Synopsis By: Lurie - Proceeding Author: William M. Earnest, Deborah R. Hensler, Norman J. Slawsky

Prof. Hensler sets forth social psychologists’ views of how people assess procedural fairness or justice, and the implications of those perceptions to arbitration. She concludes that those persons who are required to arbitrate will assess fairness on the basis of procedural features, rather than outcome, and that a perception of procedural fairness depends upon 1) one’s involvement in the process; 2) belief that the arbitrator was unbiased, fairly considered the evidence, and treated the parties equally; and 3) that he/she was treated in a dignified fashion. The union and employer perspectives are then given, the former placing a greater emphasis on the practical factors of discovery, outcome and remedy; the latter on the need for the parties to adhere to their contractual grievance process including, especially, full disclosure, and for the arbitrator to fully consider the evidence and address all arguments.