1

2011 
1

Message from the Director 

In Fiscal Year 2011, a slow recovery from the economic downturn of 2008-2009 continued to 

pose serious challenges to U.S. labor relations and labor-management cooperation in 

workplaces nationwide. Unemployment has remained at comparatively high levels, with 

many private employers not only continuing to delay hiring decisions and expansion until the 

overall economic conditions become more settled, but also considering various initiatives to 

decrease the size of their permanent workforces. Although prospects for positive change have 

brightened and a number of significant collective bargaining agreements have been entered 

into covering substantial segments of the unionized workforce, the outlook for the coming 

fiscal year remains filled with uncertainty. 

Against this backdrop, with the onset of the new fiscal year, the Federal Mediation and 

Conciliation Service will continue to focus on offering to assist the parties to restore the 

frayed labor-management relationships that were damaged by the economic downturn. Many 

companies and unions that previously were able to resolve most conflicts during periods of 

prosperity now find themselves unable to achieve common grounds in the radically altered 

environment of the post-recession period. 

One of the most important lessons we have learned from our extensive “hands-on” experience 

in the past two years is the self-evident proposition that what parties need most during 

difficult economic times is a strong labor-management relationship. History has shown that 

when controversial issues are discussed constructively in a problem-solving mode 

characterized by mutual respect for competing views, joint solutions are much more readily 

achievable. Consistent with that principle, FMCS has been dedicated to working with 

consenting parties on a pro-active, outreach basis to achieve more productive, cooperative 

relationships through carefully honed training and facilitation programs. Every day, FMCS 

mediators, in a variety of ways, offer the parties ongoing assistance with a view toward 

encouraging relationship building far in advance of the trauma of contract expiration. When 

the FMCS accomplishes its goal, the parties are able to conclude their negotiations 

successfully or at least to avoid or minimize the threat of a strike, lockout, or unilateral 

imposition of onerous terms and conditions of employment. 

Report for 

Fiscal Year 2011 
2

For example, in the final months of FY 2011, the best practices described above were put to a 

test in a large, regional negotiation that, according to news accounts, appeared headed toward a 

disruptive work stoppage affecting many communities. With a strike deadline looming for 

approximately 62,000 Southern California grocery workers, the negotiations between local units 

of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) and three national supermarket chains 

deadlocked over the cost of health care. However, with help from FMCS mediators, the parties 

finalized agreements requiring an extensive array of cost-control measures designed to manage 

cost increases or produce cost savings in future years. 

In the nick of time, with FMCS mediator help, the parties were able to complete work on a 

sophisticated wellness program, multiple cost-saving mechanisms and minimal benefit 

reductions, satisfying the concerns of both sides for an affordable but comprehensive health care 

benefit. Looking at proposals such as biometric testing of employees, reference-based pricing 

for health care services and procedures, health care premium payments for all employees, and a 

whole menu of cost-saving measures, enabled the parties to focus solely on the remaining 

economics of a final agreement. Clearly, FMCS assistance was essential in this instance in 

enabling the parties to avoid a work stoppage that neither side wanted but which appeared 

inevitable if no agreement had been achieved. This single successful settlement is illustrative of 

the expertise and assistance with complex issues that FMCS mediators consistently provide to 

bargaining tables around the country. 

In recent years, pension benefits, job security, and the costs of employer-provided health care 

have been the most contentious issues in private and public sector negotiations. In a review of 

the overall state of collective bargaining in late FY 2010, it became clear that the costs of 

employer-provided health care had become the single most persistent cause of collective 

bargaining disputes throughout the nation, irrespective of industry or sector—manufacturing, 

construction, retail, entertainment, high tech, health care facilities or public sector. Contractual 

and plan changes required by a comprehensive and controversial new law, the Patient Protection 

and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (the “Affordable Care Act”), have added to what is already an 

exceedingly conflict-ridden subject of bargaining. 

These negotiations have centered on cost shifting versus cost containment, and the desirability of 

programs addressing chronic disease management, disease prevention and wellness. And, of 

course, these issues have not only implicated the economics of health care delivery, but also the 

emotionally charged subjects of personal responsibility, privacy, and behavioral change. For 

example, Americans are repeatedly warned that in our country the percentage of obese men and 

women, especially wage earners, is approaching epidemic proportions. Obesity has been 

increasingly associated with such life-threatening illnesses as diabetes, hypertension, and heart 

disease. Indeed, a report of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention warned that an 

estimated 72.5 million adults in the U.S. are obese and this fact alone may cost the medical 

system as much as $145 billion annually. In numerous collective bargaining negotiations across 

the country, FMCS mediators have helped guide representatives of labor and management 

toward innovative new wellness and/or disease prevention programs that show great potential for 

managing and controlling the costs of chronic diseases within an employer’s workforce. Despite 
3

individual successes, reversing the unhealthy trends affecting large populations requires personal 

and societal changes on a broad scale, a daunting task not easily accomplished at the expiration 

of a labor contract. 

