This week you learned that litigation is not the only method for resolving employment disputes in the United States. Another method is alternative dispute resolution (ADR). One type of ADR is arbitration and it is growing in popularity with businesses which are frequently placing mandatory arbitration clauses in employment contracts. In other words, it is a condition of your employment that you agree to arbitrate your dispute with your employer rather than filing a lawsuit in the court system. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that mandatory arbitration clauses in employment contracts are constitutional. No problem you respond, the EEOC will handle my case and they are not bound by my employment contract or the mandatory arbitration clause and, therefore, can take my case to trial on my behalf. Recall that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is the agency you must file with initially when you have a claim of employment discrimination. If conciliation is not successful the EEOC can decide whether or not to pursue the claim in the court system. They usually only do so in a small percentage of cases. Instead, they give you a Right to Sue letter so that YOU can file a lawsuit in court. However, a Right to Sue Letter has no value when you have relinquished your right to a jury trial in your employment contract. Catch-22

1. Does it disturb you that as an employee you must give up your constitutional right to a jury trial if you want the job?

2. What are some other negatives of mandatory arbitration in employment contracts from the perspective of the employee?

3. Now think of it in terms of an employer. Why is arbitration beneficial for employers, and, if you were an employer would you require mandatory arbitration in your employment contracts?