Page 16 - December 2015

PAT FIORETTO
The finality of arbitration awards
LODGE 7 LABOR CORNER
As the year comes to an end, we thought it would be appropriate to discuss what happens when an arbitrator issues an award. Over the past months, we’ve discussed the arbitration process in great detail. Typically, once an arbitrator issues an award, it is final and binding. However, final and binding does not always mean “The End.”
is to obtain a faster and less costly resolution than the parties can achieve through litigation in court.
In Illinois, vacating arbitration awards is governed by a statute known as the Illinois Uni- form Arbitration Act. Judicial review of an arbitrator’s award is “extremely limited” and
A suit to vacate an arbitration award must be filed in state court within 90 days after the arbitrator issues a decision. Similarly, if one side does not comply with an arbitrator’s award, the successful party can file a suit in state court to enforce the award. (We’ll save that dis- cussion for another article.)
more so in the context of collective bargaining matters. In reality, courts do not want to interfere with an arbitrator’s decision, especially where the parties have had an oppor- tunity to present their cases fully.
Thus, in suits to vacate, courts only will vacate an award in those rare instances of (1) fraud; (2) corruption; (3) partiality; (4) arbi- trator misconduct (think of a situation where the arbitrator refuses to hear evidence relevant to the controversy or engages in misbehavior which prejudices the rights of any party); (5) mistake; (6) the arbitrator exceeded his/her authority under the contract; or (7) the arbitrator clearly dis- regarded the law or legal principle applicable to the case. All
A strong national policy has developed through the years, which favors settling labor disputes through arbitrations and limiting judicial involvement in the process. The notion lies, in part, on the premise that the parties “bargained” for the decision of an arbitrator to resolve contractual disputes. Believe me, judges are loath to revisit a decision issued by a labor arbitrator. If the arbitrator acts within the scope of his or her authority and the essence of the award is drawn from the collective bargaining agreement, the courts will enforce the award. Of course, another reason why judicial review is so narrow is because an underlying purpose of arbitration
these bases are extremely difficult to prove.
Recently, Lodge 7 filed a suit to vacate an award issued by an arbi-
trator, stemming from a grievance filed by Lodge 7. The grievant sought compensatory time for a series of holidays that the grievant would have been scheduled to work if the grievant had not been improperly suspended. Unable to resolve the grievance, Lodge 7 demanded arbitration and a hearing took place on May 6, 2014, where the parties appeared before the mutually selected, neutral arbitrator.
On Nov. 3, 2014, based on the evidence presented at the hearing
CONTINUED ON PAGE 18
16 CHICAGO LODGE 7 ■ DECEMBER 2015