Is Arbitration Right For Your Company?

Alvarez, Gregory T.; Arencibia, Nancy J.
December 2002
Financial Executive;Dec2002, Vol. 18 Issue 9, p46
Academic Journal
The article focuses on arbitration as an alternative to the court system for resolving employment discrimination disputes in the United States. Two Supreme Court decisions related to compulsory arbitration agreements and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) are discussed: Circuit City v. Adams which supported the enforceability of agreements; and EEOC v. Waffle House Inc. which diminished their enforceability. The passage of the Federal Arbitration Act in 1925 and the Martingdale v. Sandvik Inc. decision in New Jersey are mentioned. An explanation of the arbitration process and the benefits and disadvantages of arbitration are also discussed. INSET: PROS AND CONS OF ARBITRATION.


Related Articles

  • EEOC Will Seek Goals and Timetables.  // Labor Law Journal;Sep86, Vol. 37 Issue 9, p679 

    The article reports that the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has instructed its district directors to use the standards set forth in three recent Supreme Court decisions regarding the use of goals and timetables as remedies for discrimination in employment. Full remedies should also...

  • 1866 and 1964 Laws Are Independent.  // Labor Law Journal;Sep75, Vol. 26 Issue 9, p607 

    The article reports that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that filing a job discrimination complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not stop the time period for filing a similar action under the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The Court...

  • Reply Brief.  // Supreme Court Debates;Mar2005, Vol. 8 Issue 3, p86 

    The article reports that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's disparate impact regulations properly track U.S. Supreme Court's judgment on disparate impact. The claims are cognizable under the parallel provisions of Title VII. The two statutes share the same text and a common purpose,...

  • LABOR ATTORNEY'S FEES-- TITLE VII CLAIM--42 U.S.C. §2000eo(k).  // Arbitration Journal;Jun82, Vol. 37 Issue 2, p62 

    The article presents information about a court case in the U.S., in which the Supreme Court held that because the filing of a Title VII action prompted the plaintiff's union to pursue her discrimination claim through arbitration, a favorable award in arbitration may be deemed equivalent to...

  • A Management Perspective: Mandatory Arbitration Agreements Are an Effective Alternative to Employment Litigation. Oppenheimer, Martin J.; Johnstone, Cameron // Dispute Resolution Journal;Fall97, Vol. 52 Issue 4, p19 

    The article discusses the reason mandatory arbitration is favored by employers as a dispute resolution technique. In accordance with its long-standing opposition to the use of mandatory arbitration in employment disputes, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently issued a...

  • EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. WAFFLE HOUSE, INC.: certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fourth circuit .  // Supreme Court Cases: The Twenty-first Century (2000 - Present);2009, p1 

    This article presents information on U.S. Supreme Court case Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Waffle House Inc., case number 99-1823, argued on October 10, 2001 and decided on January 15, 2002. The Fourth Circuit concluded that the arbitration agreement between Eric Baker and the...

  • labor law. Zachary, Mary Kathryn // Supervision;Feb2007, Vol. 68 Issue 2, p22 

    The article presents information on the case U.S. Equality Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) versus Dial Corp. which challenged the provisions of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The law indicates that employers can have job requirements related to job duties, including a...

  • The New Law of Affirmative Action. Brooks, Roy L. // Labor Law Journal;Oct89, Vol. 40 Issue 10, p611 

    The article discusses affirmative action law and the major affirmative action cases in the U.S. Supreme Court. The Equal Employment Opportunity defines affirmative action as actions appropriate to overcome the effects of past or present practices, policies, or other barriers to equal employment...

  • High Court May Define 'Adverse' Job Action. Trotter, Andrew // Education Week;12/14/2005, Vol. 25 Issue 15, p22 

    The article focuses on a ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in a case that could clarify what constitutes an "adverse employment action" in federal employment-discrimination law. The appeal, Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Sheila White, involves a woman whose employer changed her job...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics