A new approach to decision-making research in labor arbitration using alcohol and drug disciplinary case

In this policy-capturing study, we investigated the decision cues relied on by labor arbitrators in alcohol and drug cases. Using the seven tests of just cause as a framework, 249 published arbitration awards were analyzed using logistic regression. Arbitrators were found to be consistent in their approaches to decision making in alcohol and drug cases. Only the requirement of a fair investigation failed to be useful to the analysis. With respect to dominance, three tests are particularly important-the ability of the company to prove misconduct, the reasonableness of the action taken by the company, and the appropriateness of the penalty. The new research approach used in this study offers practical implications to those who conduct decisionmaking research of labor arbitration and to the participants in the labor arbitration process.