It was in this context that FMCS initiated a new model of proactive intervention and relationship 

building. After conferring with labor and management health care experts, service providers, 

and plan design professionals, a broad consensus emerged on two key factors. First, negotiations 

over health care were too complicated and contentious to be left unresolved until the final month 

or two prior to contract expiration, when parties typically have addressed such contract 

modifications. Second, the painfully difficult issues generated in health-care related negotiations 

(discussed above) could only be addressed successfully if the parties had a relationship and a 

process for decision-making based on trust, transparency, and a commitment to joint problem 

solving. 

These two key elements, we learned, were being practiced with noteworthy success by a handful 

of collective bargaining partners. These unions and companies had established joint labormanagement cooperative health care committees, which regularly met in informal settings well 

in advance of contract expiration. Both sides also demonstrated, by their conduct, a fundamental 

commitment to a relationship in which the views of workers were valued and respected, the cost 

competitive needs of the enterprise accepted, information was freely and openly exchanged, and 

a process for collaborative problem solving was observed and honored at the highest levels of 

management and the union. 

In one example, an FMCS mediator’s strong professional standing with both sides in a hard 

fought labor dispute between nurses and management at the largest health care facility in 

Washington (DC) was a key influence in helping them avoid a damaging, disruptive, long-term 

work stoppage. A one-day strike by several hundred nurses at the facility had brought hospital 

and union negotiators to the brink of an impasse, with little prospect of progress toward an 

agreement. 

Having worked with both sides in previous negotiations, including providing successful training 

in joint problem-solving and collaborative bargaining techniques, the FMCS mediator had 

created longstanding relationships with the parties at that facility. His ability to impress upon the 

parties’ the advantages of placing trust in the mediation process was a decisive factor in moving 

forward in the FY 2011 negotiations. A breakthrough finally occurred when the mediator was 

able to reconvene the talks and assist the two sides in reaching agreement on staffing--one of the 

biggest sticking points of this dispute and, indeed, of many throughout the health care industry. 

This breakthrough paved the way; it opened the lines of communication, and the parties were 

able to return to the table, resolve the remaining issues and reach and ratify a new labor 

agreement in May 2011. 

Earlier in the year, the FMCS adopted a program whereby similar success stories and best 

practices would be shared to the maximum extent possible with the labor management 

community. To that end, we sponsored a series of three one-day seminars, titled Working 
4

Together: Labor-Management Solutions to the Health Care Challenge, late last year in Chicago, 

New York City and San Francisco. The seminars were designed “to spread the word” to labor 

and management that a number of their colleagues already had created the processes and 

developed the relationships necessary to bring about previously unattainable revisions in health 

care costs and delivery. Hundreds of attendees were exposed to remarkable achievements 

grounded in transparency, trust, and respectful relationships. And, they learned about FMCS 

programs and services available to help them achieve similar success. 

We are cautiously optimistic that this model of early, proactive outreach and relationship 

building will help the labor-management community meet the continuing challenges inherent in 

bargaining over employer-provided health care benefits. And of course, it goes without saying 

that after labor and management representatives learn this model of early intervention and labormanagement joint problem solving, they can be apply it to resolve other areas of potential 

workplace conflict as well. 

This fiscal year also marked the beginning of another unique FMCS outreach to promote labormanagement cooperation—this time in the public sector with the goal of elevating student 

achievement in our nation’s public schools. The FMCS was honored to be asked by the 

Education Secretary Arne Duncan to partner with the Department of Education, the two major 

teachers’ unions, American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Education 

Association (NEA), and the organizations representing school administrators, school boards, and 

major urban school systems (American Association of School Administrators, the National 

School Boards Association and the Council of the Great City Schools). It was agreed among 

these partnering organizations that it was possible for labor and management to cooperatively 

negotiate changes in school environments, premised on the basic principle that teacher quality 

was the single most important determiner of student performance. The audacious concept behind 

this reform effort was that student achievement could be improved if it was recognized as a 

mutual priority and goal in teacher-school board collective bargaining. With its expertise in 

developing cooperative labor-management relationships and training employers and employees 

in joint problem-solving techniques, the FMCS had a key role to play. 

