All disciplinary cases brought to labor arbitration are ultimately matters of contract interpretation, since those rules that must apply are framed by the terms of the parties’ collective bargaining agreement.
Although the rules of evidence are relaxed at arbitration, the quality of the evidence provided does matter to the arbitrator, and can affect the outcome of the case.
Clear, unambiguous language carries immense weight in dispute resolution, but a clear, consistent practice can support or frustrate a party’s chosen position. Advocates must be prepared to demonstrate how their conduct or administration of the language was consistent with their chosen position on the issue.
There are a number of things advocates can do to position themselves for the transition and beyond.
In every discipline case there are factors that indicate certain action is warranted, and factors that bend the decision in the opposite direction. Because disciplinary cases rely heavily on the specifics of the situation, a factor that ultimately controls the outcome in one case may prove irrelevant or have the opposite impact in another.
The interaction of workplace policy and collectively bargained contract language can play a valuable role in resolving contractual disputes.
A proper understanding of past practice and its implications is critical for practitioners who must successfully navigate workplace changes that might affect an established practice.
Minimize confusion, conflict and potential harm by taking pro-active steps to ensure workplace practices comply with collective bargaining agreements and applicable laws.
a reminder that in labor relations it is not only the letter of the law which counts, but also willingness to operate in accord with its spirit.
By establishing a practice of acting in good faith in their interactions, employers and unions can be better positioned to meet the foremost goal of just cause: to protect the rights of both employee and employer.
Charlene MacMillan 