Labor and Employment Law Books

Coach Moore is another in a long line of legends to coach under the Golden Dome. Unfortunately, Bob Davie is another in a shorter line of terrible head coaches hired by the Fighting Irish. As for the book, the author (and Moore's lawyer) would have you believe this is a tale of David vs. Goliath in the courtroom, and that his brilliant legal acumen brought the Notre Dame empire to his knees. Truth be told, a first-year law student could have won this case, and Notre Dame's legal department should be ashamed for ever letting this case go to trial. Bob Davie ADMITTED in public, to the Notre Dame football team and others, that Coach Moore's age had something to do with his termination. You don't need Clarence Darrow to tell you that is age discrimination, my friends, and only the arrogance (or perhaps stupidity) of the then-administration at Notre Dame let this case go to trial. If you hate Notre Dame, maybe you'll find pleasure in their bungling of this matter. In fact, had Notre Dame not been the Defendant, nobody would think twice about reading this book. There are pleny of better written and more interesting books on the legal system out there. Oh, and Joe Paterno coaches at Penn St. by the way...

I agree with those reviewers who have praised this as a good read. But it is no more than a "war story," and would have benefited from better editing and been more widely and profitably read as a magazine article. To deserve a book, the author should have reflected on the wisdom of the law which he practices, not only on behalf of plaintiffs but defendants as well. Why should those over 40 deserve the same protection as those who suffer racial, gender, or handicap discrimination? All of us grow old, and while that may not be fair and may affect each of us in different ways, can we as a society want or afford to be swamped with litigation and all its attendant stress and cost to argue the issue in a myriad of cases? Should the next generation be put on hold in the meanwhile? Perhaps the only lesson of this book is that Head Coach Davie must not have worn a helmet in his playing days. Otherwise, he would never have made any reference to age, but fired the plaintiff without explanation, or by simply saying that he wanted to hire his own coaching assistants.

... Coach Moore is a simple and straightforward man who was thrown under the bus by his friend Davie after Davie maneuvered his former head coach Lou Holtz in front of that same bus. The reader learns of Davie's scandal ridden past and how the University looked the other way and even used its power to fight Coach Moore despite being totally in the wrong. ... An enlightening look at the dark side of an egomaniac...and an instiutution...that backed him.

Personal Foul: Coach Joe Moore vs. The University Of Notre Dame by Richard Lieberman is the true story of a volatile lawsuit that coach Joe Moore filed against the University of Notre Dame for age discrimination. From this suit came evidence of pervasive unethical conduct in a university football program that had formerly been given the highest regard. Commanding the reader's full attention, Personal Foul is a compelling and revealing exposé into the tangled and often dark complexity of human nature in general, and college football in particular. Highly recommended reading for college football fans in general, and University of Notre Dame alumni in particular.

I couldn't put the book down. At first I was skeptical about whether or not the topic would appeal to me in that it is sports-related and about law. I'm not a sports enthusiast nor lawyer. But that was of no consequence. The book was riveting on another level: its narrative style. So if you like a good read, you'll love this book!

FIRING BACK is extraordinarily well-written and is a great development tool even if your job is not in jeopardy. It helps you keep good records, to know what could be problematic for your employer and what could potentially be problematic for you. It gives you great ideas about how to avoid defaming the character of another (even unintentionally), and why it's important to keep notes so that you can negotiate without excessive emotion. It also points out that a separation agreement isn't one sided (p. 3), and if you're leaving your job, you have tools at your disposal to negotiate even when it's a mutual decision. This gives practical, real-life examples to help you calculate your next step on your career path, too. It has a great Q & A section. Even though Galos is an attorney, she and her co-author do not automatically steer you toward the legal profession. In fact, they show examples where that might poison the negotiations and how to decide whether or not legal action is really necessary.

The authors teach you strategies for dealing with unpleasant things in a classy manner. I was impressed with how they acknowledged that a desire for revenge was valid but that it is more important to keep acrimony out of negotiations.

I really liked this book primarily because it addresses my specific situation. My employer promised us separation pay instead of severance pay. The book explained separation pay vs severance pay very well. I can't believe that businesses can do this to people and get away with it. I know where I stand and that I am not going to get any separation pay because the company is not legally obligated to pay me anything. In my case they are eliminating my position and sending my job to the Phillipines. Separation pay is a way for companies to promise you a lump sum payment and not pay you anything.

