Data Analysis

How many
A professional association was preparing to arbitrate a case centring on staffing levels. Their objectives at arbitration were to demonstrate that existing levels were insufficient to satisfy the recommendations of several inquiries, to establish an appropriate staffing level and put a feasible plan in place to remedy the situation.

Case Lab developed a computer model that could track the extent to which staffing levels met several benchmarks over an extended period of time. This model was then used in order to estimate what levels would ideally need to be. The results were sufficiently persuasive to renew negotiations. To assist in these, the analysis program was adapted to test what-if scenarios and model creative solutions to the dispute. This served as a map that both sides could work with, and enabled negotiators to quickly come to an agreement that achieved their objectives while avoiding the time and expense of a protracted arbitration.

How much
A union was required to renegotiate parts of its collective agreement due to a CCAA restructuring. The scope and complexity of the contract was such that many non-wage concessions could be made in order to reduce direct labour costs. Several of the concessions, such as productivity improvements proposed by the union, had the potential to significantly reduce costs over time. However, the unwillingness of the company to assign a reasonable value to these concessions led to negotiations reaching several impasses.

Case Lab worked with the union to develop a model for estimating the value of contract changes given different proposals, assumptions, market forecasts, financial data and operational figures. The model was designed to be simple and transparent so that the parties could negotiate how to calculate the value of proposals rather than argue the validity of each other’s estimates. With this design philosophy it was possible to both support the union’s valuations and demonstrate that the company’s lacked foundation. More importantly, the model enabled the parties to collaborate effectively to arrive at a solution that was acceptable to all and achieve greater savings than had been mandated.

How badly
A union arbitrating a case centring on compromised advancement opportunities was informed by the arbitration panel that its decision would attempt to ameliorate the harm suffered over a period of several years. Since this was favourable to the union, there was a strong likelihood that the respondent would have the award judicially reviewed. As there were no estimates of the economic damages and no generally accepted model for determining them, counsel was concerned the award could be characterized as arbitrary and therefore difficult to defend.

Case Lab worked with counsel to compile all the records from the relevant period and develop a method for analyzing them. Of the several possible methods considered, we recommended a relatively simple one that was easily explained and demonstrated. While it wasn’t the most powerful or detailed choice available, the simplicity of the methodology made the reasonableness of the damage claim transparent. Furthermore, the simpler method enabled the panel to quantify the extent to which any award would ameliorate the damages. Having submitted the estimate of damages and the details of the model, Case Lab then worked with the arbitration panel in the final stages of their deliberations to test the impacts of options they were contemplating. The result was a highly favourable award that withstood several appeals.