|
||||
|
||||
Employment Arbitration and Litigation: An Empirical ComparisonTheodore EisenbergCornell University - Law School Elizabeth T. HillNew York University School of Law March 5, 2003 NYU Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 65; Cornell Law School Working Paper Abstract: Policy debate rages over mandatory employment arbitration. Using a unique database of American Arbitration Association employment dispute awards, this article compares court-tried employment cases and arbitrated employment claims. It compares adjudicated and arbitrated outcomes in the class of disputes most often the subject of arbitration, non-civil rights employment claims. For higher paid employees, we find little evidence that arbitrated outcomes materially differ from trial outcomes. Employee win rates in both forums exceed 55% and median awards in both forums exceed $65,000. We find no statistically significant differences between arbitration and litigation in employee win rates or in median or mean award levels. These results are consistent with the belief that lower pay employees lack systematic, realistic access to court. We also report evidence that arbitrated disputes conclude more quickly than litigated disputes.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 28 Keywords: arbitration, trials, litigation, juries JEL Classification: J52, K12, K31, K41 working papers seriesDate posted: May 26, 2003Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.407 seconds