{"issue_text":"Whether the arbitrator acted ultra vires his mandate by conducting a salary review instead of setting a COLA based on the inflation figure","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"The arbitrator awarded 10% instead of using 4.9% inflation figure"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the arbitrator's award of 10% increase had factual and legal basis","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Arbitrator considered multiple factors including PDL, sector growth, ability to pay"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The appellant appealed against an arbitration award that interpreted clause 6 of the July 2010 to December 2011 Collective Bargaining Agreement as using year-on-year inflation figures as a starting point for negotiating salary increases, and awarded a 10% salary increase for 2012. The appellant argued the arbitrator exceeded his mandate by conducting a salary review instead of setting a COLA based on the 4.9% inflation figure.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases