40 U.S.C. § 18304

Procedures for enforcement of awards

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 40 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Modifications and Finality of Award.—Within 10 days after the parties receive an arbitration award to which section 18303 of this title applies, the interstate compact agency and the employees, through their representative, may agree in writing on any modifications to the award. After the end of that 10-day period, the award, and any modifications, become binding on the interstate compact agency, the employees in the bargaining unit, and the employees’ representative.(b)Implementation.—Each party to an award that becomes binding under subsection (a) shall take all actions necessary to implement the award.(c)Judicial Review.—Within 60 days after an award becomes binding under subsection (a), the interstate compact agency or the exclusive representative of the employees concerned may bring a civil action in a court that has jurisdiction over the interstate compact agency for review of the award. The court shall review the award on the record, and shall vacate the award or any part of the award, after notice and a hearing, if—(1) the award is in violation of applicable law;(2) the arbitrator exceeded the arbitrator’s powers;(3) the decision by the arbitrator is arbitrary or capricious;(4) the arbitrator conducted the hearing contrary to the provisions of this chapter or other laws or rules that apply to the arbitration so as to substantially prejudice the rights of a party;(5) there was partiality or misconduct by the arbitrator prejudicing the rights of a party;(6) the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or bias on the part of the arbitrator; or(7) the arbitrator did not comply with the provisions of section 18303 of this title.(Pub. L. 107–217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1294.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Revised

Section

Source (U.S. Code)

Source (Statutes at Large)

18304

40:1304.

Pub. L. 104–50, title IV, § 405, Nov. 15, 1995, 109 Stat. 465.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2011–2013 · leading case: Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth. v. Local 689, Amalgamated Transit Union, 818 F. Supp. 2d 888 (D. Maryland 2011).
Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth. v. Local 689, Amalgamated Transit Union, 818 F. Supp. 2d 888 (D. Maryland 2011). · cites it 10× “§ 18301 (b), but which also imposes a specific standard of review for courts reviewing final awards issued by such arbitrators, see 40 U.S.C. § 18304 (c). Specifically, the Act requires the court to vacate an award, or any part thereof, if, among other things, “the decision by…”
Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth. v. Local 2, Off. & Prof'l Employees Int'l Union, Afl-Cio, 965 F. Supp. 2d 13 (D.D.C. 2013). · cites it 7× “See 40 U.S.C. § 18304 (c) (2006). Specifically, WMATA asks the Court to vacate the general wage adjustments (and resulting pension benefit increase), the new subcontracting provisions, and the new pay band provisions.”
Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth. v. Local 689, Amalgamated Transit Union, 804 F. Supp. 2d 457 (D. Maryland 2011). · cites it 9× “§ 18301 (b), but also imposes a specific standard for courts reviewing final awards issued by such arbitrators, see 40 U.S.C. § 18304 (c). Specifically, the Act requires the Court to vacate an award, or any part thereof, if, among other things, “the decision by the arbitrator is…”
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.