Chapter 8: Intervening “Fairly” in Disputes among Nationally-Different Employees:Is this Possible?

The international diversity of the “American” workforce is increasing exponentially, leading to more disputes between nationally-different employees; these disputes need to be managed. The rise of self-managing work teams means that third party-interventionists are increasingly peers, not only authorities. In this chapter we review literature that guides propositions regarding the extent to which procedural justice will be perceived as fair by non-U.S. as well as U.S. disputants. We examine cases where: (1) the dispute resolution procedure gives the disputants outcome control in addition to process control; (2) the third-party is a peer rather than an authority-figure; (3) the third-party shares nationality with only one of the disputants; and (4) all parties involved in the dispute resolution procedure—each disputant and the third party—are from different nations. After identifying the likelihood that national differences among disputants and third parties may impede a universal experience of procedural justice, we discuss possible remedies for intervening “fairly” for all disputants in such situations.