Abstract

 


 



Mandatory Arbitration as an Employer's Contractual Prerogative: The Efficiency Challenge to Equal Employment


Steven Plass


St. Thomas University - School of Law

October 1, 2011

Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2011
St. Thomas University School of Law Research Paper No. 3

Abstract:     
The Supreme Court’s classification of mandatory employee arbitration policies as contracts has severely impeded the vindication of employee antidiscrimination rights in derogation of the statutory scheme. The Court has in effect decided that rights expressly granted to employees do not operate as a restraint on employers' contractual liberty if employees can vindicate those rights in arbitration using alternative processes. After reviewing the historical conditions that led to the enactment of various antidiscrimination statutes, the article weighs a history of employer abuses against potential social conditions supporting enforcement (e.g., deters fraudulent suits). The article concludes that these agreements should only be enforced when they are voluntary, bargained-for, and supported by consideration to the employee.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 43

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: March 2, 2012  

Suggested Citation

Plass, Steven, Mandatory Arbitration as an Employer's Contractual Prerogative: The Efficiency Challenge to Equal Employment (October 1, 2011). Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2011; St. Thomas University School of Law Research Paper No. 3. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2012927

Contact Information

Steven Plass (Contact Author)
St. Thomas University - School of Law ( email )
16401 N.W. 37th Ave.
Miami, FL 33054
United States
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 349
Downloads: 28

© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.344 seconds