Lunch and Discussion

On February 2, 2007 a l "lunch and discussion" program entitled "What Arbitrator's Want" was conducted by the Connecticut Chapter of IPMA-HR at Central Connecticut State College in New Britain.  Over 84 participants gathered to hear Paul Bodehofer, Labor Relations Specialist at the Office of Labor Relations, and Arbitrator Larry Foy give insights gleaned from their many years of experience.

The first presenter, Paul Bodenhofer talked about the role of the Office of Labor Relations in the arbitration process.  He said the two types of issues that would come before an arbitrator, those being issues of contract interpretation and discipline cases.  (He also mentioned that there was also "interest arbitration" cases which arise from contract negotiations, but that was not part of the discussion today.)  He started  by saying that the fact that a case had come to arbitration represents a failure of management and the union to come to a agreement at the local level, where it is hoped that most disputes could be resolved.  He then focused his discussion on cases involving discipline.  He explained that one the greatest reasons that many cases are either dismissed or have discipline reduced is because the agency failed to conduct a through investigation and to have maintained concise documentation.

The second presenter, Arbitrator Larry Foy, who has arbitrated over 2,000 cases, gave participants the rare opportunity to hear the arbitrator's own view.  Arbitrator Foy, discussed each of the "7 Standards for Just Cause".  He also talked about how arbitrators view discipline cases, especially cases involving dismissal.  He also stressed the importance of having thorough documentation.  This is critical in cases that involve progressive discipline that has now risen to a higher level.  He explained that arbitrators recognize that there are cases that warrant dismissal regardless of other factors, such as previous work record or length of service.  However, that many times they would be taking into account if the employee had been "forewarned" by the use of progressive discipline.  He said that it is also important that the grievant know the consequence of an act or the consequence of a repeated act.  He said that any work rules concerning discipline should be disseminated to employees.  However, any arbitrator would recognize that there does not need to be a work rule to cover every eventuality.  There are certain "unwritten" rules which if violated, a "reasonable" person would know could subject them to discipline.  In these cases the arbitrator would only look at the severity of the discipline in relation to the act and sometimes also the employee's work record.

The presentation concluded with a "question and answer" session with both presenters.  One of the questions, which was asked of Paul Bodenhofer, concerned writing a discipline letter.  Mr. Bodehofer said that in his view a discipline letter should be short and concise.  It should only speak of the act, the violation, and the discipline.  He said that if the discipline being administered was a result of previous discipline given that this should be referenced in the letter.  He stated that there should only be enough information in the letter for the person to be able to raise a reasonable defense.  Arbitrator Foy in one of the questions directed to him once again went back to something that he had mentioned in his presentation when he talked about dismissal cases.  The question concerned cases where it would be reasonable for an agency to immediate dismiss an employee rather than to utilize progressive discipline.  Arbitrator Foy answered that arbitrators recognize that there are such things as an immediate dismissal case.  However, he re-emphasized the importance of the documentation in these cases.  He also said that it was important to have not only the witnesses to an event, but also to have at an arbitration anyone who prepared reports that would be presented.  He also went back to one of the ""7 Standards for Just Cause"" in there being an appropriateness between the act and the discipline.

The event concluded with Chapter President Elect, Vicki Arpin, who said that in lieu of the normal token of appreciation, a donation would be made by the chapter in the name of both presenters to the American Heart Association.  The day of the event was also the day that the American Heart Association was raising money in in their fight against heart disease, the number one killer of women with their "Go Red for Women Day" .  Also on this day, the Chapter received many items of used business clothing and also used purses.  These items were donated by the Chapter to organizations which give these to women who entering the workforce, but do have the funds to purchase these items.