To launch the Secretary’s initiative, the partners agreed to co-sponsor a major conference in 

Denver, Colorado on February 15-16, 2011, called Advancing Student Achievement Through 

Labor-Management Collaboration. Secretary Duncan set the theme for this visionary effort to 

reform our public school systems when he announced that “[w]e have seen how good labormanagement relations can create the conditions that drive student success so we want to bring 

together leaders in labor and management who are committed to collaboration and bold 

reforms.” He went on to stress that “ districts and teachers’ unions must forge new compacts—

compacts in which [all the parties] acknowledge their shared responsibility to establish a strong 

and stable school environment, and give educators resources and tools to transform all schools so 

that all students receive a genuine opportunity to obtain a high quality education.” 

Following the Denver conference, FMCS had the distinct privilege of facilitating a pioneering 

effort between the AFT and the American Association of School Administrators (AASA) aimed 
5

at providing their respective constituencies an agreed-upon general framework for addressing 

core education reform issues. FMCS facilitated a series of joint meetings, attended by the 

organizations’ top leadership, which resulted in a groundbreaking and comprehensive 25-page 

document captioned “Educator Quality for the Twenty-first Century: A Collaborative Effort of 

the American Association of School Administrators and the American Federation of Teachers 

(AFT-AASA Framework).” 

The AFT-AASA Framework pinpointed the threshold principle the parties deemed critical to 

reforming our current educational system—namely, the support and development of the educator 

workforce. “As a first concrete step we need to systemically recruit, develop and retain great 

educators... [we] have adopted a framework to continuously improve the nation’s teaching force, 

revamp teacher development and evaluations systems, and provide teachers and schools the tools 

and support they need.” Beyond that, the framework highlighted the need for a comprehensive, 

fair, and objective teacher evaluation system which would include, in some instances, classroom 

observations by master teachers. It further provided a due process system whereby teachers 

identified as having certain deficiencies were offered an opportunity to remedy those deficiencies 

through the school support system but with the understanding that if they did not succeed within 

a reasonable stated time frame they would be subject to discipline up to and including dismissal. 

The sheer breadth of the AFT-AASA Framework provided hope that labor-management 

collaboration in school districts throughout the country will become the model that finally will 

engender positive and long lasting public education reform. 

In FY 2011, the Obama Administration also selected the FMCS for a prominent part in the 

implementation of labor-management partnerships for federal government agencies across the 

country. Mandated in December 2009, when President Obama issued an Executive Order to 

“promote satisfactory labor relations and improve the productivity and effectiveness of the 

Federal Government,” the policy requires federal agencies to establish “labor-management 

forums [that] allow managers and employees to collaborate in continuing to deliver the highest 

quality services to the American people.” The purpose of the order was to establish a 

cooperative and productive form of labor-management relations throughout the executive 

branch. This Presidential mandate provided another perfect opportunity for implementing the 

FMCS’s proactive outreach and intervention model. 

Within days of the issuance of this Executive Order, the FMCS reached out to the Director of the 

Office of Personnel Management, the primary U.S. agency tasked with implementing the Order, 

and offered the full support of the Agency and its staff. When this offer was enthusiastically 

accepted, FMCS, as its first step, began working with the Federal Labor Relations Authority 

(FLRA) Office of the General Counsel, to craft an appropriate training program. In the training 

that resulted, FLRA attorneys instructed paired labor and management participants on the first 

day on a two-day session. The FLRA attorneys educated attendees about the duty and scope of 

bargaining, including permissive subjects of bargaining under the federal bargaining law, and the 

use of pre-decisional involvement as a tool for more effective labor-management relations. On 

the second day of training, FMCS mediators provided participants with information and 
6

interactive skill building on effective labor-management forum design, consensual decisionmaking, facilitation, and other skills needed for successful forum implementation. Through FY 

2011, a wide range of federal departments and agencies were served, including the Departments 

of the Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, Health and Human Services, Veterans Affairs, 

Labor, Agriculture, the Army and the Navy, the Office of Personnel Management, the Federal 

Aviation Administration, the National Labor Relations Board, the Peace Corps, and the Marine 

Corps. 