This book is terrible.The "real life situations" used to convey points are so contrived they are obviously made up.This book is written on a sixth grade level and would only apply to your situation if you live in a sitcom.Very poor and possibly financially dangerous advice.Seek information elsewhere.

This book takes the reader from a position of helplessness in the firing process to that of equals negotiating the best transition out of a work situation. While nothing will ever make the process of losing your job pleasant, this book covers all of the ins and outs of making sure that you get the best exit deal that you can, and that you don't fall apart in the time between jobs. Covering the time from before you lose your job (Yes, Virginia, there may be signs that it is coming) through the process of negotiating your exit, and what to do after it's all over, this book gives a solid, sensible approach to handling yourself in the one crisis few of us anticipate. This book tells you what to do, and more importantly, what not to do when you are being fired. Most people don't think about being fired until it's all over. Get the book and be prepared. It can happen to you.

Jodie-Beth Galos and Sandy McIntosh have written an extremely useful book for those who have been unjustly fired or "downsized." The authors provide a comprehensive plan for deciding what the terminated (or soon to be terminated) employee wishes to accomplish, what s/he can, in fact, accomplish, how, precisely, to enter into negotiations and pursue and monitor each phase of the process, how to reach a satisfactory settlement, and, finally, how to manage money while out of work. This clearly and elegantly written book features a balance of realistic stories about firing and negotiation processes and appropriately technical and involved legal and financial information.

Ms. Stockford's account provides a useful albeit one-dimensional chronicle of this landmark equal opportunity case. AT&T and its employment practices were selected for spotlighting by government lawyers, in an effort to proceed against a major company on a front-page, pressing issue. This was all well and good, except that relative to most other major companies at the time, AT&T's hiring, training and promotion practices were far less discriminatory. True enough, there was a glass ceiling at AT&T, women seldom rose to high-level management jobs. Nonetheless the company had been a leading employer of working class and middle class women for many decades, and in terms of job security and benefits the company was on the leading edge. Thus there was a sense among those assigned to defending AT&T that EEOC charges needed to be placed in wider context. However such a context would have had to acknowledge subtleties and nuances that were missing from the case, and that are nowhere to be found in the book. Nor is there reason to believe that Ms. Stockford read some of the source materials cited in the hearings, such as The Conscience of the Corporations. But her book is nonetheless valuable, and her characterizations of some of the players (not all) are fair-minded and perceptive.

The Bellwomen is a must read for anyone interested in understanding what it was like to be a working woman in the early 1970's. Not a dry history. Ms. Stockford is very skilled in telling this as a compelling, suspenseful story. This book is a fascinating but little known chronicle of the EEOC's suit against AT&T, and Ms. Stockford's comprehensive research is skillfully used to create an exciting drama. She brings to life the characters involved in the legal process. She intersperses sketches of three women who worked for AT&T which only add to this movie-like tale. You won't be able to put this book down.

This isn't the kind of book I'd normally pick up, but once I started reading I was completely absorbed. The writing is clear and compelling; the characters engaging; and the potentially dry material is presented in a way that makes it fresh and relevant. Ms. Stockford has managed to wrap a complex event into a suspenseful work of non-fiction--quite an accomplishment. Highly recommended.

Bellwomen presents readers with an evenhanded account of the complex legal battle leading up to the landmark AT&T settlement of 1973. Stockford's extraordinary research combines with details she discerns from countless interviews to offer a gripping presentation of the facts in a text reminiscent of A Civil Action. The lucid voice in the writing proves especially effective as the author weaves descriptions of the participants' personalities and private lives between scenes of courtroom contests. The reader comes to appreciate the humanity of the subjects as they reflect on both the mistakes and accomplishments which ultimately leads AT&T and numerous other corporations to recruit and hire women and minorities.

Ms. Stockford's book is a compelling read for anyone with an interest in either the landmark AT&T settlement, or the remarkable transformation of women's roles in the workplace over the last few decades. It's well-organized, thoroughly researched, brimming with details, and yet very user-friendly. Refreshingly impartial, it includes something for everyone: personal stories, legal niceties, corporate awakenings, feminist voices from the early days of the women's movement, and even courtroom drama.

