Which Arguments Should Be Given More Weight? Those Based On ✓ Solved

Which Arguments Should Be Given More Weight Those Based On Company Po

Determine the relative importance of arguments grounded in company policy, employee handbooks, and labor agreements compared to mitigating factors presented by the grievant and witnesses. Explain how unprofessional conduct can be defined and discuss its potential impact on arbitration decisions. If acting as the arbitrator, outline how you would rule in this case, providing comprehensive reasons for your decision.

Write a 1,300-word paper using Microsoft Word, adhering to APA 6th edition style. Support your position with a sufficient number of credible references, defending your arguments convincingly. Use primary sources such as government websites (e.g., U.S. Department of Labor, Census Bureau, The World Bank), peer-reviewed scholarly journals accessible via EBSCOhost or Google Scholar. Also include secondary credible sources like reputable news outlets (e.g., CNN Money, The Wall Street Journal), trade journals, and academic publications available in EBSCOhost. Avoid non-credible, opinion-based, or unsubstantiated sources such as wikis, blogs, Yahoo Answers, or eHow. Cite all sources in-text and include a comprehensive reference list formatted according to APA 6th edition guidelines.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

In the realm of labor relations and arbitration, determining the weight of various arguments is pivotal to ensuring fair and just outcomes. Central to this debate is whether arguments based on company policies, employee handbooks, and labor agreements should take precedence over mitigating factors presented by the grievant and witnesses. This paper explores the hierarchy of these arguments within the arbitration process, defines the scope of unprofessional conduct, and offers a reasoned decision on how an arbitrator should rule in such cases, grounded in legal principles, ethical considerations, and empirical research.

Prioritization of Arguments in Arbitration

Arbitrators typically give significant consideration to foundational documents such as the collective bargaining agreement (CBA), employee handbook, and company policies. These documents serve as the contractual backbone that governs employment practices, dispute resolutions, and disciplinary actions. Their significance stems from their legally binding nature, providing clear guidelines for employer and employee conduct, and establishing disciplinary procedures that reduce ambiguity (Folger & Cropanzano, 1998). Consequently, arguments rooted in these policies often carry considerable weight in arbitration, as they reflect the agreed-upon standards and expectations agreed upon by both parties.

However, mitigating factors presented by the grievant and witnesses play an equally vital role, especially when the circumstances surrounding the misconduct are complex. These factors include personal circumstances, provocation, or other extenuating events that might justify or lessen the severity of the misconduct (Gillespie et al., 2016). Arbitrators must assess these factors carefully, balancing them against the rules articulated in the contracts, to ascertain whether disciplinary measures are proportionate and fair.

In practice, the weight assigned to each depends on the case's specifics, but the overarching principle in arbitration leans towards upholding the contractual language unless compelling mitigating evidence suggests otherwise. Courts and arbitration panels have historically favored consistent application of policies to maintain employment stability and uphold the integrity of the collective bargaining process (Lewin, 2017).

Defining Unprofessional Conduct

Unprofessional conduct encompasses behaviors that violate accepted standards of workplace behavior, undermine team cohesion, or damage the employer’s reputation. It typically includes misconduct such as insubordination, harassment, dishonesty, absenteeism, or other violations of workplace rules (Smith, 2014). However, the interpretation of what constitutes unprofessional conduct can vary depending on organizational culture and the context of the incident.

Legal definitions tend to frame unprofessional conduct broadly, emphasizing conduct that breaches the duty of loyalty, honesty, and respect. Thus, unprofessional behavior might be defined as any action that breaches the reasonable expectations of conduct as outlined in workplace policies or accepted professional standards (Bailey, 2018). Establishing a clear and consistent definition is critical for fair disciplinary procedures and for arbitration review, ensuring that misconduct is assessed objectively rather than arbitrarily.

Ruling as an Arbitrator

If I were the arbitrator, I would carefully review all evidence, including the company’s policies, the grievant’s mitigation claims, witness testimonies, and any relevant contextual information. My ruling would be guided by the principle of fairness, the contractual obligations, and the proportionality of disciplinary measures.

Suppose the misconduct involved an incident of unprofessional behavior, such as insubordination or harassment, clearly violating existing policies. If the grievant’s mitigation factors are compelling—such as external stressors, health issues, or provocation—I would consider adjusting the penalty accordingly. Conversely, if the policy explicitly mandates termination for certain acts, the discipline should reflect that severity, unless extraordinary circumstances justify leniency.

In this case, I would lean towards upholding the disciplinary action if evidence certifies a clear breach of conduct, but I would also weigh mitigating factors that suggest the disciplinary measure might be disproportionate. For example, if the misconduct was minor, isolated, or contextually excusable, I might advocate for a lesser penalty. If the misconduct was egregious and in direct violation of contract and policy, I would support the decision to uphold the discipline to preserve workplace standards and uphold contractual integrity.

In conclusion, an arbitrator’s role is to balance adherence to contractual policies with fairness to the employee, considering mitigating circumstances when appropriate. This nuanced approach ensures consistent, equitable, and legally sound outcomes that reinforce trust in the arbitration process and the employment relationship.

References

• Bailey, J. (2018). Workplace Discipline and Legal Standards. Journal of Employment Law, 35(2), 45-67.
• Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Sage publications.
• Gillespie, N. A., et al. (2016). The role of mitigating factors in workplace disputes. Human Resource Management Review, 26(3), 208-219.
• Lewin, D. (2017). Judicial and arbitration review of disciplinary actions. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 70(4), 789-812.
• Smith, P. L. (2014). Unprofessional Conduct in the Workplace. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(4), 543-555.