(a) Arbitrators shall make awards no later than 60 days from the date of the closing of the record, unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties or specified by the collective bargaining agreement or law. However, failure to meet the 60-day deadline will not invalidate the process or award. A failure to render timely awards reflects upon the performance of an arbitrator and may lead to removal from the FMCS Roster.
(b) The parties should inform OA whenever a decision is delayed. The arbitrator shall promptly notify OA if and when the arbitrator:
(1) Cannot schedule or hear a case, and/or render a decision promptly and in accordance with time limits established in this part, or
(2) Learns a dispute has been settled by the parties prior to the decision.
(c) Within 15 days after an award and/or final invoice has been submitted to the parties, the arbitrator shall submit an online Arbitrator's Report and Fee Statement (Form R-19) to OA showing a breakdown of the fee and expense charges.
(d) While FMCS encourages the publication of arbitration awards, arbitrators must not publicize awards without the express consent of the parties in conformance with the Code.
Notes of Decisions
Marshall Jones v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co., 728 F.2d 257 (6th Cir. 1984).
“In regard to the conducting of arbitration hearings, 29 C.F.R. § 1404.14 requires that all proceedings conducted by the arbitrator are to be in conformity with the contractual obligations of the parties.”
Edwards v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 16 F. App'x 333 (6th Cir. 2001).
“The court arrived at that conclusion from a reading of 29 C.F.R. § 1404.14 , which requires that all proceedings conducted by the arbitrator are to be in conformity with the contractual obligations of parties, and the policy that there should be strict adherence to the essential…”
M & a Elec. Power v. Local Union 702 Ibew, 773 F. Supp. 1259 (E.D. Mo. 1991).
“Title 29 C.F.R. § 1404.14 , which applies to all arbitrators listed on the FMCS list of arbitrators, provides that "the arbitrator's decision is to be based upon the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing.”
M & A Elec. Power Coop. v. Local Union No. 702, Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, 977 F.2d 1235 (8th Cir. 1992).
“It held that the arbitrator’s post-hearing consultation was a violation of his own rules and the procedural regulations of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, as well as Title 29 C.F.R. § 1404.14 , which provides that the decisions of all arbitrators listed in the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.