Brown & Root

[Rip Verkerke <ripv@virginia.edu>]

A student commented:

Although on the surface the Brown and Root plan seems to
provide the employee with protection and neutrality, I
wonder if the four step plan may be exploited by the
employer.  That is, by encouraging the employee to take the
first three steps (open-door policy, conference, mediation)
before any award may even be granted, isn't the employer
allowing itself ample opportunity to talk the employee out
of bringing suit?  I realize the first three steps are not
mandatory, but still they appear strongly encouraged.


Rip responded:

Absolutely!  In fact, one of the principal purposes of any internal
grievance system is to give the employer a chance to talk the employee out
of bringing suit.  The open question is whether that effect is necessarily
bad for employees.

Some argue that it interferes with the exercise of the employee's legal
rights (against discrimination, unjust discharge, harassment, or whatever).
Others contend that internal processes are more likely to provide timely and
complete relief than cumbersome, expensive and interminable judicial
processes.  On this view, employers gain something from the chance to avoid
suit, and at the same time, employees gain a more responsive alternative for
resolving their employment disputes.

In the end, it is surely an empirical question to determine which effect
predominates.  At least under the Brown & Root system, the employer's
savings seem to come from lower legal costs rather than from reduced
payments to aggrieved employees.  See p. 237.  Perhaps these results from
the Camelot of ADR would not generalize to other systems, but without
systematic evidence we can only guess.

Warm regards,

Rip