Court Opinion

ID: 9629563
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 09:45:01.972312+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:07:21.110779
License: Public Domain

NIGRO, Justice,
concurring and dissenting.
I concur in the majority’s articulation of the two-prong inquiry necessary to determine whether an arbitrator’s award is reviewable by the courts. However, on the facts of this case, I would hold that the arbitrator did not have jurisdiction to hear the grievance because Mr. Mitchell was a probationary employee at the time of his termination.
Article 14, Section 8 of the subject collective bargaining agreement plainly says: “During a professional employees [sic] initial twelve (12) months of employment, the provisions of this Article shall not apply.” (Emphasis added). The collective bargaining agreement could not be more definitive that probationary employees are not governed by any of the bargained-for provisions applicable to employees who have satisfied the probationary period and been retained by the employer. Thus, without further inquiry, I would find that the arbitrator improperly arbitrated a grievance of an employee specifically excluded from coverage under the collective bargaining agreement.