Your City Fired an Employee. The Arbitrator Disagreed. Now What?

If you serve on a municipal board or run a city department, you need to understand a scenario— because when it happens, it will feel deeply unfair.

An employee does something that clearly warrants termination. You fire them. The union takes it to arbitration. The arbitrator says the employee gets their job back.

Your instinct is to fight it in court. Almost every time, you'll lose.

The Deal You Already Made

Most collective bargaining agreements require the employer to prove "just cause" before discharging an employee. If you can't, the arbitrator orders reinstatement. That's the deal. Both sides agreed to let the arbitrator decide, and courts will almost never second-guess that decision.

The Supreme Court has been clear. An arbitrator's award is treated as the parties' agreement. Unless the arbitrator completely ignored the contract or exceeded their authority, courts won't touch it.

The Public Policy Exception (and Why It Almost Never Works)

The one escape hatch employers reach for is the "public policy exception." The argument goes: enforcing this award would violate some important public policy. Sounds promising. In practice, it's a dead end.

The Supreme Court laid this out in Eastern Associated Coal Corp. v. United Mine Workers of America, 531 U.S. 57 (2000). A truck driver in a safety-sensitive position failed random drug tests twice. The employer tried to fire him both times. Both times, the arbitrator ordered reinstatement with conditions — suspension, substance abuse treatment, random testing, and a signed, undated resignation letter triggered by one more failure.

The employer went to court arguing public safety. The Supreme Court unanimously rejected it. The public policy exception requires the policy to be "explicit, well defined, and dominant" — grounded in actual laws and legal precedents, not general ideas about what seems right. Neither the federal drug-testing statute nor DOT regulations actually required discharge. They also emphasized rehabilitation. The arbitrator's conditions were consistent with the law, so the award stood.

If that exception can't save you when a twice-failed drug test is involved in a safety-sensitive transportation job, it probably won't save you in most municipal employment disputes either.

What This Means for Municipalities

This isn't an argument against accountability. It's a reality check.

When your municipality enters a collective bargaining agreement with an arbitration clause, you're agreeing to live with the arbitrator's interpretation of "just cause." That's a serious commitment. The real work happens before arbitration—in how you document performance issues, follow progressive discipline, and build the record.

Cities that take shortcuts on documentation, skip steps in their own policies, or terminate employees without a solid paper trail are the ones most likely to see an arbitrator order reinstatement. And once that award comes down, the odds of a court overturning it are slim.

The Bottom Line

The public policy exception exists in theory. In practice, it is extraordinarily narrow. If you're a municipal employer facing an unfavorable arbitration award, you need counsel who understands both the limits of judicial review and the practical steps you can take going forward — not someone who will burn resources on a challenge that's almost certain to fail.

Disclaimer: This blog is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this post does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case is different, and you should consult a licensed attorney for advice regarding your specific situation.