The initial joint training was highly acclaimed, thereby generating a demand for additional 

training, especially from large agencies with multiple bargaining units. In response, the FLRA 

and FMCS developed and delivered a consolidated one-day joint training program. In addition, 

FMCS was tasked by the National Council on Federal Labor-Management Relations, the entity 

created to oversee the implementation of Executive Order 13522, with developing an innovative 

“train-the-trainer” program, which multiplied the effect of the training within large agencies by 

increasing the number of available trainers with each training session. 

In conclusion, the Agency’s experience in FY 2011 again validates the long recognized benefits 

of joint problem solving and cooperative efforts within the framework of collective bargaining in 

forming a powerful economic engine. As Congress declared legislatively more than 60 years 

ago, constructive labor-management relationships and collective bargaining provide the parties 

with the most effective tools for achieving productivity, innovation and competitiveness—the 

central ingredients for a growing economy. 

As Director, I believe the FMCS for FY 2012 has no higher duty than supporting and advancing 

the institution of collective bargaining, which underpins U.S. labor relations and the success of 

the U.S. world-leading economy. This past year, in speeches by our senior management at 

conferences and seminars and through group and individual outreach efforts by our mediators, 

we have worked to convey a simple truth to labor and management representatives, that in 

today’s competitive economy, they are partners not adversaries. Working together, through the 

framework of collective bargaining, they have the greatest chance for economic survival and 

success. 

Sincerely, 

George H. Cohen 

Director 
7

FY 2011 Agency Services 

Agency Mission 

For more than 60 years, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) has delivered 

neutral and confidential conflict resolution assistance to the nation’s unionized workplaces. The 

core mission of FMCS is to help employers and unions avoid costly work stoppages and 

minimize their potentially devastating effects on regional or national commerce. The FMCS was 

created by Congress as an independent agency in the Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947. 

Our highly trained mediators provide conflict resolution services to the nation’s employers and 

their unionized employees. Our goal is to prevent or minimize interruptions to the free flow of 

commerce that grow out of labor disputes and to improve labor-management relations. The core 

activity of the FMCS is collective bargaining mediation; a voluntary process in which mediators 

serve as third-party neutrals to facilitate the settlement of issues in the negotiation of collective 

bargaining agreements. 

A. Collective Bargaining Mediation 

Through collective bargaining mediation, FMCS helps avert or minimize the cost of work 

stoppages to the U.S. economy. The FMCS’s core work is to mediate collective bargaining 

negotiations for initial contract negotiations—which take place between an employer and a 

newly certified or recognized union representing its employees—and for negotiations for 

successor collective bargaining agreements. FMCS provides mediation services to the private 

sector, and also to the public sector, including federal agencies, and state and local governments. 

During mediation, the mediator’s task is to identify alternative solutions and compromises, 

encourage settlement where appropriate, control the critical timing of offers, and persuade the 

parties to honestly discuss their differences. In FY 2011, FMCS mediators were actively 

involved in nearly 4,700 collective bargaining contract negotiations in every major industry 

throughout the United States. 

B. Grievance Mediation 

Grievance mediation involves the use of a neutral party to mediate disputes that may arise over 

the terms and conditions of a collective bargaining agreement. FMCS mediators provide this 

service to the private and public sectors with the goal of preventing unresolved contract 

interpretation issues from spilling over into future contract negotiations. Lengthening contract 

terms increase the importance of resolving contentious issues arising during the term of a 

contract. In FY 2011, FMCS mediated 1,905 grievance mediation cases and helped the parties 

reach agreement in 1,428 of these. 
8

C. Relationship-Development and Training 

Preventing conflict that may arise during the term of a collective bargaining agreement is another 

important goal of the FMCS. The FMCS’s relationship-building training programs are designed 

to improve labor-management relationships by helping labor and management to develop 

collaborative problem-solving approaches. Effective use of these programs better enables the 

parties to jointly respond to rapidly changing business and economic conditions during the term 

of the contract and also make future mediation efforts more effective. 

D. Employment Mediation 

Outside the collective bargaining arena, FMCS provides employment mediation services to the 

federal sector and to state and local governments on a cost-reimbursable basis. The 

Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1990, the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990, and the 

Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 expanded FMCS’ role as a provider of these 

services. The legislative intent behind these acts was to expand the use of alternative dispute 

resolution throughout the Federal government, reduce litigation costs, and promote better 

government decision-making. The FMCS also provides employment mediation to the private 

sector to resolve workplace disputes falling outside of the traditional collective bargaining 

context, i.e., equal employment opportunity disputes. In FY 2011, FMCS mediated 1,254 

employment cases. 

