Arbitrator Decision Making in Substance Abuse Cases

Abstract

The approach taken in this study is to regard substance abuse discharge cases as specific instances of discharge cases in general. Consequently, in trying to model arbitrators' decisions, the possible predictors of the outcome of arbitra­ tion hearings are derived from those factors found to significantly affect the outcome in earlier discharge studies. Discriminant analysis is used to deter­ mine those factors that significantly affected the outcomes of substance-abuse discharge cases in the period 1985-1993. While most of the predictors thought to influence arbitral decision making operated in the anticipated manner, there were some surprises. In particular, neither management's concern for safety nor the grievant's prior work record affected the outcome of the cases. Over the past thirty years, the abuse of drugs, both licit and illicit, has increasingly pervaded the consciousness of American society in general and, more recently, of American industry. According to a recent survey undertaken by the Conference Board, business and industry in the United States loses approximately $20.6 billion annually because of alcoholism alone [1]. When the losses of nonbusiness organizations are included, the figure swells to a staggering $100 billion [1, 2]. While initially employers were reluctant to acknowledge the magnitude of the problem, they have responded with a combination of both corrective and deter­ rent measures [3-4]. Management in many businesses has either negotiated or unilaterally promulgated drug policies that have become part of the work rules at these firms. As a result of the sanctions inherent in these measures, penalties and other actions taken against employees who are alleged by their employers to have