Arbitration of Employment Disputes under Employment Law
Arbitration of Employment Disputes
What is Arbitration in Employment Law?
Arbitration is an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) method where employment-related disputes between employers and employees (or unions) are resolved outside the courts by an impartial third party called an arbitrator.
In arbitration, both parties agree to submit their dispute to the arbitrator, whose decision is usually binding and final.
Why Arbitration in Employment Disputes?
Speed and Efficiency: Courts may take years to resolve disputes, whereas arbitration is faster.
Confidentiality: Arbitration proceedings are private, protecting sensitive employment information.
Expertise: Arbitrators often specialize in employment law and workplace issues.
Flexibility: Procedures can be tailored to the nature of the dispute.
Cost-effective: Less expensive compared to prolonged litigation.
Types of Employment Disputes Suited for Arbitration
Wrongful dismissal or termination
Discrimination and harassment claims
Wage and hour disputes
Breach of employment contract
Collective bargaining agreement disputes
Arbitration Process
Agreement to Arbitrate: Usually in the employment contract or collective bargaining agreement.
Initiation: One party files a request for arbitration.
Selection of Arbitrator: Parties may agree on an arbitrator or an arbitral institution appoints one.
Hearing: Both sides present evidence and arguments.
Award: Arbitrator issues a decision that is binding on both parties.
Enforcement: The award can be enforced by courts if necessary.
Advantages and Challenges
Advantages:
Faster resolution
Expert decision-making
Less formal and more flexible
Preserves ongoing employment relationships by avoiding adversarial litigation
Challenges:
Limited right to appeal
Possible power imbalance if arbitration is mandatory in employment contracts
Perception of bias if employer controls the arbitration process
Important Case Law Principles on Arbitration in Employment Disputes
1. Union of Employers vs. Employees Association (Hypothetical Case) – Validity of Arbitration Clause
Facts: Employees challenged the arbitration clause in their contracts claiming it waived their right to access courts.
Holding: The court held that arbitration agreements are valid and enforceable if entered into voluntarily and clearly.
Principle: Arbitration clauses, when fair and agreed upon, are a legitimate means to resolve disputes.
Significance: Reinforces the enforceability of arbitration agreements in employment contracts.
2. Smith vs. Corporation XYZ (Hypothetical Case) – Arbitrator’s Authority
Facts: Dispute over whether the arbitrator could decide on the issue of dismissal.
Holding: The court upheld the arbitrator’s authority to decide all matters expressly or impliedly submitted to arbitration.
Principle: Arbitrators have broad authority to resolve disputes if parties agree.
Significance: Emphasizes that courts respect the arbitrator’s jurisdiction as agreed by parties.
3. Jones vs. Manufacturing Co. (Hypothetical Case) – Enforcement of Arbitration Award
Facts: Employee refused to comply with the arbitration award ordering reinstatement.
Holding: Court ordered enforcement of the arbitration award as final and binding.
Principle: Arbitration awards are enforceable like court judgments unless there are exceptional circumstances (fraud, bias, procedural unfairness).
Significance: Demonstrates that arbitration awards carry strong legal weight.
Summary
Arbitration provides an effective, speedy, and expert forum for resolving employment disputes.
It is based on the parties’ agreement to submit disputes to arbitration.
Courts generally uphold arbitration agreements and awards, ensuring enforceability.
Arbitration can help preserve employment relationships and reduce costs but may limit judicial oversight.
Fairness and voluntariness in arbitration agreements are key to their validity.
RELATED Blog
0 comments