I'm looking forward to her next book!

awsome and yet practicl

This is a good clear overall glimpse of the battleground of executive compensation strategies and guidlines. For most executives looking for some strategies, this will be helpful reading. For the CEO/Pres candidate or company looking to construct an complex package this helps but falls slightly short of being able to put the most cutting edge deal together. I recommend this book. It seems to be the best all around one available. It must, however, be augmented with executive compensation trend reports from consulting groups. Required for the library of anyone dealing daily within the business of HR or recruiting. A must for the executive candidate looking to negotiate his own package.

Of several books I've purchased on the subject, this is by far the best for executives or superstars negotiating contracts with options, bonuses, etc. The author is engaging and very informative, and topics are presented from the employee's perspective.

The book discusses typical contracts (as if any of these deals are "typical") and how to initiate negotiations, followed by chapters detailing each area of the contract - complete with pro's and con's for options in each subject.

Many real-world examples are presented, covering agreements between numerous named parties. Several full-text contracts are also included, and many more are dissected to illustrate key points. (Eisner's mega-deal with Disney is an excellent reference on the subject, and as such it's covered here appropriately.)

Despite being a 1997 edition, the content is very valuable. Position on options and other market-based compensation seem a little dated, but are probably still accurate. An accompanying website would also be nice to facilitate re-use of the contract texts presented.

Overall, this book is easily worth the money and the read!

This is a wonderful book for understanding employment contracts. It is written in an engaging style. It does, however, rely on a great deal of information from the public records of "superstars" like Michael Eisner. The information on these contracts has little bearing on the contracts of most employees. However, Tarrant discusses many concepts and data that will apply to everyone that is either offering or accepting employment contracts. I recommend this book highly.

This is an excellent book. The author has done a great job in pulling together the elements which spell success in the quest for employment. I recommend it.

Wayne D. Ford, Ph.D., author of "The Accelerated Job Search" docwifford@msn.com

Gregory's book is very helpful in understanding what factors can win an age discrimination action. His clear and concise case studies are used to illustrate the main legal points and how the courts have changed over recent years in their requirements for success. It has in several ways become more difficult to win age discrimination cases and Gregory explains how and why very clearly.

The book also helps one decide whether or not to pursue an age related legal recourse.

if you wish to become a plaintiff, and as a source of information, wisdom and comfort, if you do take action against your employer.

Age discrimination in the year 2003 should be so silly, but it seems as though corporate America, for the most part, does not look beyond a five year horizon. In 5 years, when "boomers" begin leaving the workforce in large numbers, and employers can
no longer find qualified people, or even more important, qualified people with wisdom gained from experience, there will be an employment crisis again. Some companies have recognized this and geared their policies and opportunities accordingly. Most have not...most have gloried in a legal system, that, by its very bureaucracy and expense, guarantees anonymity for corporations because of settlement, and very few court challenges. Most employees are discouraged before they start.

Gregory's book is a valuable resource to not let yourself become discouraged! Highly recommended!

There is very little written on the subject of age discrimination in employment that ventures to explain the whole process for the Plaintiff. This author is very credible to me both in providing behavior insights and process descriptions. It raises my confidence that older workers can gain a good understanding of the steps they need to take when they face the problem of age bias in employment.

If you work for a large or small corporation, this book is a must
read. Gregory shows how corporations streamline their payrolls by
getting rid of their 'older' employees, thus reducing wages, benefits, etc. Younger employees earn less, so it's just a matter
of doing the math. Corporations use early retirement incentives,
whether or not an employee wants to stop working. A little slow at first, this book picks up the pace, and grabs hold of the reader with fascinating, real-life cases, from a lawyer who obviously knows his stuff. Read on!!

I purchased this book a class. It is a very good book that explains all workplace laws.

Your a teacher and don't know what a Rabbi Trust is? Shame on you. Look it up and learn it and stop thinking everyone is Anti-Semitic. As a Jewish man I take offense to your comment.

I am using this book for a master's level personnel law course. It covers all the topics quite thoroughly. It might be useful as a quick selective reference tool for HR administrators unfamiliar with one or more of the specialty areas. Some chapters (such as the one on benefits and the one on pensions) might benefit from another look at organization of the material. However, most of the information is accurate, if necessarily streamlined in many areas. Since personnel law now covers several deeply specialized areas, this is not surprising.

Stylistically, the book's sentences are jam-packed with information. This might prove difficult reading for some. In a few cases, a series of issues will be "hidden" by a single sentence that is oversimplified, but this is apparent only to a reader who is familiar with the field. The advantage is that the author has made a very creditable attempt to address all the issues. The author generally avoids drawing temporal or one-sided conclusions, which may mislead in a field that is fraught with disputes. I appreciate the even-handedness of this approach.

One small but annoying detail. On page 220 is a reference to a "rabbi trust". I took offense at the use of this term in the book, without quotation marks. I think later editions should avoid or explain the use of language which is apparently bigoted. In fact, I will recommend that my students not use this term because I can offer no good explanation for its continuance.

Human Resource managers and specialists have a lot of legal material to learn. They have to keep up with the latest changes in the laws that affect the way they handle employees and the way they administer benefits. This guide, updated each year since its initial release, is designed to help human resource personnel find the answers to legal questions.

The most striking feature of this guide is its length. It is more than 1,100 pages long and contains 43 chapters. It needs to be this way, of course, to encompass all of the different laws pertaining to human resource management. It covers most everything about HR one can imagine, from rules and regulations regarding hiring and terminating to laws covering sexual harassment and pension administration.

Even though this book is a very good resource, there are still a few things you will not be able to find. The primary function of this reference guide is to provide an overview of the federal laws. Thus, many of the laws unique to the individual states are not discussed here. There are a few exceptions, but there are many state- specific questions this guide will not be able to answer. This is what happened to me one day when I consulted this book for an answer regarding workmen's compensation. It didn't have what I needed to know about my state, so I had to look elsewhere. Still, it pointed me in the right direction so it did have its use.

The organization of this book is ok, but some things about it are a little cumbersome. The table of contents, for example, doesn't include page numbers. Instead, it references the various pages based on the chapter number and the subsection (for example, "23.02" means turn to chapter 23, and then look for the second section). I think it would be better if it showed the page number.

There are plenty of references in this guide to specific court cases, pointing out new decisions and how they were decided. Human Resource laws change all the time, which is why a book like this becomes outdated quickly. Fortunately, the author of this handy guide updates it every year with a new release. It's a large, bulky book that may not be organized in the most efficient way, but is still invaluable as reference guide for HR personnel.

Lochner v. New York was a 1905 Supreme Court case where an anodyne state law regulating working hours in bakeries was ruled uncontitutional because it breached the "freedom" of workers and employers to form employment contracts on any terms the market allowed. The notion of liberty of contract had no constitutional basis -- it was invented by conservative social theorists after the Civil War -- but it had been smuggled into American jurisprudence by activist judges in the guise of enforcing the 14th amendment. It was a godsend to business groups that wanted to beat back state efforts to regulate working hours and minimum wages.

The libertarian ideas animating Lochner were already losing popularity by 1905, but the court continued to police state regulation of business for more than thirty years, hampering social reform and causing huge damage to the credibility of the judiciary. As an example of sheer judicial assertion, Lochner was the Roe v. Wade of its day.

This book is short, clearly written, and alive to the ironies (and hypocrisies) of judicial activism, where one's view tends to depend on whether the activism in question is conservative or progressive. My only complaint is that parts of the book meander off the main subject and seem to have been stitched together from research the author did for other projects. For example, there's way too much material on New York state politics, and the long discussion of the libertarianism of Justice Stephen Field, although fascinating, is a bit misplaced, since Field was long dead by the time Lochner was decided! That said, history buffs and law students will get a lot out of this book.

"Lochner v. New York" is one of the best known and most despised US Supreme Court rulings. In Lochner, the Court voted 5 to 4 to invalidate a New York law that limited bakers' working hours to 10 a day or sixty a week. The Court found that it was a "labor legislation", and therefore unconstitutional. To this day, Lochner v. New York is remembered as one of the most extremist judicial activist opinions, and gave the name to an era of conservative judicial activism, which lasted well into the New Deal.

