Automated Scheduling in Arbitration: Saving Time and Cost

Ask an experienced advocate where arbitration cases lose time and you will rarely hear "the arbitrator took too long to decide." You will hear about arbitration scheduling — weeks spent trading emails to find two consecutive days eight busy people can all protect.

Scheduling is the quietest cost driver in dispute resolution and the easiest to fix. Here is why it eats time, what a strong timetable contains, what a continuance costs, and how automated calendaring ends it.

Why Arbitration Scheduling Is the Hidden Bottleneck

Run the arithmetic on an ordinary commercial case. You must align one arbitrator, two sets of counsel, a party representative each, and three witnesses — eight calendars, often across two or three time zones, at least one with a trial schedule.

Finding a mutually open two-day block takes several rounds of email, each costing a day or two. Availability decays while you negotiate: dates open in round one are often gone by round three, and the search restarts.

The result is a delay nobody chose and nobody bills for — absorbed into the timeline, then blamed on "the process."

The Scheduling Order: The Backbone of the Case

Well-run cases fix this early, at a preliminary hearing. Institutional rules provide for one — the American Arbitration Association's Commercial Rules, for example, call for one in larger cases, where the arbitrator and parties set the framework. The same structure works on any capable platform.

The output is a scheduling order, the most useful document in the case. Every later timing dispute is measured against it.

What a Complete Procedural Timetable Contains

1. Document exchange. Requests served by one date, responses and productions by another.
2. Witness lists. Each side names fact and expert witnesses by a fixed date.
3. Expert reports. Opening reports, then rebuttals, with a meaningful gap.
4. Evidence lists. Delivered early enough for the arbitrator to read.
5. Pre-hearing briefs. Usually simultaneous, one to two weeks before the hearing.
6. Hearing dates. A firm block, not a single day that will run over.
7. Post-hearing briefing. Set at the hearing's close, while everyone is present.
8. Target award date. Counted forward from the close of the record.

A timetable missing any of these leaves a gap to argue about later.

The Real Cost of a Continuance

Here is the number most parties never calculate. Suppose a two-day hearing is pushed sixty days out, three weeks before the original date.

By then each side has finished witness preparation, drafted examination outlines, and organized the document set — twelve hours of senior time. At $450 an hour, that is $5,400 already spent, and much of it does not survive a two-month gap. Witnesses need re-preparation, outlines refreshing, the file re-absorbing. Each side realistically redoes 40% to 60% of that work.

Add a possible arbitrator cancellation fee and non-refundable travel for in-person hearings. A single continuance often costs each side several thousand dollars and adds six to ten weeks. Two can erase arbitration's cost advantage over litigation.

To see how a firm case calendar protects that advantage, visit arbitration.net or get in touch at (888) 885-5060.

How Automated Calendaring Removes the Email Round-Trip

A modern hearing scheduler replaces the negotiation. Each participant marks availability once, and the system does what email cannot:

• Finds the overlap instantly across every calendar, including the arbitrator's.
• Normalizes time zones, so a 9 a.m. Pacific session is never booked against a witness in London.
• Counts deadlines backward from the hearing date, so exchange, witness list, and brief dates populate themselves.
• Syncs to personal calendars and sends reminders, cutting missed deadlines.
• Keeps a record of who agreed to which date — useful when someone later claims otherwise.

The savings compound. Weeks of dead calendar time disappear, and downstream deadlines stop drifting.

Where Automation Does Not Help

Automation cannot fix a party that genuinely needs more time, and should not try. A schedule compressed past what the evidence requires carries its own risk: under 9 U.S.C. § 10(a)(3), an award can be vacated where an arbitrator refused to hear material evidence. Speed helps only when both sides get a fair chance to be heard.

How Arbitration.net Can Help

Our platform builds the case calendar into the case itself. Availability is collected once, hearing blocks are locked in early, and every downstream deadline is tracked automatically with real-time alerts. That is much of why cases resolve in weeks, not the eighteen to twenty-four months typical of litigation. Learn more at arbitration.net or connect with our team at (888) 885-5060.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who sets the arbitration schedule?

The arbitrator does, after hearing from both sides at a preliminary hearing. Parties can suggest dates and often agree on most of the timetable, but the arbitrator sets deadlines and resolves timing disputes.

Can an arbitration hearing date be changed?

Yes, though it is harder than in court. A party must show good cause, and the arbitrator weighs it against the prejudice to the other side. Expect an adjournment fee and a date well out from the original.

How far in advance should hearing dates be set?

Reserve them at the preliminary hearing, typically three to six months ahead. Dates set early are far more likely to hold, because everyone protects them before competing commitments appear.

What happens if the other side keeps missing deadlines?

Raise it with the arbitrator promptly and in writing. Arbitrators can shorten time, bar late evidence, draw adverse inferences, or move toward a default award. To see how automated tracking captures missed deadlines, visit arbitration.net or dial (888) 885-5060.

This article is for educational purposes and is not legal advice. Cost figures are illustrative examples, not quotes. For guidance specific to your situation, consult a qualified attorney or contact Arbitration.net.