Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons^™

Mandatory Arbitration Stymies Progress Towards Justice In Employment Law: Where To, #Metoo?, Jean R. Sternlight

Scholarly Works

Today our employment law provides workers with far more protection than once existed with respect to hiring, firing, salary, and workplace conditions. Despite these gains, continued progress towards justice is currently in jeopardy due to companies’ imposition of mandatory arbitration on their employees. By denying their employees access to court, companies are causing employment law to stultify. This impacts all employees, but particularly harms the most vulnerable and oppressed members of our society for whom legal evolution is most important. If companies can continue to use mandatory arbitration to eradicate access to court, where judges are potentially influenced by social …

Mika V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 71 (Sep. 24, 2015), Kory Koerperich

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The court denied extraordinary writ relief from the district court’s decision to compel arbitration between Petitioners and their employer based on a long-form arbitration agreement signed only by the Petitioners, and federal law favoring arbitration agreements.

Disarming Employees: How American Employers Are Using Mandatory Arbitration To Deprive Workers Of Legal Protection, Jean R. Sternlight

Scholarly Works

Employers’ imposition of mandatory arbitration constricts employees’ access to justice. The twenty percent of the American workforce covered by mandatory arbitration clauses file just 2,000 arbitration claims annually, a minuscule number even compared to the small number of employees who litigate claims individually or as part of a class action. Exploring how mandatory arbitration prevents employees from enforcing their rights the Article shows employees covered by mandatory arbitration clauses (1) win far less frequently and far less money than employees who litigate; (2) have a harder time obtaining legal representation; (3) are often precluded from participating in class, collective or …

Forced Arbitration Undermines Enforcement Of Federal Laws By Suppressing Consumers' And Employees' Ability To Bring Claims, Jean R. Sternlight

Congressional Testimony

Testimony of Professor Jean R. Sternlight to the Senate Judiciary Committee, arguing for the passage of the Arbitration Fairness Act of 2013.

What's Left To Remedy Wage Theft? How Arbitration Mandates That Bar Class Actions Impact Low-Wage Workers, Nantiya Ruan

Scholarly Works

For low-wage workers who suffer “wage theft” – employers illegally withholding portions of their wages – the dollars missing from their paychecks violate existing law and significantly impact the well-being of individuals, families, and communities. Despite this dire societal problem, the Supreme Court continues “closing the courtroom doors” in two ways: allowing employers to force workers out of court and into private arbitration; and prohibiting aggregate claims. Such trends, in combination, silence wage theft, leaving many claims unheard while unscrupulous employers gain direct advantage.

This Article explains how various procedural rulings have combined to prevent meaningful redress for wage theft. …

Conference Bibliography: Democracy And The Workplace, Wiener-Rogers Law Library, University Of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School Of Law

Lectures & Talks

A selected bibliography was prepared in connection with the Saltman Center Labor Law Symposium 2012: Democracy and the Workplace held at the William S. Boyd School of Law, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, on February 23-25, 2012.

In Search Of The Best Procedure For Enforcing Employment Discrimination Laws: A Comparative Analysis, Jean R. Sternlight

Scholarly Works

As our world effectively shrinks, many countries are beginning to reach a striking substantive consensus regarding the prohibition of employment discrimination. Yet, and in sharp contrast, nothing approaching consensus has yet emerged regarding the best procedural method with which to resolve individual claims of employment discrimination. Instead, while countries have struggled, individually, to devise processes that meet a variety of needs, none seems to be satisfied with its efforts. Litigation is slow, costly, and impersonal. Informal processes such as conciliation, mediation, arbitration, or administrative processes aim to be faster and cheaper, but may not result in adequate enforcement of discrimination …

Compelling Arbitration Of Claims Under The Civil Rights Act Of 1866: What Congress Could Not Have Intended, Jean R. Sternlight

Scholarly Works

The Civil Rights Act of 1866 was a very special statute, designed at minimum to eliminate all "badges and incidents of slavery" and to ensure that the freed slaves would be provided with civil rights equal to those of white persons. Its enforcement depends on the availability of a neutral public system of justice. Private arbitration cannot assure these characteristics. Thus, courts should not enforce agreements to arbitrate future disputes that may arise under this statute. This Article, however, does not argue that arbitration of claims under the Civil Rights Act of 1866 should be prohibited altogether. Disputants who mutually …