Permanent umpires are less vulnerable when a militant union presents less meritorious cases than when a union saves arbitration for very important issues.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

If a militant union presents less meritorious cases, there may be a perception that the umpire is biased against the union. On the other hand, if the union only saves arbitration for important issues, the umpire may feel pressure to rule in their favor to avoid a strike or other disruptive actions. So, in this case, permanent umpires would not necessarily be less vulnerable.

Permanent Umpires Are Less Vulnerable When a Militant Union Presents