Arbitrator example sentences

"Arbitrator" Example Sentences

The two parties agreed to use an arbitrator to resolve their contract dispute.
The arbitrator listened to each side present their arguments before making a ruling.
The arbitrator's decision in the labor dispute was binding on both management and the union.
The collective bargaining agreement stipulated that an outside arbitrator would decide disputes related to contract interpretation.
The arbitrator carefully reviewed the evidence and contract language before issuing an award.
The parties reached an impasse in contract negotiations, so they decided to utilize an outside mediator as well as an arbitrator.
The arbitrator recommended that the company provide back pay to the terminated employee.
Going to arbitration proved to be faster and less expensive than filing a lawsuit in court.
The arbitrator ruled that the company had just cause for firing the employee according to the provisions in the employee handbook.
The role of the arbitrator is to render an unbiased decision based on the facts presented by both sides.
After days of hearings, the arbitrator issued an award in favor of the union.
The company refused to comply with the arbitrator's ruling, so the union threatened to strike.
The two sides selected an arbitrator from a panel maintained by the American Arbitration Association.
The arbitrator imposed a compromise solution that both sides found reasonably acceptable.
Since the parties could not agree on an arbitrator, they asked the judge to appoint one to decide the dispute.
The arbitrator only makes a decision about the specific issues submitted for arbitration.
The arbitrator's award directed the employer to reinstate the terminated worker with full back pay and benefits.
The union retained an experienced labor attorney to serve as their arbitrator for contract grievances.
The arbitrator harshly admonished both sides for failing to settle their differences without using arbitration.
The parties agreed to abide by the arbitrator's decision as a final resolution of their claim.
The lawyer served as an arbitrator for several years deciding small claims disputes for the court.
The grievance was scheduled for arbitration to be heard by an arbitrator next month.
The arbitrator selected by the court heard testimony from both parties and issued an award within 30 days.
The arbitrator's decision is not appealable by either side, so it represents a final resolution of the dispute.
The arbitrator ruled in favor of the employee's sexual harassment claim against the employer.
The arbitrator employed a quasi-judicial process when conducting the labor dispute hearing.
The arbitrator was an experienced labor lawyer with decades of experience settling contract disputes.
The arbitrator urged the parties to resolve their differences through good-faith negotiations instead of arbitration.
To select an arbitrator, the parties each choose one nominee and those two nominees choose a third neutral party.
The arbitrator split the cost difference between the two offers as a compromise award amount.
During arbitration proceedings, the arbitrator listens to testimony and reviews evidence from both sides.
After arbitration, the parties shook hands and agreed to let bygones be bygones and move forward.
The arbitrator had the authority to issue subpoenas for witnesses to appear at the arbitration hearing.
The two arbitrators failed to agree on an award amount, so they brought in a third arbitrator to break the tie.
Going into arbitration was seen as a last resort by the parties to finally settle their lingering dispute.
Many collective bargaining agreements stipulate that the arbitrator's decision is binding on both the union and management.
The arbitrator considered past practices and industry standards in addition to the black-letter contract provisions.
The arbitrator rendered a "Solomonic" decision by splitting the difference between the union's demand and the company's offer.
The arbitrator's goal was to foster good labor-management relations by issuing a fair and just resolution.
If the parties could not agree on an award amount, an arbitrator would impose one based on the merits of the case.
The arbitrator carefully reviewed all relevant evidence before rendering the award in arbitration proceedings.
The arbitrator had the power to subpoena documents as well as witnesses for the arbitration hearing.
The role of the arbitrator is to hear both sides' facts and contract interpretations impartially.
After listening to arguments from both attorneys, the arbitrator deliberated privately before issuing the award.
The arbitrator considered past practice as well as equity and fairness in addition to the direct language of the contract.
The arbitrator only decided the issues specified in the submission agreement between the parties.
The two sides selected an arbitrator to resolve their contract dispute and avoid costly and time-consuming litigation.
The arbitrator asked probing questions of witnesses from both sides during the hearing.
The arbitrator reminded both parties that the goal was to reach a fair resolution, not to "win" the arbitration.
The arbitrator's powers and duties were outlined in the arbitration clause of the collective bargaining agreement.
Either party had the right to request that the arbitrator reconsider certain aspects of the award.
The arbitrator's award provided specific remedies and directives to settle the conflict between the two sides.
The arbitrator was selected in accordance with procedures specified in the parties' contract.
The arbitrator explained that he could only decide the dispute based on the issues presented, not on subjective feelings.
The parties compromised on an arbitrator who was experienced but not excessively expensive.
The arbitrator issued a "final and binding" decision that represented a definitive resolution of the contractual dispute.
Through arbitration, the sides were able to obtain a rapid, inexpensive resolution of their difference of opinion.
The parties agreed to be bound by the arbitrator's decision even before a specific arbitrator had been chosen.
The arbitrator's task was to interpret the contract language and determine if it had been breached.
Based on the evidence presented, the arbitrator ruled that the employer had just cause for terminating the employee.

