ADR, the NLRB and non-union workers

Article Abstract:

The NLRB began to defer its investigative procedures to outside arbitration after 1955. The NLRB stipulated in the Spielberg Manufacturing Co. case in that year that arbitration should be fair and regular, all parties should agree to arbitration and arbitration should not contravene the National Labor Relations Act. Deference expanded in subsequent years although the NLRB recognizes the different employee power structures in union and non-union environments.

---

EEOC rejects mandatory binding employment arbitration

Article Abstract:

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a statement on July 10, 1997, rejecting mandatory binding employment arbitration. The EEOC stated employees should retain the right to the judicial process and employers create an unfair advantage for themselves when mandatory binding employment arbitration is a condition of employment. The EEOC recognized the benefits of arbitration but does not insist on its mandatory use.

Cover Story

---

The employee's perspective: mandatory binding arbitration constitutes little more than a waiver of a worker's rights

Article Abstract:

Employees who agree to mandatory binding arbitration as a condition of employment effectively waive their rights as workers. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 guaranteed a worker's right to a jury trial. Mandatory binding arbitration negates this right. Other rights regarding discovery processes, remedies, time limits and representation may be reduced or eliminated depending on the employment contract.

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Superannuation - protection for investors. The role of the employment contract in superannuation: an analysis focusing on surplus repatriation powers conferred on employers
• Abstracts: A learned profession: law students need grounding in values, responsibilities of the law. The law lists
• Abstracts: Menu for success. Be it ever so unusual ... finding odd spaces can ease the minds of lawyers and their clients
• Abstracts: Deregulatory takings and breach of the regulatory contract: a comment. The global Fifth Amendment? NAFTA's investment protections and the misguided quest for an international "regulatory takings" doctrine
• Abstracts: Two conceptions of emotion in criminal law. The secret ambition of deterrence. Is Chevron relevant to federal criminal law?

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.