Commentators have rightly criticized Pyett for its complete disregard of decades of established precedent. In this article, however, I situate the Pyett decision in the context of an ongoing evolution in labor arbitration as that institution has tried to accommodate the intrusion of public law claims into a private system of workplace self-governance. I suggest that labor arbitration has developed a kind of schizophrenic existence, preserving its role as a substitute for strikes and other workplace strife in a private system of self-governance while accommodating an additional role as a substitute for litigation of public law claims. Nevertheless, I find the decision in Pyett misguided and assess its implications for the institution of labor arbitration's ability to cope with its evolving schizophrenia.
Martin H. Malin,
Evolving Schizophrenic Nature of Labor Arbitration, The,
2010 J. Disp. Resol.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol2010/iss1/4