Opinion ID: 197392
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Is the Award Reviewable?

Text: In general, even final and binding arbitration awards are not subject to judicial review. See General Drivers, Warehousemen & Helpers, Local 89 v. Riss & Co., 372 U.S. 517, 519 (1963); United Steelworkers v. Enterprise Wheel & Car Corp., 363 U.S. 593, 596 (1960). In United Paperworkers Int'l Union, AFL-CIO v. Misco, Inc., 484 U.S. 29, 38 (1987), the Court said, [A]s long as the arbitrator is even arguably construing or applying the contract and acting within the scope of his authority, that a court is 1. While unnecessary under the circumstances, we deal briefly with the argument that the arbitrator's third paragraph was a retention of jurisdiction. Third Step, the processing by the Grievance Committee, is a proceeding all by itself. A disappointed party may subsequently seek arbitration, but it would be a choice, a new proceeding, not preordained. We regard the arbitrator's statement as to the date the grievance should begin to be merely a spelling out of the interpretation on which he based his finding that the claim was a day to day claim arising daily. It had no independent consequences. -8- convinced he committed serious error does not suffice to overturn his decision. At the same time the Court stated that the arbitrator's award settling a dispute with respect to the interpretation or application of a labor agreement must draw its essence from the contract and cannot simply reflect the arbitrator's own notions of industrial justice.2 If the arbitrator fails to meet this standard, courts have no choice but to refuse enforcement of the award. Enterprise Wheel, 363 U.S. at 597. We feel that in the present case this admittedly, extremely narrow exception, exists because the arbitrator enlarged the agreement and exceeded his authority under the CBA.