DocketNumber: No. CV970572216S
Citation Numbers: 1998 Conn. Super. Ct. 1771
Judges: DEVLIN, J.
Filed Date: 2/5/1998
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
In support of these claims the Union claims that the disciplinary proceedings conducted by the police department were flawed because (1) the proceedings improperly combined off-duty and on-duty conduct that is treated separately in the Collective Bargaining Agreement; (2) the police department failed to meet its burden of proof at the disciplinary hearing; and (3) the hearing officer failed to make subordinate findings of fact in violation of Sergeant Garcia's due process rights.
In this case the issue presented to the arbitrators was:
Did the City impose a 45 day suspension upon Edwin Garcia for just cause? If not, what shall be the remedy?
In response, the arbitrators in their award stated:
Yes, the forty-five (45) day suspension imposed upon Edwin Garcia was for just cause.
Judicial review of arbitration awards is limited in scope because arbitration is a creature of contract and the parties delineate the power of the arbitrator by the terms of the submission. Wilson v. Security Insurance Group,
After reviewing the arbitration clause in the collective bargaining agreement between the Union and the City, the court finds that the submission was unrestricted. See InternationalAssociation of Fire Fighters. Local 1339. AFL-CIO v. Waterbury,
The court also finds that the award conformed to the submission. An award conforms to the submission when the award is dispositive of the dispute the parties submitted to arbitration.Stratford v. Local 134 IFPTE,
Accordingly, the motion to vacate the award is denied.
So Ordered at Hartford, Connecticut this 4th day of February 1998.
Devlin