Mr. Glick is a graduate of the School of Industrial Relations at Cornell University, and has been employed by the National Association of Counties and the New York State Joint Legislative Committee on Metropolitan and Regional Areas. He is currently attending law school.
It is the purpose of this paper to investigate the questions of misconduct, fraud, bias and impartiality as they relate to the legal status of the arbitrator and to explore the remedies available to injured parties in these cases.
The law has been vague and often contradictory in reference to the status of the arbitrator. Is he a judge, a quasi-judicial officer, a referee? Should he be subject to laws applying to judges or those applying to administrative officers and jurors? Such questions are engendered by the law itself. It is important for arbitrators as individuals and as a profession to seek clarity in the definition of their legal status.
In general, the crucial problem of policy in regulating arbitrators may be: How do we allow sufficient flexibility to enable the arbitrator to effectively execute his duties while providing sufficient regulation to protect against abuses and to maintain a high level of confidence in the profession?