Common Phrases

The union and management appointed an arbitrator to settle the labor dispute.
The court appointed an arbitrator to resolve the legal dispute between the two parties.
The arbitrator heard both sides of the argument and will issue a binding decision.
The arbitrator decided in favor of the plaintiff, awarding them monetary damages.
The contract stipulates that any disputes will be settled by a mutually agreed upon arbitrator.
The two feuding sides agreed to allow the arbitrator to make a final and binding decision.
The arbitrator will listen to each party's position before determining a fair outcome.
After months of negotiation, the parties finally agreed to submit the dispute to an impartial arbitrator.
The arbitrator settled the dispute over compensation to the satisfaction of both sides.
The arbitrator determined that the plaintiff's claims were without merit and ruled in favor of the defendant.
The parties interviewed several potential arbitrators before agreeing upon one.
The arbitrator has the power to make a final decision that both sides are legally bound to honor.
The role of the arbitrator is to render an unbiased decision based on the facts and arguments presented.
Both sides agreed to abide by the decision of the arbitrator in order to avoid a costly lawsuit.
The arbitrator used a mediation approach to help the parties reach a mutual resolution.
The arbitrator's decision brought the long legal battle to a close.
The collective bargaining agreement stipulates that any salary disputes must be settled by an arbitrator.
The arbitrator ruled that the employer had grounds for dismissing the former employee.
The arbitrator heard both sides present their cases before issuing an award.
The arbitrator crafted an equitable compromise that both parties could accept.
The arbitrator issued a narrowly tailored decision based on the specific circumstances of the case.
The contract mandated that any disputes would be settled by binding arbitration before an agreed upon arbitrator.
The arbitrator found that both parties shared some fault and apportioned damages accordingly.
The arbitrator possessed extensive knowledge of the industry involved in the dispute.
The job of the arbitrator is not to please the parties but to follow proper adjudication procedures.
The arbitrator recommended that the parties meet again to see if an amicable solution could be found.
The arbitrator suggested a compromise that both sides found acceptable.
The neutrality and impartiality of the arbitrator is crucial to a fair outcome.
The arbitrator's lengthy experience led the parties to trust his judgment and wisdom.
The arbitrator conducted a full and fair hearing before rendering a decision.
The arbitration panel will hear arguments from both sides before issuing a unanimous decision.
The arbitrator sought to understand the unique circumstances of the case before making a ruling.
The arbitrator stressed the importance of compromise and accommodation in settling differences.
The arbitrator recommended that the company revise its policies to avoid future conflicts.
The parties agreed that the arbitrator had acted fairly and issued a just decision.
The arbitrator encouraged the parties to negotiate their own solution before imposing a ruling.
The arbitrator conducted witness interviews and reviewed documents before crafting the ruling.
The arbitrator heard closing statements from both parties before beginning deliberations.
The arbitrator's decision was based solely on the evidence presented during the hearing.
The arbitrator preserved good working relationships by striving for equitable compromises.
The arbitrator's expertise and experience led to a timely and cost-effective resolution.
The arbitrator reminded both sides that the objective was a fair and sustainable outcome.
The arbitrator found merit in both sides' arguments but ultimately ruled in favor of one party.
The arbitrator fashioned a creative remedy that respected the rights of all involved parties.
Both sides respected the arbitrator's integrity and impartiality throughout the proceedings.
The arbitrator skillfully summarized the complex facts at issue before identifying key legal principles.
The settlement achieved through arbitration avoided a protracted and uncertain legal battle.
Both sides deferred to the arbitrator as a neutral decision-maker with relevant expertise.
Through careful listening, the arbitrator helped each side understand the other's perspective.
The arbitrator required both sides to provide full disclosure of all relevant evidence and information.
The arbitrator rejected claims based on speculation and hearsay in favor of substantive evidence.
The arbitrator maintained an open dialogue with both parties throughout the arbitration process.
The arbitrator reminded the parties that a swift resolution was in everyone's best interest.
The arbitrator's reasoned decision provided clarity and certainty moving forward.
Both sides expressed satisfaction with the arbitrator's handling of the complicated case.
The arbitrator emphasized that cooperation, not conflict, would best serve each party's interests.
The arbitrator sought to craft a solution that would satisfy the parties' unmet underlying needs.
The arbitrator's procedural rulings exhibited strict neutrality and impartiality.
The arbitrator's recommended solution achieved a balance that honored competing interests.
The arbitrator's years of experience enabled a nuanced understanding of industry norms and customs.