On Monday, November 12th, we submitted our response to the University’s motion for reconsideration.  In it we point out that the arbitration provision in our collective bargaining agreement (CBA), as supported by well-established law, does not give the arbitrator jurisdiction to reconsider his decision.  Article 8 of our CBA states that “The decision of the arbitrator shall be binding on all parties,” and it does not provide either party with an opportunity for a second try.  Our response document also responds to each of the University’s major arguments, pointing out how they misrepresent our bargaining history as well as the application of state law.

While we don’t believe the arbitrator has jurisdiction to reconsider his entire decision, he does have jurisdiction to clarify the terms of his award.  It was for this reason that we filed our October 19th motion proposing specific terms of implementation: namely that the SFR fee be reimbursed in its entirety for 50% ASEs, and that the U-Pass be waivable for 50% ASEs by individual choice (provided that a certain revenue threshold is met so the program is protected).  Our request is that the arbitrator denies the University’s motion and implements the award as we have proposed.

As you may remember UW is required to provide its rebuttal by November 21st, after which time we expect the arbitrator to issue a ruling.