{UAH} Questions About Arbitration

1. who would pay for arbitration? Arbitrators charge as much as normal attorneys in their area. UNAA came out of Dallas with less than $700...that would give us about an hour or two of arbitration in California.  We might get more in rural States (may be 4 hrs?).

2. do we use convention money or membership fees?  e.g all our membership money was used to cover the Dallas convention loss. 

3. what disputes would go to arbitration? e.g when we don't like BoT decisions or when we don't like Executive decisions or when we don't like Council decisions or when we don't like EC decisions?

4. which parties would go to arbitration? e.g our leaders only? or any aggrieved member?

5. when would arbitration end? do we go whenever we don't like a decision (BoT, Executive, Council, EC, Local Organizing Committee, etc)..i.e do we outsource not only the BoT's role, but Executive and Council roles too? After all, I can see a situation when one disagrees with an Executive/Council decision, then goes to the BoT, the BoT makes a decision and then the loser asking for arbitration. 

Anytime a dispute is taken to the BoT, there will be two sides. As I have said before, there are NO draws when you take a dispute to a tribunal...one side is bound to lose. Should the losing sides keep going to arbitrators? 

Who would determine when we should not go to arbitration?  Would the decision to curb arbitration be taken to an arbitrator?

I know that Mr Gaburungyi misled us yesterday that decisions of an arbitrator have the force of law...but the truth is that arbitrators have NO power to make law.  The parties can agree that the arbitration will be binding on them...otherwise, arbitration decisions are appeallable to court. 

thanks