Last Updated Oct. 23, 2023
Arbitration Decisions
Arbitration Decision and Award Phase 1 – Issued Friday, Oct. 20, 2023.
HGEA’s Stance on Phase 1 Decision
The decision is as convoluted as the way the arbitrator handled the case. Despite the arbitrator conceding that a hazard existed, his decision appears to exclude many job classifications from eligibility for THP, in conflict with the nature of this case as a class grievance. We obviously disagree with parts of the decision, and we plan to use every tool at our disposal to fight for our members.
While the arbitrator concluded a hazard existed for the period of March 4, 2020 to March 25, 2022, he took the unusual approach of ruling on job classification eligibility. This is outside of the scope of Phase 1 of the case, which should only rule on the existence of a hazard. As with other THP cases, HGEA has always maintained that eligibility discussions occur in Phase 2.
This case has been highly unusual from the start, requiring a reopener and an excessive 17 days of hearings. A total of 2,875 pages of testimony was solicited to establish that a hazard existed, a burden of proof that HGEA met. We did not anticipate that the arbitrator would use this testimony to create his own classification eligibility list, outside the scope of this phase of the case. The criteria used to exclude job classifications raises questions of accuracy, inequality and feasibility.
Overall, HGEA maintains that those who went to work at their worksites should be eligible for THP, especially when the arbitrator found that a hazard existed.
The fight is not over. Rest assured we are exploring all avenues to contest this decision and achieve a more favorable resolution for members.