SB 436

Under current law, a court may review an award following arbitration and must

vacate the award if the court finds that the award was procured by corruption, fraud,

or undue means; that there was partiality or corruption on the part of an arbitrator;

that the arbitrator was guilty of misconduct in refusing to postpone the hearing or

in refusing to hear relevant evidence or of any other misbehavior by which the rights

of any party were prejudiced; or where an arbitrator exceeded his or her powers.

This bill imposes the same standards for vacating an award following

arbitration that was conducted pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement, but

specifies that an arbitrator exceeds his or her authority if the award requires a party

to violate a state statute or constitutional provision or if the arbitrator expressly

disregards contractual language governing the dispute. Under the bill, an arbitrator

does not exceed his or her authority merely by misinterpreting contractual language

or making a mistake of law or fact.

Under the bill, a court may not review whether a party to the dispute followed

a grievance or arbitration procedure and may not vacate an arbitration award unless

it finds one of the grounds listed above for vacation.