WPC  # VUNa % 0(w@4 1 @ 0lH 0D 0J 0TB 0^ 0h 0r\ 0| 0J 0 1u` 0d U>9B)wDC AMU*0ZFA v~v D3Y B 0@ AO8 0D D/B Bq HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 (9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($ {U|}~Ӏz!3|x((3$ !      0  (#$  0  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23    ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d7Border 1dd- C << G<  9p`(Arial !  ""   YYY FILED"X October15,1996CecilCrowson,Jr."AppellateCourtClerk  !   $       ThearbitratorfoundthatthecostofDeBerrystelephonecallswas$87.77andthatthecostofMurrellscallswas$51.24. !   $       T.C.A.295301to320(Supp.1995).  !   $       Section295313permitsvacationofanawardwhere:8  (1) Theawardwasprocuredbycorruption,fraudorotherunduemeans;8  (2) Therewasevidentpartialitybyanarbitratorappointedasaneutralorcorruptioninanyofthearbitratorsormisconductprejudicingtherightsofanyparty;8  (3) Thearbitratorsexceededtheirpowers;8  (4) Thearbitratorsrefusedtopostponethehearinguponsufficientcausebeingshowntherefororrefusedtohearevidencematerialtothecontroversyorotherwisesoconductedthehearing,contrarytotheprovisionsof295306,astoprejudicesubstantiallytherightsofaparty;or8  (5) Therewasnoarbitrationagreementandtheissuewasnotadverselydeterminedinproceedingsunder295303andthepartydidnotparticipateinthearbitrationhearingwithoutraisingtheobjection.8 Thefactthatthereliefwassuchthatitcouldnotorwouldnotbegrantedbyacourtoflaworequityisnotgroundforvacatingorrefusingtoconfirmtheaward.T.C.A.295313(Supp.1995).PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   BA Op Geneva  BA Op Geneva ++++'dxd d("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! .   ` ` pX\RA'\ћ@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE,WESTERNSECTION@ ATJACKSON@ _______________________________________________________  ) ADAMSTVOFMEMPHIS,INC.,  ) ShelbyCountyCircuitCourt LicenseeofWHBQTV , ) No.48639T.D. )̀Plaintiff/Appellant. ) )VS. ) C.A.NO.02A019511CV00262L!# ;+'h|8`  `L ) INTERNATIONALBROTHERHOOD  ) OFELECTRICALWORKERS,  ) AFLCIO,LOCAL474and  ) JOHNDEBERRYandMORGAN  ) MURRELL , ) )̀Defendants/Appellees. ) )______________________________________________________________________________FromtheCircuitCourtofShelbyCountyatMemphis. HonorableKayS.Robilio,Judge ArchieSanders,III ,SHUTTLEWORTH,SMITH,McNABB&WILLIAMS,Memphis,TennesseeAttorneyforPlaintiff/Appellant. DanM.Norwood , JamesR.Becker,Jr. ,NORWOOD&DEBOO,Memphis,TennesseeAttorneysforDefendants/Appellees.OPINIONFILED: AFFIRMED FARMER,J.LILLARD,J. :(Concurs) SUMMERS,Sp.J. :(Concurs)  ` ` X PlaintiffAppellant,AdamsTVofMemphis,Inc.,LicenseeofWHBQTV( AdamsTV),appealsthetrialcourtsorderdenyingAdamsTVsapplicationtovacateanarbitrationawardinfavorofDefendantsAppellees,InternationalBrotherhoodofElectricalWorkers,AFLCIO,Local474( Union),JohnDeBerry( DeBerry),andMorganMurrell( Murrell). DeBerryandMurrell(collectively, Employees)werefiredfromtheiremploymentwithAdamsTVformakingunauthorizedpersonallongdistancecallsontheiremployerstelephones.Wheninitiallyconfronted,theEmployeeseitherdeniedmakingthetelephonecallsorstatedthattheycouldnotremembermakingthem.Uponfurtherquestioning,however,theEmployeesadmittedmakingmanyofthecallsand,consequently,wereterminated. OnthesamedayDeBerryandMurrellwereterminated,AdamsTVsgeneralmanagersentamemotoallemployeesstatingthatnolongdistancepersonaltelephonecallscouldbemadewithoutadepartmentheadspriorapprovalandthatemployeeswhodeviatedfromthispolicyriskedtermination.ThismemoapparentlywasAdamsTVsfirstcommunicationtoemployeesregardingitspolicyonlongdistancetelephonecalls. PursuanttotheprovisionsofitscollectivebargainingagreementwithAdamsTV,theUnionfiledagrievanceonbehalfoftheEmployees.Whenthegrievanceprocedurefailedtoresolvethedispute,thematterwassubmittedtoanarbitratorinaccordancewiththecollectivebargainingagreement.Aspertinent,thecollectivebargainingagreementgaveAdamsTVthe