Originally from Dispute Resolution Journal

Preview Page

The author addresses the question of whether a labor arbitrator should consider
external law in attempting to resolve a dispute or grievance. On one side of this issue are
the so-called “contractualists,” who believe that the arbitrator must craft his or her
decision solely from the terms of the collective-bargaining agreement. The opposing
viewpoint, that of the so-called “contextualists,” contends that arbitrators may consider
external law in addition to the terms of the collective-bargaining agreement. This article
will examine both sides of this dilemma, basing its assertions on the views of highly
respected members of the ADR field, as well as key court and NLRB rulings.

Courts, arbitrators and legal scholars have long debated the issue of whether
it is appropriate for an arbitrator to consider external law in order to reach
a decision in a specific dispute or grievance.1 External law encompasses the
entire body of law developed through statutes, regulations and court decisions,2
specifically federal law that the Supreme Court has ruled shall be determinative in