A collective bargaining agreement must provide a means for resolving issues that arise as a consequence of the agreement. This procedure must be documented. You have the option of using the grievance and arbitration processes to resolve your concerns.
The Divisions Your Need To Know
A union or employer, on the other hand, may apply to the Director of the Collective Agreement Arbitration Bureau (CAAB) that an arbitrator be appointed to resolve the disagreement in a time frame that is both exact and expedited if the issue falls within the scope of the Labor Relations Code.It is possible that the parties will include a standard arbitration clause in their contract if the dispute or claim is straightforward and the parties place a high value on the speed with which the arbitration procedure may be completed. If both parties agree, expedited arbitration rules may be applied in the case. However, the parties may elect accelerated arbitration at any time, even after the formation of a dispute or even during the course of an arbitral proceeding, but they must do so no later than the filing of the Answer to the Request for Expedited Arbitration.
There are many advantages to having arbitration concluded more rapidly, including:
The following methods for accelerated arbitral proceedings are specified in Article 48 of the Arbitration Rules:
One of the most essential elements of the arbitration procedure is that it has shorter timeframes and easier guidelines. Unless the parties agree differently, service will only be accomplished by electronic means, and the quantity of written submissions will be restricted, among other restrictions (for the appointment of arbitrators, filing of submissions, issuing the final arbitral award).
Because the final arbitral judgment must be issued within six (6) months of the case being assigned to a single arbitrator, accelerated arbitration proceedings may result in significant time savings for the parties involved.
Smart Commercial Solutions
Commercial as an alternative to going to court, arbitration is a frequent technique of settling disputes since it is intended to be more rapid and less costly than going to court. It has taken a long time and a great deal of work to build arbitration procedures that are both successful and fair. Many people feel that an increase in the frequency of arbitral hearings that are similar to court procedures has occurred in recent years, although this has not always been the case. In response to such responses, a new set of techniques to conflict resolution has been tested.
The arbitration procedure will be less expensive and time-consuming if there is just one arbitrator, as opposed to a panel of arbitrators that comprises a higher number of arbitrators. When compared to the expenditures of a panel of three arbitrators, the tribunal’s expenses should be cut by almost half.
Conclusion
It is more difficult for a solitary arbitrator to resolve a dispute than it is for a co-arbitrator since he or she must make more decisions. Providing that the solitary arbitrator is properly appointed and adequately competent, the absence of the co-arbitrators should do no damage to the interests of either party and should result in a more expeditious settlement than would be the case otherwise.