exclusiverighttodirectitsemployees,therighttohire,promote,demote,transfer,dischargeordisciplineforjustcauseandtomaintaindisciplineamongemployees,andgenerallymanagetheCompanysbusinessasitdeemsbest.Theissuebeforethearbitrator,therefore,waswhethertheEmployeeswereterminatedfor justcauseunderthetermsandconditionsofthecollectivebargainingagreement.Theagreementalsoprovidedthatthearbitratorsdecision shallbeconclusive,finalandbindinguponthepartiesbutthat [t]hearbitratorshallhavenopowertochange,addto,subtractfromormodifytheagreement. Inhisopinionandaward,thearbitratorfoundthattheEmployeesunauthorizeduseofcompanytelephoneswas aseriousoffensethatcouldnotbetoleratedbutthat,absent anypriordisciplinaryactionregardingthistypeoftransgression,terminationwas toosevereapenalty.Thearbitratordetermined,therefore,thatatwoweeksuspensionwithoutpayandreimbursementofthecostofthetelephonecalls $   ׀wastheappropriatepenalty.AdamsTVsubsequentlyappliedtothetrialcourtforanordervacatingthearbitrationaward. OnappealfromthetrialcourtsorderdenyingAdamsTVsapplicationandupholdingthearbitratorsaward,AdamsTVpresentsthefollowingissueforreview:8  [Whether][t]hetrialcourterredindenying[AdamsTVs]ApplicationforanOrderVacatingtheArbitrationAwardbecausethearbitratorexceededhispowers.WeconcludethatthisissuewasdecidedadverselytoAdamsTVbythiscourtsdecisionin AdamsTVofMemphis,Inc.v.Local474,InternationalBrotherhoodofElectricalWorkers ,1996WL219618(Tenn.App.1996), perm.app.denied ,(hereinafter AdamsTVI ),and,thus,weaffirmthetrialcourtsorderbasedonthereasoningsetforthinthatcase. Aftertheappealswerefiledin AdamsTVI andinthiscase,theSupremeCourtofTennesseedecided Arnoldv.MorganKeegan&Co. ,914S.W.2d445(Tenn.1996),inwhichtheCourtsetforththestandardtobeappliedbycourtsinreviewingarbitrationdecisions.AfternotingthatTennesseehadadoptedtheUniformArbitrationAct, %   ׀governingthescopeofjudicialreviewofarbitrationawards,theCourtstatedthat [t]hestandardtobeappliedbythetrialcourtisanarrowone.Itiswellestablishedthatcourtsshouldplayonlyalimitedroleinreviewingthedecisionsofarbitrators. Id .at448.TheCourtthenaddressedtheprovisionsoftheActwhichallowvacationormodificationofanarbitrationawardundercertainspecificallyenumeratedcircumstances. See T.C.A.295313(Supp.1995)(governingvacationofanaward); &   ׀T.C.A.295314(Supp.1995)(governingmodificationorcorrectionofanaward).TheCourtconcluded:8 Underthetermsofthestatutes,atrialcourtmaynotvacateanawardsimplybecauseitdisagreeswiththeresult.[CitingT.C.A.295313(5)].8  Thelimitinglanguageofthestatutesgoverningvacationandmodificationofarbitrationawardsevidencesanintenttolimit severely thetrialcourtsauthoritytoretrytheissuesdecidedbyarbitration....8  ....8  ...Aslongasthearbitratoris,arguably,construingorapplyingthecontractandactingwithinthescopeofhisauthority,thefactthatacourtisconvincedhecommittedseriouserrordoesnotsufficetooverturnhisdecision. Arnold ,914S.W.2dat44849(emphasisinoriginal;citationsomitted). AftertheTennesseeSupremeCourtdecided Arnold ,thiscourtissueditsopinionin AdamsTVI ,acaseinvolvingthesamepartiesandthesamecollectivebargainingagreementatissueinthepresentcase.Inthatcase,asinthepresentcase,thearbitratorsetasideanemployeesterminationandinsteadimposedafourteendaydisciplinarysuspensionbasedonthearbitratorsinterpretationoftheterm justcause. AdamsTVI ,1996WL219618,at*2.Thearbitratorreasonedthat,althoughtheemployeesprovenmisconductmadeanexcellentcaseforhistermination,theconceptofjustcauserequiredthattheemployeefirstbemadeawarethataparticularbehaviororbehaviorpatternwouldorhadjeopardizedhisjob. Id .at*23. Applyingthestandardsetforthin Arnold ,in AdamsTVI thiscourtaffirmedthetrialcourtsorderupholdingthearbitrationaward.Webelievethatthefollowingreasoningsetforthin AdamsTVI isequallyapplicabletothepresentcase:8  Thecollectivebargainingagreementprovidedthatanemployeemaybedischargedforjustcause,butissilentastowhatproceduralprerequisitesattachtotherequirementthatdischargebeforjustcause....8  Asdefendantscorrectlypointout,thereisasubstantialbodyofarbitraldecisionsholdingthattheterm justcauseincludesnotonlythesubstantiveelementofappropriatefactualcircumstancesjustifyingdischarge,butalsotheproceduralrequirement,frequentlyreferredtoas industrialdueprocess,whichrequiresanemployertowarnanemployeethathisconductmayresultindischargeandgivetheemployeetheopportunitytoexplainhisbehaviorbeforeheisdisciplined. See JuliusG.Getman, LaborArbitrationandDisputeResolution ,88YALEL.J.916,921(1979).Inthiscase,althoughthearbitratoragreedwithplaintiff[AdamsTV]thatthelistedinstancesofmisconductmade anexcellentcasefortermination,plaintiffhadnotwarned[theemployee]thathisconductwouldresultindismissalorgiven[theemployee]anopportunitytodefendhimselfagainstthecharges.8  Thearbitratorwashiredbythepartiestointerpretthetermsofthecollectivebargainingagreement.Becauseplaintifffailedtoadequatelywarn[theemployee]thathisconductmayresultindismissal,thearbitratorheldthathisdischargewasnotfor justcause.Thearbitratorsholdingincorporatesnotionsofindustrialdueprocessanddoesnotexceedhispowersunderthecollectivebargainingagreement. AdamsTVI ,1996WL219618,at*4. Asin AdamsTVI ,thearbitratorinthepresentcasefoundthattheEmployeesmisconductconstitutedadisciplinableoffense.Ininterpretingthecollectivebargainingagreements justcauseprovision,however,thearbitratordeterminedthat,absent anypriordisciplinaryactionregardingthistypeoftransgression,theEmployeesoffensedidnotrisetothelevelofjustcauseaswouldjustifytermination.ImplicitinthearbitratorsrulingisthenotionthatindustrialdueprocessrequiredsometypeofwarningornoticethatthetransgressioninquestionwouldorcouldresultintheEmployeestermination.Weholdthat,inaccordancewith AdamsTVI ,thearbitratordidnotexceedhispowersininterpretingthecollectivebargainingagreementand,thus,thatthetrialcourtcorrectlydeclinedtovacatethearbitratorsaward. Insoholding,weareremindedofthefinalitythatcourtsshouldaffordthearbitrationprocess:8  Courts,...donotsittohearclaimsoffactualorlegalerrorbyanarbitratorasanappellatecourtdoesinreviewingdecisionsoflowercourts.Ifthecourtswerefreetointerveneonthesegrounds,thespeedyresolutionofgrievancesbyprivatemechanismswouldbegreatlyundermined. Arnold ,914S.W.2dat449. ThetrialcourtsorderdenyingAdamsTVsapplicationtovacatethearbitrationawardisaffirmed.CostsofthisappealaretaxedtoAdamsTV,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.` ` X _______________________________ FARMER,J.______________________________LILLARD,J.(Concurs)______________________________SUMMERS,Sp.J.(Concurs)