2006/Vol. 5 No.1 - Hamline Law - Hamline University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

58 THE JOURNAL OF AMERICAN ARBITRATION [<strong>Vol</strong>. 5:1 contract as the source from which arbitrators receive their authority. 224 They reason that only the contract is significant and that neither the law nor public policy should be of concern to an arbitrator. These arbitrators assert that unless the contract calls for the application of a specific law and/or the accounting of public policy, only the contract matters. On the other hand, there are arbitrators who contend that law and public policy are implied in any contract. 225 Such arbitrators argue that the parties choose them because of their training in the law and their understanding of public policy. Consequently, the interpretation of any contract will always be within the context of law and public policy. “A court’s refusal to enforce an arbitrator’s award under a collectivebargaining agreement because it is contrary to public policy is a specific application of the more general doctrine, rooted in the common law, that a court may refuse to enforce contracts that violate law or public policy.” 226 “Such a public policy, however, must be well defined and dominant, and is to be ascertained ‘by reference to the laws and legal precedents and not from general considerations of supposed public interests.’” 227 B. The Requirement of a Reasoned Decision Arbitrators usually submit written awards. Some arbitration awards do not require findings of fact or conclusions of law. 228 Labor 224. United Steelworkers of Am. v. Enter. Wheel & Car Corp., 363 U.S. 593, 597 (1960) (stating that an arbitrator “may of course look for guidance from many sources, yet his award is legitimate only so long as it draws its essence from the collective bargaining agreement”). 225. United Steelworkers of Am. v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co., 363 U.S. 574, 581-82 (1960) (stating that “[t]he labor arbitrator’s source of law is not confined to the express provisions of the contract, as the industrial common law— the practices of the industry and the shop—is equally a part of the collective bargaining agreement although not expressed in it”). 226. United Paperworkers Int’l Union Inc. v. Misco Inc., 484 U.S. 29, 42 (1987) (citing W.R. Grace & Co. v. Rubber Workers, 461 U.S. 757, 766, (1983); Hurd v. Hodge, 334 U.S. 24, 34-35, (1948)). 227. W.R. Grace & Co. v. Rubber Workers, 461 U.S. 757, 766, (1983) (citing Muschany v. United States, 324 U.S. 49, 66 (1945). 228. A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc. v. McCollough, 967 F.2d 1401, 1403 (9th Cir. 1992) (holding that “arbitrators are not required to state the reasons for their decisions”); Escobar v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc., 762 F. Supp. 461, 463 (D.P.R. 1991) (stating that “arbitrators are not required to disclose the basis on which their awards are made”); Cobec Brazilian Trading & Warehousing Corp. of United States v. Isbrandtsen, 524 F. Supp. 7, 9 (S.D.N.Y. 1980).
<strong>2006</strong>] ARBITRATION: THE BASICS 59 Arbitration Awards and International Commercial Arbitration Awards are fully reasoned awards with findings of fact, conclusions of law, and rationale for the final award. There are three general kinds of Arbitration Awards; 1. A simple decision; 2. A decision with limited findings of fact and conclusions; 3. A fully reasoned decision with contentions of the parties, findings of fact, and decision and rationale. A simple decision need only set out the basic information such as which party prevails and how much money is awarded. A simple award is quick, efficient, and saves time and money. And the dispute is settled. A fully reasoned decision, on the other hand, delineates the contentions of both parties, findings of fact by the arbitrator, and a decision and rationale for that decision. A written, reasoned decision takes considerably more time and effort. It is common for a Labor Arbitration Award in the United States to be ten to fifteen pages long, sometimes longer. An International Commercial Arbitration Award can be upward of one hundred pages. The determination to provide a fully reasoned decision is based on tradition that has developed in certain arbitration contexts. Considerations of efficiency, cost, and importance of the decision weigh into whether a reasoned decision is used. The nature of the case is one factor arbitrators use in determining the sort of decision to award. The FMCS provides that non-reasoned, or “expedited,” decisions “may be appropriate in certain non-precedential cases or those that do not involve complex or unique issues.” 229 Arbitration decisions in national commercial arbitrations, insurance arbitrations, and sports arbitrations, are usually simple decisions with very limited explanations. But fully reasoned decisions are expected in arbitrations involving labor and international commercial disputes. The amount of money involved is not the primary consideration in determining which type of written award an arbitrator will issue. It is not unusual to see non-reasoned decisions even when the dispute involves large amounts of money. Time, efficiency, the expectation of the parties, the expectation of the administrative agency, the precedential value of 229. Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, supra note 132, § 1404.17.
Page 1:
THE JOURNAL OF AMERICAN ARBITRATION
Page 4 and 5:
2 THE JOURNAL OF AMERICAN ARBITRATI
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11: 8 THE JOURNAL OF AMERICAN ARBITRATI
Page 12 and 13: 10 THE JOURNAL OF AMERICAN ARBITRAT
show all

2006/Vol. 5 No.1 - Hamline Law - Hamline University

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?