The author is a long-standing commercial and labor arbitrator with the AAA, and is on the labor panels of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, the National Mediation Board and the N. Y.S. Employment Relations Boards, among others. He is on the adjunct faculty of Baruch College, focusing on labor relations, arbitration, E.E.O. and human resource management. He has also taught similar courses at Hofstra University, the N.Y. Institute of Technology and the New School for Social Research.
Not all employers in industry approach arbitrability in precisely the same way. Academia is no different. Variations exist. But there are clear central thrusts that highlight the differences between private industry and higher education in dealing with arbitrability in the labor-management context. In industry, for example, there is a central tendency enabling management to impose an unpaid suspension or discharge without having to await a sanctioning arbitration award. In academia, such disciplinary actions cannot be implemented without some form of hearing and peer review. And if the matter goes to arbitration, implementation of the penalty must await a finding of "just cause." These differences highlight the need for careful review of both traditional industry dispute resolution procedures and more rigid practices of collegial governance.