Professor Paul Kens' "Lochner v. New York" (I shall henceforth refer to the decision as "Lochner" and to the book as "Lochner v. New York") is not the type of book I was looking for. I wanted a legal analysis of the infamous decision. Kens' book is less a legal analysis as a social, political and intellectual history, explaining the various trends that shaped the law, the case, and the decision.

Too often, Social History can be merely a list of practices, or a description of conditions that are entirely predictable to anyone with even a slight familiarity with economic and social concepts (see respectively Eric Poner's Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877 and John Dower's Embracing Defeat: Japan in the Wake of World War II). "Lochner v. New York" on the other hand is revealing of the working conditions and social and economic situation of the baking industry, and Kens judicially uses statistics to chronicle its evolution from the mid 19th century to the early 20th.

As Intellectual history, Kens offers an in depth look at the thought of various Lessez-faire and Social Darwinist ideologists, as well as their progressive opponents. Although Kens clearly has little sympathy for Social Darwinists, they come out quite well - Social Darwinist thought, while extremist, is not all that different from modern Libertarianism.

Kos does a good job of describing the politics surrounding the Baking hour law's passing, and the ironies with which it abounded - including the fact that one of the Law's chief backers were later to argue its unconstitutionality before the Supreme Court.

After contextualizing Lochner, Kens gets down to legal analysis. Essentially, the court applied the doctrine of "substantial due process" to declare the 10 hour law unconstitutional. The court used the 14th amendment requirement against deprivation of liberty to protect the "Sanctity of contract". The state must not deprive a person of the right to work at whatever terms he sees fit, unless it is for reasons of public health or safety, or unless the person is in need of paternalistic protection, if he is a minor or (in Victorian America) a she.

The vast majority of the Court, including Dissenter John Marshall Harlan, subscribed to this interpretation. Harlan only claimed that the Court should give the state the benefit of the doubt - if it claimed that the Law meant to protect bakers' health, then that is what it did. Only Oliver Wendell Holmes articulated a completely different vision: "The 14th Amendment does not enact Mr. Herbert Spencer's Social Statics" he famously wrote in his classic dissent. The sanctity of Contract was not in the constitution, and states should have no problem overruling it.

Kos agrees with the dissenters. He convincingly (in my view), demonstrates that the framers of 14th amendment did not intend to protect the liberty of contract, and that laissez faire Capitalism was not an antebellum ideology (although he may underestimate the extent to which laissez faire was latent in pre Civil War America - most ideologies only take shape when challenged, as laissez faire was by the increasingly powerful state of the late 19th century). Ken clearly thinks that the Court should not enforce values that are not clearly articulated in the Constitution text or its history.

Kens realizes that his position requires opposition not only to Lochner, but also to Liberal rulings such as Griswold v. Connecticut, which ensured the right of married individuals to use contraception. Kens argues that this also requires expansive, ideological reading of the Constitution and thus should be avoided.

But the very purpose of a constitution is to check the majority's power against minorities. Because times change, the means of oppression can change also. The specific clauses of the US constitution - the ones that protect against abuses that were known at the time of framing - are mostly outdated. Think of the 3rd amendment's prohibition against the stationing of soldiers at private houses. It is the more general, opaque clauses of the constitution (like the prohibition against abridging the Freedom of Speech or inflicting "Cruel and unusual punishments") that can deter present day majorities from manhandling minorities and protect the little citizen from Big Brother.

But can Lochner v. New York be distinguished from expansive Liberal rulings? Does adherence to Griswold force on us to accept Lochner?

I think there are good pragmatic reasons to say no. First, we should acknowledge that the Court's decision is right in treating suspiciously governmental intervention in the freedom of contracts. But the Court erred, in my view, in seeing Lochner as essentially a question of Liberty. I think Lochner is actually a question of wealth redistribution.

By regulating the terms in which bakeries and baker workers contract, New York improved the relative position of the workers vis a vis the owners. But government policy can most assuredly do that. The government is entitled to levy taxes in any form it wishes, whether progressively (taxing the rich more then the poor) or regressively (the other way around). It may levy tariffs on incoming goods, improving the lots of US manufacturers and worsening those of exporters. It can supply welfare benefits for the poor. The competition between the various interests is the very essence of the democratic process and should be left (within reason), to the democratic process. The time for the Court to intervene is to prevent Government from abusing citizens, not to keep the spoils out of the hands of the winners in marketplace of ideas.

