National Union of Hospital and Health Care Employees District No. 1199 v. Board of Regents of the University of New Mexico

The National Union of Hospital and Health Care Employees District No. 1199 (the union) (defendant) and the Board of Regents of the University of New Mexico (the hospital) (plaintiff) were engaged in collective-bargaining negotiations pursuant to New Mexico’s Public Employee Bargaining Act (PEBA). A resolution called the University of New Mexico Labor Management Relations Resolution (LMRR) also governed collective bargaining for the university. The union made its last offer during mediation, and the hospital responded with its last, best, and final offer. The mediation process ended without the parties reaching an agreement. Both PEBA and the LMRR required arbitration following 30 days of an impasse. They both required an arbitrator to render a final, binding decision within 30 days of the beginning of arbitration. PEBA and the LMRR mandated that the arbitrator’s decision be limited to a selection between the two parties’ final offers. An arbitration hearing took place on December 12, 2007. At the hearing, the arbitrator conferred with the parties off the record and permitted the union to modify its offer several times. The hospital objected to this throughout the hearing. Before concluding the hearing on December 12, the arbitrator told the parties he would allow them to submit another modified offer. The arbitrator also met with both parties’ counsels to share his opinions on the modified offers and how he would view certain modifications to the offers. The arbitrator then directed the parties to simultaneously submit modified offers to him on January 4. The arbitrator, believing the LMRR allowed him to choose between the last, best offers before him at the time of his final decision, ultimately accepted the union’s January 4 offer. The hospital challenged the arbitrator’s final decision in district court, arguing that the arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to enter the decision and either engaged in misconduct or exceeded his authority. The district court vacated the arbitrator’s ruling, and the union appealed.