Behavioural determinants of public sector illegal strikes: Cases from Canada and U.S.

A framework for analyzing illegal public sector strikes is developed that explains observed patterns of behavior of employees, unions, managers, and third parties. It is found that no-strike laws diminish such positive effects of right-to-strike bargaining systems as eliciting information, adjusting expectations, and providing catharsis. A new theoretical outline helps understand and explain such illegal strike characteristics as the suddenness of strike development, the rank-and-file nature, lack of union control, conflict without clearly defined union objectives, and breakdown of the conflict regulation process by neutral agencies. Three policy issues emerge: 1. some conflict could have been avoided with a broader scope of bargaining, 2. mandatory and more responsive third party procedures should be legislatively provided, and 3. such information about worker discontent as grievance usage should be made available to dispute settlement agencies and mediators before conflict escalates out of control.