header-logo header-logo

Out of court: forced arbitration

29 November 2018 / Hannah Carroll
Issue: 7819 / Categories: Features , Profession , Employment , ADR
printer mail-detail

​Hannah Carroll considers the use of exclusive arbitration agreements in workplace disputes

  • Forced arbitration clauses.
  • Whether or not such agreements should be prevented in respect of some or all types of dispute.

Earlier this month an estimated 1,500 Google employees walked out of their offices in a collective protest sparked by the company’s alleged mishandling of sexual misconduct claims. One of the key issues on which protesters focused was the use of ‘forced arbitration’ in harassment and discrimination cases. Forced Arbitration refers to the practice of businesses entering into agreements with their workers which prevent the initiation of court proceedings in respect of certain workplace disputes.

It is often said that the foundation of arbitration as a dispute resolution procedure is the notion of respect for individual autonomy in resolving disputes. In general, parties are free to agree that any disputes that arise between them are resolved finally before an independent arbitral tribunal. Part 1 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) requires that an arbitration agreement is evidenced in writing

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll