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

Kennedys—Samson Spanier

Kennedys—Samson Spanier

Commercial disputes practice bolstered by partner hire

Bird & Bird—Emma Radcliffe

Bird & Bird—Emma Radcliffe

London competition team expands with collective actions specialist hire

Hill Dickinson—Chris Williams

Hill Dickinson—Chris Williams

Commercial dispute resolution team in London welcomes partner

NEWS
Judging is ‘more intellectually demanding than any other role in public life’—and far messier than outsiders imagine. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC reflects on decades spent wrestling with unclear legislation, fragile precedent and human fallibility
The long-predicted death of the billable hour may finally be here—and this time, it’s armed with a scythe. In a sweeping critique of time-based billing, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, argues in this week's NLJ that artificial intelligence has made hourly charging ‘intellectually, commercially and ethically indefensible’
From fake authorities to rent reform, the civil courts have had a busy start to 2026. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold surveys a procedural landscape where guidance, discretion and discipline are all under strain
Fact-finding hearings remain a fault line in private family law. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Rylatt and Robyn Laye of Anthony Gold Solicitors analyse recent appeals exposing the dangers of rushed or fragmented findings
As the Winter Olympics open in Milan and Cortina, legal disputes are once again being resolved almost as fast as the athletes compete. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Ian Blackshaw of Valloni Attorneys examines the Court of Arbitration for Sport’s (CAS's) ad hoc divisions, which can decide cases within 24 hours
back-to-top-scroll