E. International Training and Exchange 

Beyond the nation’s borders, FMCS plays an important role in promoting collective bargaining 

and conflict resolution around the world. FMCS’ international work is a small, but integral, part 

of its services. Emerging market economies often struggle to compete effectively in a globally 

integrated marketplace. FMCS helps establish the labor relations institutions that are essential to 

the smooth functioning of free market economies. These programs are also a knowledge-sharing 

experience: FMCS mediators gain familiarity with complex issues affecting the global economy 

and, as a result, are more effective in resolving labor-management disputes with international 

implications. 

FMCS’ international efforts help to level the economic playing field for U.S. companies and 

workers by strengthening the rule of law and workers' rights in developing countries. In addition 

to supporting U.S. companies and workers in the global market by advocating core labor 

standards for all nations, the program helps create the stable and productive work forces that are 

needed to attract foreign investment and improve living conditions. In addition to industrial 

relations, FMCS mediators assist with rule of law initiatives, thereby helping to support 

economic growth and investment. These initiatives include mediation training and working with 

NGOs and other civil society organizations to develop mediation and other FMCS ADR 

programs. FMCS’ international program operations are reimbursed and are funded in part by a 

number of foreign and U.S. agencies, including the U.S. Department of Labor, the U.S. 

Department of State, the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the International Labor 

Organization. 
9

F. Arbitration Services 

National labor policy favors arbitration for settling contractual disputes. FMCS’ Office of 

Arbitration Services maintains a roster of approximately 1,400 independent arbitrators who are 

qualified to hear and decide disputes over the interpretation or application of collective 

bargaining agreements. Upon request from the parties, FMCS furnishes a list of names from 

which they may choose an arbitrator to hear their case and render a decision. During FY 2011, 

the Office of Arbitration Services processed nearly 14,400 requests for arbitration panels 

nationwide. Arbitrators on the FMCS roster heard and decided nearly 2,300 labor arbitration 

cases. 

G. FMCS Institute for Conflict Management 

The FMCS Institute for Conflict Management provides training and education to labor and 

management practitioners from multiple organizations in an off-site classroom format. The 

Institute offers training in practical conflict resolution skills, collective bargaining, arbitrator and 

arbitration skills-building, facilitation process skills, multi-party facilitation, cultural diversity, 

equal employment opportunity mediation skills, and workplace violence prevention. The 

Institute runs as a reimbursable program and is funded by fees received from training 

participants. 
10

Mediation Services Program Data

PROGRAM SERVICES FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

1. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING MEDIATION ....... 

 Assigned Cases1 14,308 13,887 14,127 13,712 

 - Private Sector 12,914 12,425 12,888 12,460 

 - Public Sector (state and municipal) 1,083 1,138 906 943 

 - Federal Sector 311 324 333 309 

 Mediated Cases2 4,836 4,767 4,919 4,665 

 - Private Sector 3,437 3,320 3,632 3,271 

 - Public Sector (state and municipal) 1,145 1,155 991 1,091 

 - Federal Sector 254 292 296 303 

 Closed Cases 13,480 13,308 12,992 13,776 

 Closed Mediated Cases 3,914 3,958 4,005 3,815 

 Activity Rate3

 29% 30% 31% 28% 

 Settled and Closed Mediated Cases 3,396 3,395 3,428 3,234 

 Percentage of mediated cases settled through FMCS4 87% 86% 86% 85% 

 Activity rate in significant cases5

 38% 37% 45% 33% 

2. GRIEVANCE MEDIATION .................................... 

 Assigned Cases 1,749 2,027 2,124 1,968 

 Mediated Cases 1,728 2,004 2,084 1,905 

 - Private Sector 1,296 1,570 1,708 1,513 

 - Public Sector (state and municipal) 314 313 239 261 

 - Federal Sector 118 121 137 131 

 Settled GM Cases 1,299 1,479 1,532 1,428 

 Percentage of cases settled through FMCS6

 75% 74% 74% 75% 

3. RELATIONSHIP-DEVELOPMENT AND 

TRAINING ......................................................................... 

