The Trend: Mandatory Arbitration
As an employee, you might be aware of the “arbitration agreement” that you signed with your employer upon your hiring. In the employment context, an arbitration agreement can be a more efficient way to privately settle legal disputes that may have arisen at some point since the time that you were hired than litigation is. Arbitration agreements are facing backlash however, as critics claim that employers insisting on mandatory arbitration do not have incentives to obey labor laws.
Georgia Physician Employment Lawyers
Critics of arbitration agreements state that these provisions are a way for employers to forcibly lure an employee into waiving their legal rights. Criticism of mandatory arbitration continues to be discussed and scrutinized by courts and legislators. Some arbitration clauses have been held unenforceable by courts. In Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, an arbitration clause barred employees from suing their employers. In that case, the Court enforced the company’s mandatory arbitration clause, favoring corporations and employers, after employees banded together to sue their employers for damages because they were underpaid. Since the ruling, more questions have arisen regarding the enforceability of mandatory arbitration agreements. More cases have come forth of employees having disputes that fall under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Now, since the Epic Systems ruling, it is more difficult for employees to contest against discrimination.