As a junior political science major at UNC, I have had to read a lot of books similar to Kens's. These books focus on a particular case, be it the Skokie trial, the Tinker armband case, the Chadha legislative veto case or the Bakke affirmative action case. Anthony Lewis's Gideon's Trumpet book seems to be the first of this kind.

Kens' book is by far the best of its type that I have read. The other books of this genre I've read in this genre deal too much with the proceedings of a case. For instance, Mr. Chadha had this legal problem, he got this lawyer, they went through this legal proceeding, they had to refine their arguments, they went to the next appellate court, blah blah blah. Frankly these kinds of details are boring, and give little if any insight into the importance of a given case.

Kens's has a different approach. Instead of going into great detail about why Mr. Lochner picked a given lawyer, Kens goes into great detail of the impetuses for the passage of the law that Mr. Lochner was challenging. He talks about the social and political climate of the times, tying in influential theories of the day like Social Darwinism and laissez-faire economics. Kens clearly places the case of Lochner v. New York in its historical framework. This, it seems, is a superior method for studying an important case like this one.

I would strongly urge this book to any professor teaching a constitional law/history class. I would also strongly recommend it to a student looking for a good introduction to the study of substantive due process.

This is a great book. I like long books, but this one is short and sweet. Moves the story along, and explores the fascinating background to Lochner (including the history of the baking industry and the conflicts of interest -- to give but one example, the attorney for anti-union Lochner was in fact not an attorney and in fact was a union organizer in the past.

Also discusses the Negative Rights (Substantive Due Process in law) doctrine and has a great bibliography.

The author is clearly a world expert in this field and I wish the book could have been longer. The author does not appear to be heavily biased either for or against Positive Rights (read Big) government.

Bibliography and timeline at the end of the book is great too.

Outstanding.

The authors' explanation of the workings of the Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc systems is adequate but is not particularly well written and often lacks clarity. This is certainly not one of NOLO's best offerings.

Especially annoying was the authors' frequent and tedious editorializing. I suspect most readers of this book want the facts, not the authors' socialistic, simplistic opinions.

page 10/7: "E. Medical Treatment....And dependents and survisors of a veteran who has a service connected disabilities, or who receives a veterans pension, are entitled to care in VA facilities if they are unable to afford private care."

I have been a VA employee for 16 years. The above is WRONG. There IS a pilot program in a handful of VA hospitals allowing dependents to use the VA hospital. Otherwise, this is NOT the case.

..."The VA can also pay for long-term care of an elderly or disabled veteran in a private nursing facility if there is no space in a VA facility."

This is also not entirely correct. The operative would is CAN. However, the VA is only obligated to pay for the care of veterans who have a certain percentage of Service-Connected Disability. If they pay at all for any others, most VA's only pay for care for a VERY limited period of time.

The authors of this comprehensive guidebook come close to achieving this feat. As they point out, many Americans are not receiving all the benefits they deserve under our current system. By explaining the various benefit programs and laws in conversational English, they hope to help readers ensure they are getting everything to which they are entitled. It's also helpful that the text is presented in a visually interesting two-column format with plenty of headings, boxes, and even the occasional illustration.

Each chapter explains a different benefit program or set of laws designed to protect the rights of older Americans. Security and Medicare take up more than half the book. The discussions of Medicare claims and appeal procedures are particularly thorough, complete with samples of Medicare summary notices explaining what the sometimes confusing columns of numbers mean. There also are chapters on Medigap policies, Veterans benefits, private pensions and 401(k) plans, and federal civil service retirement benefits. However, if you're looking for in-depth information on Medicaid coverage of nursing home costs, this is not your best resource. While Medicaid's basic eligibility rules are briefly discussed, the complexities of transferring assets to qualify for Medicaid benefits are not.

The authors mainly stick to the facts, but every once in a while they reveal their view of our society's tattered safety net. For example, they call our failure to enact a comprehensive, universal health care plan a "national disgrace."

