Effect of Arbitration vs Court Action Intervention - EEOC

morrisg · September 2004

I know the 2002 Supreme Court greatly weakened arbitration clause where an employee files with the EEOC and the EEOC elects to sue (which it does rarely).

However, what if the employer has an arbitration clause, and an employee charges under a matter protected by title VII, and the EEOC finds a right to sue and the employee goes to court, using his/her own attorney. Does the court have to defer to the arbitration provision of the employer prior to going to court?

Al Vreeland · September 2004

The Waffle House case only held that an arbitration clause could not be used to prevent the EEOC itself from pursuing a court action.

The courts still enforce properly drafted arbitration agreements which require employees to arbitrate instead of filing lawsuits. The key is that the arbiration agreemenent be drafted within the guidelines set out by the courts, e.g., the agreement has to be specific about what types of claims must be arbitrated, the employee must be able to recover the same remedies he could in court, and the arbitration program cannot make arbitration too difficult or expensive to invoke.

Al Vreeland
Editor, Alabama Employment Law Letter
Lehr Middlebrooks Price & Vreeland, P.C.

catty · February 2005

I would say look at the Circuit City lawsuits. I believe the answer to be yes, depending, on whether or not the arbitration agreement can be upheld. Morrison v. Circuit City 317 F3d 646 says that "statutory rights, such as Title VII, may be subject to mandatory arbitration only if the arbitral forum permits the effective vindication of those rights."

[email]goingm@hillsboroughcounty.org[/email]

Effect of Arbitration vs Court Action Intervention - EEOC

Comments