ABSTRACT
The hope is that factfinding can provide the requisite measure of finality and make a significant contribution to the accomplishment of the twin bargaining objectives of: promoting bilateral collective negotiation efforts, and substantially contributing to the conclusion of bilateral agreements when an impasse does occur. To gain some insight into the bargaining atmosphere before the factfinding procedure was implemented, the negotiating parties were asked three questions. The first question asked whether the other party bargained in good or bad faith. The second question asked the parties whether their negotiating positions were affected by the possibility of implementing the factfinding procedure. The third question asked the parties to summarize the actual progress of their negotiations before the factfinding procedure was implemented. Based on New Jersey’s limited public sector bargaining experience, it seems quite possible that factfinding might not actually possess the requisite measure of finality that is necessary to make it an adequate strike substitute.
