Arbitration Question

[Justme]

Let's say that there are two work groups. Both groups grieve a specific part of their contract in which the language happens to be identical. One of the group's grievance makes it to an arbitrator before the other one and labor gets the win. Does this ruling act as a precendence for the other group's arbitrator?

Thank you for your careful and considered opinions!

jm

 

[philly rocks]

I would say hope for a different arbitrator! I think (not positive) each case for arbitration is a seperate entity unless it is a blanket grievance for "all" employees. They should all be heard seperately regardless.
Now, if you win an arbitration and the company is in violation onemore time that original win would be in your favor/

 

[allstrike]

Let's say that there are two work groups. Both groups grieve a specific part of their contract in which the language happens to be identical. One of the group's grievance makes it to an arbitrator before the other one and labor gets the win. Does this ruling act as a precendence for the other group's arbitrator?

Thank you for your careful and considered opinions!

jm

I see what your saying but it needs more detail.The variables here are undaunting. i.e. same union same class etc etc..

 

[Bear96]

An arbitration decision does not create BINDING precedent, meaning the later arbitrator is not required as a matter of law to follow the earlier decision the way an appellate court creates binding precedent on the lower courts in its jurisdiction.

However, the earlier decision "precedent" to the extent that it can be highly persuasive to the arbitrator in the later case, especially if details and facts about the two cases are similar.

 

[Justme]

An arbitration decision does not create BINDING precedent, meaning the later arbitrator is not required as a matter of law to follow the earlier decision the way an appellate court creates binding precedent on the lower courts in its jurisdiction.

However, the earlier decision "precedent" to the extent that it can be highly persuasive to the arbitrator in the later case, especially if details and facts about the two cases are similar.

Thanks to all for your responses. This response is basically what I was looking for. Details and facts are exact except for 2 different work groups and so my hope is that the first ruling is "highly persuasive" to the arbitrator.

I'll keep my hopes up.

 

[Bear96]

Oops -- wrong thread.