Vanderbilt Law Review Volume 74 Issue 4 May 2021 Article 4 5-2021 Police Arbitration Stephen Rushin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr Part of the Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons Recommended Citation Stephen Rushin, Police Arbitration, 74 Vanderbilt Law Review 1023 (2021) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol74/iss4/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. Police Arbitration Stephen Rushin* Before punishing an officer for professional misconduct, police departments often provide the officer with an opportunity to file an appeal. In many police departments, this appeals process culminates in a hearing before an arbitrator. While numerous media reports have suggested that arbitrators regularly overturn or reduce discipline, little legal research has comprehensively examined the outcomes of police disciplinary appeals across the United States. In order to better understand the use of arbitration in police disciplinary appeals and build on prior research, this Article draws on a dataset of 624 arbitration awards issued between 2006 and 2020 from a diverse range of law enforcement agencies. It finds that arbitrators on appeal reduced or overturned police officer discipline in 52% of these cases. In 46% of cases involving termination, arbitrators ordered police departments to rehire previously terminated officers. On average, arbitrators reduced the length of officer suspensions by approximately 49%. Arbitrators gave several common justifications for reductions in officer discipline.