They both settle disputes between or on a land.
Differnce is that they dispute on different types of land
Answer:
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine, Ten, Eleven, Twelve, Thirteen, Fourteen Wilsons
Answer:
Explanation:
This paper proposes a definition of systems thinking for use in a wide variety of disciplines, with particular emphasis on the development and assessment of systems thinking educational efforts. The definition was derived from a review of the systems thinking literature combined with the application of systems thinking to itself. Many different definitions of systems thinking can be found throughout the systems community, but key components of a singular definition can be distilled from the literature. This researcher considered these components both individually and holistically, then proposed a new definition of systems thinking that integrates these components as a system. The definition was tested for fidelity against a System Test and against three widely accepted system archetypes. Systems thinking is widely believed to be critical in handling the complexity facing the world in the coming decades; however, it still resides in the educational margins. In order for this important skill to receive mainstream educational attention, a complete definition is required. Such a definition has not yet been established. This research is an attempt to rectify this deficiency by providing such a definition.
That statement is false
On federal level elections, third party politicians will contend for votes that failed to outpoll the two other parties
hope this helps
Answer:
The Pullman Strike and Loewe Vs Lawlor
Explanation:
The Pullman Strike was an organised strike by the American Railway Union against the Pullman Company. The strike closed off many of the nations railroad traffic. Workers of the Pullman company had gone on strike in response to a reduction in wages and when this was unsuccessful, they increased their efforts and with the help of the AFU took it nationwide. They refused to couple or move any train that carried a Pullman car. At its peak the strike included 250,000 workers in 27 states.The federal government's response was to obtain an injunction against the union and to order them to stop interfering with trains. When they refused, President Cleveland sent in the army to stop strikers from interfering with the trains. Violence broke out and the strike collapsed. The leaders were sentenced to prison and the ARU dissolved.
Loewe V Lawlor was a Supreme Court decision that went against the rights of the labour movement. D. E. Loewe & Company had been subjected to a strike and a boycott as a result of it becoming an 'open shop'. The nationwide boycott was supported by the American Federation of Labor and persuaded retailers, wholesalers and customers not to buy from Loewe. This boycott cost him a large amount of money and he sued the union for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act (Another piece of legislation subsequently used to attack unions).
The case was sent to the US Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut, which found that the lawsuit was out of the scope of the Sherman Act. However, upon appeal it then went to the Supreme Court, who ruled in favour of Loewe. The courts decision was important for two reasons. Firstly it allowed individual unionists to be held personally responsible for damages arising from the activities of their unions. Secondly, it effectively outlawed secondary boycott (Where members of different companies boycott in solidarity with the affected workers) as a violation of the Sherman Act. Both of these limited the ability of the unions to bring about change through striking and boycott.
Read more on Brainly.com - brainly.com/question/13463190#readmore
