Where the arbitrator ignored the parties’ agreed upon procedural rules for conducting the arbitration, the arbitration award failed to draw its essence from the parties’ collective bargaining agreement.
We reverse the arbitration award, which reinstated a terminated union member, Sarah Black.
Article 13, § 4(e) of the parties’ collective bargaining agreement (CBA) demands that, in “all discipline cases, the arbitrator shall determine whether [the plaintiff-employer] had a reasonable basis for concluding that the employee engaged in the conduct for which he/she is being disciplined.” We refer to this provision as the “reasonable basis determination.”
Section 4(e) also says, “If a court of competent jurisdiction finds that the Arbitrator abused his or her discretion in any way or if the Award is contrary to this Agreement in any way, the Award shall be deemed not to draw its essence from the Agreement and shall be vacated.”
Here, the arbitrator never explicitly made the required reasonable basis determination. The award’s only references to the reasonable basis determination requirement are in listing relevant contractual provisions and summarizing the employer’s position. Besides that, the only other hint that the arbitrator might have actually considered the requirement is the award’s description of information that the employer had when it terminated Black’s employment.
Yet, rather than looking backward to the information the employer had at the time of its discharge...
NPR and NewsGuard tested six chatbots and four search engines with 30 questions built on false claims spread by Russia, China and Iran. The chatbots debunked the claims on average about three tim...