 Number of training programs provided 2,356 2,327 2,200 2,301 

 - Private Sector 1,390 1,400 1,471 1,267 

 - Public Sector (state and municipal) 712 682 433 493 

 - Federal Sector 254 245 296 541 

4. EMPLOYMENT MEDIATION ............................... 

 Mediated Cases 1,220 1,362 1,392 1,330 

 - Federal Sector 1,205 1,336 1,387 1,297 

 - Public Sector (state and municipal) 11 9 2 5 

 - Private 4 17 3 28 

 Settled EM Cases 576 638 675 641 

 Percent of EM cases settled through FMCS7

 47% 47% 48% 48% 

5. OUTREACH .............................................................. 

 Outreach cases8

 3,347 3,622 3,240 3,190 

 

1

 Section 8(d) of the NLRA, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §158(d) requires that any employer or labor organization provide notice to FMCS 30 days prior to 

contract expiration. Not all cases providing notices are assigned. Actual FY 2011 FMCS case intake exceeded 23,100. 2

 Mediated cases (formerly called “active” cases) represent the number of cases in the FY where mediators have become active in the negotiations. 3

 Defined as the number of closed cases where there was at least one meeting divided by the number of total closed assignments. 4

 Defined as the number of active cases settled divided by the total number of active cases. 5

 Significant cases are generally defined as situations where the bargaining unit exceeds 1,000. 6

 Defined as the number of grievance mediation cases settled and closed within the fiscal year divided by the number of closed GM assignments. 7

 Defined as the number of mediated employment cases settled divided by the number of mediated cases closed 8

 FMCS requires all mediators to engage in outreach efforts. These kinds of activities include non-bargaining meetings with labor and 

management representatives, attendance at conferences, meetings with local and state officials to offer FMCS services, and presentations 

designed to increase public knowledge.
11

Work Stoppage Information 

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 

Work stoppages carried from preceding FY 52 31 19 29 13 19 

Work stoppages beginning within FY 247 163 193 103 159 152 

Work stoppages closed within FY 268 175 183 119 153 143 

Work stoppages open at end of FY 31 19 29 13 19 28 

Average duration of work stoppages in closed cases 

(number of days) 70.9 63.1 51.8 104.2 47.3 45.4 

Estimated number of worker-hours lost due to work 

stoppages (1,000s) 25,175 29,734 20,147 19,609 8,877 11,222 

Work Stoppage Cost Information 

Direct 

Costs 

Indirect 

Costs 

Total 

Costs 

Year ($1,000s) ($1,000s) ($1,000s) 

1999 883,010 896,481 1,779,490 

2000 3,350,203 3,672,152 7,022,355 

2001 495,484 476,000 971,484 

2002 363,522 461,289 824,811 

2003 372,678 329,595 702,273 

2004 1,102,475 267,260 1,369,735 

2005 488,075 450,737 938,812 

2006 725,180 686,468 1,411,648 

2007 801,314 931,108 1,732,422 

2008 533,971 567,397 1,101,368 

2009 623,264 736,032 1,359,296 

2010 250,162 238,538 488,700 

2011 389,041 314,144 703,185 

 

Savings to Parties Attributable to Mediation

Reduced 

Incidence

Reduced 

Duration

Total 

Savings

Year ($1,000s) ($1,000s) ($1,000s)

1999 756,974 211,149 968,122 

2000 1,992,529 303,092 2,295,621 

2001 667,206 60,372 727,578 

2002 840,936 272,595 1,113,531 

2003 717,239 224,287 941,525 

2004 2,259,575 173,177 2,432,752 

2005 1,269,679 798,666 2,068,345 

2006 1,320,946 374,872 1,695,818 

2007 888,376 383,386 1,271,762 

2008 1,155,903 (501,807) 654,096 

2009 2,613,336 1,142,193 3,755,529 

2010 1,389,809 (39,122) 1,350,687 

2011 301,044 763,335 1,064,379 
12

Arbitration Services Program Data 

Activity 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 

 

Panels Issued9 16,264 15,717 16,692 16,486 14,367 

Arbitrators Appointed 6,485 6,568 6,496 6,870 6,608 

Activity Charged For 

Travel Days .45 .45 .57 .48 .44

Hearing Days 1.10 1.07 1.10 1.14 1.10

Study Days 2.34 2.43 2.40 2.37 2.37

Total 3.89 3.95 4.07 3.99 3.91

Average Charges 

Per Diem Rate $883 $913 $962 $981 $984 

Amount of Fee $3,571 $3,780 $4,049 $4,039 $4,045 

Amount of Expenses $359 $391 $421 $380 $384 

Total Charged $3,929 $4,171 $4,470 $4,419 $4,429 

 

9 Frequently, the labor-management parties request more than one panel for arbitration cases, resulting in an increase in the number of panels issued over the number of requests 

received.