Final answer:
The statement is true, both med-arb and final-offer total package arbitration require the arbitrator to choose between the proposals submitted by the parties, rather than creating a new contract.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement "Med-arb and final-offer total package arbitration are similar in that the arbitrator does not make up his own contract but picks one of those that has been negotiated" is true.
In both med-arb (a hybrid of mediation and arbitration) and final-offer total package arbitration (also known as baseball arbitration), the dispute resolution process occurs when parties cannot reach an agreement through negotiation or mediation. The arbitrator in these arbitration types must choose between the proposals submitted by the disputing parties, rather than crafting a new agreement.
Therefore, both methods rely on the premise that one of the proposed settlement offers will become the binding resolution, and that the presence of a neutral third party will encourage the submission of more reasonable and fair offers from the outset.
Med-arb combines mediation and arbitration, where the parties attempt to reach a settlement through mediation, but if unsuccessful, the arbitrator can make a binding decision based on predetermined contracts.
Final-offer total package arbitration involves each party submitting a final offer and the arbitrator selecting one of the offers. The selected offer becomes the binding contract, avoiding lengthy negotiations.