Assignment Instructions/ Description
After reviewing Exhibit 11.11 (page 579), would you rather work as an employee in an environment of labor arbitration or employment arbitration? Why? Why not?Image transcription textCHAPTER 11 . Labor and Employment Artaviation
Exhibit 11.11
Employment
Labor
Arbitration
Arbitration
Jurors
inter Aberation, and Juran
1. Burden of proof
Employee
Employer
Employee
2. Acceptability
Employer selects
Union and
employer
3. Professional
Management more
Public service
background
than Holly
4. Consider
Not likely
Yes
YUs
mitigating
orcumstincon
5. Decision
Less likely employ-
More likely To
More licely to
on will receive
re cow favor
receive favorable
a tavrable
ably decision
decision than by
when repe-
an employment
ignited by a
artitrator
union
6. Who pays the
Usually the
Usualy the union
Taxpayer, a small
arbitrator
jumployur
and employer
fee for jury duty
pay oqually
and expenses
included 32 different case scenarios where an employee was challenging termination.
Exhibit 11.11 highlights some of the significant differences between employment arbitra-
tors, labor arbitrators, and jurors. Employment arbitrators, who usually have a manage-
ment background, are usually selected solely by the employer and are less likely to rule in
favor of the terminated employee. The employee has the burden of proof which means
that the employee must prove there was a violation of a company rule or policy that was
written by the company. In addition, the employment arbitrator is not likely to consider
mitigating circumstances, such as long service with the company, a good work record,
and so on. Because the employer pays the arbitrator to serve and is selected by the
employer, some critics of employment arbitration would say that the employment arbi-
trator has allegiance to the employer.
In comparison, the burden of proof in discharge cares in labor arbitration rests with
the employer. The general principle is that a person is innocent until proven guilty, Since
the labor arbitrator is selected and paid by both parties, the labor arbitrator must have a
reputation of neutrality or he or the will not be selected by both parties, In addition, the
labor arbitrator may find an employee guilty of wrongdoing, but due to a good work
record of considerable years may reduce the penalty from a termination to a disciplinary
suspension without pay. Since the burden of proof rests with the employer and a labor
arbitrator considers mitigating circumstances, the employee is more likely to receive a
favorable decision from the labor arbitrator.
In between, in a jury trial, the employee has the burden to prove that the employer
violated the employer's rules or policies. However, since jurors will comider mitigating cir-
cumistances, they are more likely to render a favorable decision for the employee than an
employment arbitrator would. Since jurors serve as a public service, they are not concerned
about acceptability and receive only a small fee for their time and reimbursement for their
expenses."... Show more�Course Material:The Labor Relations Process by Holley, Ross, and Wolters; 11th edition