Ralph’s Grocery Co.
Labor Arbitration
108 Lab. Arb. Rep. 718 (1997)

- Written by Miller Jozwiak, JD
Facts
An employee of Ralph’s Grocery Company (Ralph’s) (defendant) was terminated. The employee successfully grieved his termination as being without just cause. An arbitrator ordered that the employee “should be reinstated with full back pay and benefits.” Between the termination and arbitration award, there were three periods: (1) between November 1995 and May 1996, the employee collected unemployment while searching for a job; (2) between June 1996 and December 1996, the employee attended trainings to receive an extension of unemployment benefits but did not search for a job (additionally, he did not search for a job between May and June because he was not receiving unemployment benefits); and (3) between December 1996 and January 1997, the employee looked for work. Subsequently, the union (plaintiff) and Ralph’s could not agree what amount, if any, the employee was due as back pay. The union argued that the employee was entitled to full back pay and benefits with no reduction for earnings or unemployment compensation. The union also sought $1,000 as punitive damages/interest on the original award. Ralph’s responded that the full amount was not due because the employee failed to take reasonable steps to mitigate his losses. Ralph’s also argued that it should not be responsible for anything beyond back pay and that any back pay should be reduced by the employee’s unemployment benefits. The union responded that the employee took sufficient steps to search for other employment after the initial termination.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Prayzich, Arbitrator)
What to do next…
Here's why 824,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.