Compulsory Arbitration

In recent years, employers have begun to require, as a condition of employment, that their non-union employees agree to arbitrate rather than litigate any employment disputes, including claims of discrimination. As the number of employers considering such a requirement soars, so does the fear that compulsory arbitration may eviscerate the statutory rights of employees. The author of this volume explains what he regards as the clear advantages of arbitration: much faster and less expensive than litigation, arbitration provides a forum for the many employees who are shut out of the current litigative system by the cost and by the backlog of cases. Alternatively, employers could use arbitration abusively. Bales views the current situation as an ongoing experiment. As long as the courts continue to enforce agreements which are fundamentally fair to employees, the experiment will continue. After tracing the history of employment arbitration in the non-union sector, Bales explains how employment arbitration has actually worked in the securities industry and at Brown & Root, a company with a comprehensive dispute resolution process.
He concludes by summarizing the advantages, disadvantages and policy implications of adopting arbitration as the pre-eminent method of resolving disputes in the American workforce.