This happens to be the best all-around book concerning the difficult subject of Social Security that I have read. Understandable and very well written. The sections regarding disability are filled with just the info I needed to know.

The format of this book is a restatement, where each principle is set out as a bold black letter section and underneath it are both commentary and case references. I have found it to be invaluable and fun to read. The principles are divided into different categories commonly associated with labor arbitrations and this is a multi-author work. It may be out of print, and this is a shame, but if you can get it, buy it. Highly recommended for anyone involved in or interested in labor arbitration.

As an arbitrator, and also a member of the National Academy of Arbitrators, I disagree strongly with the other review. To begin, the book itself makes it clear that it is NOT official National Academy of Arbitrators Policy or viewpoint. Second, the reviewer actually ignored the WHOLE title of the book. It is "The Common Lw of the Workplace: The Views of Arbitrators." If you read it (and this is a readable book, unlike Elkouiri, How Arbitration Works for example), you will find 15 scholarly articles written with differing viewpoints. In fact, the arbitrators disagree with each other on some really major points. These analyses are tied to the record made before the arbitrator, and the unique elements of the contracts which the arbitrator is trying to apply and interpret. Black letter princples are followed by analytical examples. One learns that first line arbitrators are not applying a monolithic "The law of the Shop," but are instead trying to apply "The law of a Shop.' The book deals with matters of procedure and substance. It gives a surprisingly succinct overview of such issues as "just cause" for discipline. The section of "Troubled employees' is lyrical. The intricacies of contract interpretaiton are well laid out -- a difficult subject is made understandable. It has a new section on ethics. Rather than getting a "common law," the careful reader will find a sweet and melodious chorus, which will give you some useful insight into how arbitration cases are really decided by arbitrators. If I could only buy one book on arbitration, this would be it. It provides a lot of 'bang for the buck,'

I am the director of labor relations for a state government. I disagree with the fundamental premise of this book inasmuch as I reject the notion that there IS a common law of workplaces. That said, the arbitrators are all citing to this work and it is authoritative. At minimum a practitioner should have it to see what the Academy is thinking and adjust your argument and presentation accordingly.

My beef with the Academy, and they know who they are, is the whole notion of "inherent ambiguity" in contract language espoused in this book. To my mind, it is simply a rationalization for broad equity powers for arbitrators, power that I deny that they have unless expressly conferred by the agreement.

As I said, I disagree with it, but I have it and insist that my staff at least consult it.

If only hindsight wasn't 20/20! If someone had recommended this book to me before my nightmare experience of being wrongfully terminated by Western Temporary Services after being employed as Manager of their Hawaii office some years ago, I could have saved myself a lot of emotional pain and heartache. Even though I've rebuilt my life (and dignity) since that event, the scars will always be there. I've made a point to recommend this book to other friends/associates who have been through similar experiences, and hope that these authors will write an updated version soon to reflect the new laws and policies that continue to erode our rights as workers, and human beings in the workplace.

or for those who know little about their rights, Human Resoures or Employment Law. (There, that sounds better.) This book was difficult to find six weeks after publication. It flew off the shelves. Here's why:

The authors provide real cases of sexual harassment, employee discrimination, front and back pay awards, and how different jurisdictions favor employers or employees. Many of these stories are three or four pages that reduce the legaldygook to the vernacular. Sometimes the authors are tongue-in-cheek, or emphatic.

The last printing of this book was 1995. While the information is very useful for those who know little or nothing of employee rights, the reader should consider a few things before feeling "employee-invincible: Some states are still "empoyment-at-will" which means they can fire in those states at any time, without reason, or having to provide one. Two, the administration has changed. Many more conservative judges have been appointed under Bush than under President Clinton. Many of them have made controversial decisions in favor of corporations. And third, the employee may have to pay taxes on the total of an award or settlement. That means even paying taxes on that part that goes to the lawyer. That means the awardees could find themselves in debt to the IRS. (Read "Perfectly Legal.")

This is easy-to-read and good to have. It's in paperback and worth the investment.

If you work for a large Corporation you should read this book PERIOD. Wish I had read it before a bad day. The author gives you everything you need to know to protect yourself should you find yourself terminated suddenly. Especially useful to long service employees but anyone with 10 years plus should make themselves read it.