1The Company based its decision to discharge Mr. Ross on three reasons.  What are these three reasons?

2. In addition to the three reasons explained above, the arbitrator cited a fourth reason that was considered by the Company in deciding to discharge Mr. Ross.  What is this fourth reason?

3. What is the specific personal safety equipment item that Mr. Ross failed to utilize?

4. Did the Union take the position that Mr. Ross did should not have received any discipline for his actions on May 1, 2006?

5. Did the arbitrator agree with the Companys position that Mr. Ross engaged in several acts of misconduct that ordinarily should warrant discharge. 

6. In his award, does the arbitrator uphold the Companys decision to discharge Mr. Ross?

7.  What fact about Mr. Rosss work history does the arbitrator mention in explaining how he arrived at his decision in this case?

8.  In his award, arbitrator Richard Adelman provides the Company with the authority to require that Mr. Ross do something in the future.  What is that?

9.  Did arbitrator Adelman agree with the Companys position that the discharge of Mark Ross was for just cause?

10.  Is this a labor arbitration case or an employment arbitration case?