In re the Arbitration between City of Auburn & Law Enforcement Officers Union, Council 82

**What Happened** The Law Enforcement Officers Union filed a grievance against the City of Auburn over the reassignment of one of their union members. The city didn't want to resolve this dispute through arbitration (a process where a neutral third party makes a binding decision). Instead, the city went to court asking a judge to stop the arbitration process from moving forward. **What the Court Decided** The appellate court sided with the union. The court reversed the lower court's decision that had temporarily stopped the arbitration and ordered that the dispute must go to arbitration. The court found that the collective bargaining agreement between the city and union clearly required this type of workplace dispute to be resolved through arbitration rather than in court. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling reinforces workers' rights to use arbitration processes spelled out in their union contracts. When unions negotiate collective bargaining agreements that include arbitration procedures, employers cannot simply avoid those processes by going to court first. Workers can rely on these agreed-upon dispute resolution methods to address workplace issues like reassignments, discipline, or other contract violations without having to fight lengthy court battles.