1000 CR , Test 5 , q 20

hopefully · Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:13 pm Post subject: 1000 CR , Test 5 , q 20

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 pubic-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 with 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 from an arbitrator.

givemeanid · Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 6:22 am Post subject:

"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" means the arbitration is advantageous for workers otherwise it would not be 'costly' for the government. C it is

sochatte · Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:37 am Post subject:

I would go with C