Unless limited by the collective bargaining agreement, an arbitrator has broad powers to fashion an appropriate remedy in resolving a contract grievance

To contact us Click HERE

Unless limited by the collective bargaining agreement, anarbitrator has broad powers to fashion an appropriate remedy in resolving a contractgrievance
Westchester County Corr. Officers' Benevolent Assn. v County of Westchester,2012 NY Slip Op 07307, Appellate Division, Second Department
An arbitrator issued an award that directed the WestchesterCounty Department of Correction to cease from denying correction officers theuse of a floating holiday or floating vacation day where the maximum allowablenumber of correction officers who were permitted to take off from work on anyparticular day had not been reached. When the Westchester County Corr. Officers'Benevolent Association attempted to confirm the award, Supreme Court denied itsArticle 75 petition.
The Appellate Division reversed the Supreme Court’s ruling.
The Appellate Division explained that "Courts are boundby an arbitrator's factual findings, interpretation of the contract andjudgment concerning remedies," and a court may not "examine themerits of an arbitration award and substitute its judgment for that of thearbitrator simply because it believes that its interpretation would be the betterone," citing New York State Correctional Officers & PoliceBenevolent Assn. v State of New York, 94 NY2d 321 and other decisions.
Further, said the court, even where an arbitrator makeserrors of law or fact, "courts will not assume the role of overseers toconform the award to their sense of justice."
In contrast, while "judicial review of arbitrationawards is extremely limited," the Appellate Division noted that a courtmay vacate an arbitrator's award where the arbitrator "exceeded his [orher] power." Typically courts find that an arbitrator exceeds his or herpower where his or her award violates a strong public policy, is irrational, orclearly exceeds a specifically enumerated limitation on the arbitrator's power.
In this instance the Appellate Division found that theSupreme Court’s determination that the arbitrator had exceed a specificallyenumerated limitation on his power was incorrect.
The court noted that the collective bargaining agreement providesthat "[a] grievance dispute arising under any term of the Agreementinvolving County policy or discretion may be submitted for arbitration only asto the question of whether or not the County policy was disregarded, or wasapplied in so discriminatory, arbitrary, or capricious a manner as toconstitute an abuse of discretion." However, said the Appellate Division, thisprovision “does not contain any limitation upon the arbitrator's power tofashion an appropriate remedy where he or she determines that a County policyhas been applied in so discriminatory, arbitrary, or capricious a manner as toconstitute an abuse of discretion.”
Here, the arbitrator determined that a policy of theWestchester County Department of Correction that permitted only one correctionofficer per day to use a floating holiday or vacation day was applied in anarbitrary manner to the named grievant.
As the collective bargaining agreement did not set out any limitationon the arbitrator's power to award relief upon making such a finding, the courtruled that the arbitrator had not exceed his power by “directing the Departmentto cease and desist from denying correction officers the use of a floatingholiday or floating vacation day where the maximum allowable number ofcorrection officers who were permitted to take off from work on any particularday, as determined by the Department, has not been reached.”

The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2012/2012_07307.htm