条路：罢工、仲裁。通常情况下，政府不该制止所有罢工行为，因为通过仲裁解决代价太高；但公共部门的罢工应制止……
结论：说明仲裁对公共部门工人来说是合算的