This study uses a simulation methodology to analyze the use of three alternative norms of distributive justice by arbitrators in conventional interest arbitration. Sixty-nine experienced arbitrators each provided decisions in 25 hypothetical wage cases in which seven factors, such as the inflation rate and the ability to pay, were systematically varied. Individually, most arbitrators were very consistent in the weights they gave to these seven factors in their decisions across cases, but arbitrators differed significantly among themselves in the weight assigned each factor. Also, arbitrators' subjective assessments of their weighting policies often differed from their actual weighting practices. The most common norm followed by these arbitrators was “anchored equity”: maintaining the status quo by adjusting the present wage by the average negotiated increase in the industry.