Reasons arbitrators' decisions are final and binding in labor relations

Collective Bargaining - Labor relations Topic: The facets job arbitrator. Essay Question: What facets job arbitrator? Cite examples ethical considerations, past practice, fairness, traits responsibilities.

What are three reasons an arbitrator's decision may not be the final and binding decision? Provide court examples defending your reasons.

Most organizations set their own limits as to what conditions may be subject to arbitration and the scope of final arbitration decisions (Rules of conditionally binding arbitration, 2013, BBB). However, regardless of company policy, there are conditions in which the final arbitration decision may be overturned. If Title VII rights are involved, such as in cases of discrimination based upon 'protected' categories, the decision of the arbiter may not be final and binding. An arbiter cannot make a decision that violates an employee's civil rights, which are specified in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In the Alexander v. Gardner-Denver decision, the decision of the arbiter that an employee was justly terminated was overturned because it was determined that racial discrimination against the employee may have been a factor in the original settlement (Sloane & Witney 2010: 246).

Another reason an arbiter's decision may not be final and binding is manifest in the Anchor Motor Freight case, when it was determined that the union did not provide fair representation to the employee, thus rendering the arbiter's decision invalid. The issue involved inflated motel receipts by truck drivers but the arbiter did not interview the motel employees, who actually turned out to be culpable in the matter (Sloane & Witney 2010: 246). Finally, the McDonald v. City of West Branch Michigan case, a union steward was fired for allegedly engaging in sexual misconduct with a minor (Sloane & Witney 2010: 247). The steward sued, claiming that the discharge was actually due to his union activities and thus was a violation of his First Amendment rights. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the federal court judgment against the employee, stating that the venue of arbitration was not an appropriate place to address an individual's statutory and constitutional rights and was therefore invalid (Sloane & Witney 2010: 247). All three cases thus collectively demand that arbitration decisions are nondiscriminatory, follow certain procedures of fairness (including appropriate representation and gathering of evidence) and limit the scope of issues which can be decided by arbitration.