US arbitration rule adds reasons, review and fee safeguards

A final rule effective today

The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service published a final arbitration-services rule effective on 29 October 2026. It confirms a limited inquiry into whether providing a panel or appointment would conflict with law, a court order or the agency’s authority. It adds procedural protections to the interim arrangements that began in August, rather than making FMCS the tribunal deciding every grievance. Official source.

An objection is not automatically a legal barrier

Under the rule, a party’s assertion that a grievance lacks merit, is late or is not arbitrable under the agreement does not by itself justify withholding services. The final regulatory text also distinguishes unwillingness to participate from a genuine legal obstacle. Parties have a reasonable opportunity to respond to information submitted in the threshold inquiry.

Written reasons and reconsideration

If services are declined or a request is held in abeyance, the agency must give written notice and reasons. A held request keeps its original receipt date and can be reconsidered on relevant additional information, with periodic review. A payer may request a refund or credit where services are declined or held. These procedural rights do not guarantee an eventual appointment.

Build the request around the actual obstacle

Retain the collective bargaining agreement, request receipt, any court order, the agency’s reasons and the parties’ submissions. Identify whether the problem concerns FMCS’s lawful ability to provide a service or the merits of the underlying dispute. That distinction helps avoid spending a response on an issue the agency’s threshold inquiry is not designed to decide.

Hypothetical example

An employer refuses to rank proposed arbitrators because it considers a grievance weak. That objection alone is not the same as a court order preventing an appointment. Conversely, if an actual order is relevant, supplying it with a clear explanation may be necessary. Neither scenario permits a party simply to ignore the applicable selection process.

Watch the selection deadline separately

Where the stated ranked-preference procedure applies, the rule provides a 14-day period for the other party after notification; non-response can allow the first party’s choice to prevail, subject to the agency’s legal-authority inquiry. Keep contractual and other procedural deadlines under review. This federal labour-arbitration rule does not rewrite every private commercial arbitration agreement or a Georgian dispute procedure.

Legal check date

Sources and law checked on 29 October 2026. Later developments are not reflected automatically. Application of the rules depends on the individual facts.