Horton Automatics: Workplace-Rule Violation

287 Words2 Pages
3-7: Arbitration (pg. 77) Horton Automatics and the Industrial Division of the Communications Workers of America, the union that represented Horton’s workers, negotiated a collective bargaining agreement. If an employee’s discharge for a workplace-rule violation was submitted to arbitration, the agreement limited the arbitrator to determining whether the rule was reasonable and whether the employee violated it. When Horton discharged employee Ruben de la Garza, the union appealed to arbitration. The arbitrator found that de la Graza had violated a reasonable safety rule, but “was not totally convinced” that Harton should have treated the violation more seriously than other rule violations. The arbitrator ordered de la Graza reinstated. Can a court set aside this order?…show more content…
According to the textbook, “the arbitrator exceeded his/her powers or failed to use them to make a mutual, final, and definite award”. Application/Analysis The arbitrator exceeded his/her power since the agreement limited the arbitrator to determining whether the rule was reasonable and whether the employee violated it. The fact that the arbitrator follows up with another question to Harton: whether Harton should have treated the violation more seriously than other rule violations, this action explains that the arbitrator had exceeded his/her authority. In addition, the arbitrator “was not totally convinced” which this reveals the fact that he/she failed to make a definite decision. Conclusion In conclusion, the arbitrator exceeded his/her powers and failed to use them to make a mutual, final, and definite award for the case of de la Graza. According to the textbook, “arbitrator does not need to follow any previous cases in rendering their decisions.” Therefore, the court shall set aside this

More about Horton Automatics: Workplace-Rule Violation

Open Document