"I Didn't Agree to Arbitrate That!"-How Courts Determine if Employees' Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Claims Fall Within the Scope of Broad Mandatory Arbitration Clauses

Authors

Eric Koplowitz, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

Abstract

Throughout the last few decades, mandatory arbitration clauses have become more prevalent in employment contracts. Mandatory arbitration clauses provide employers with a cheaper and less formal method to resolve disputes with their employees once they occur. Employers who want most or all of their employees' claims subjected to mandatory arbitration will use broad language in the arbitration clauses. Despite the use of broad and seemingly all-encompassing language in broad mandatory arbitration clauses, some employees' claims can escape their reach and proceed to court. This Note will look at how courts determine if employees' sexual assault and sexual harassment claims against their employers are within the scope of broad mandatory arbitration clauses.

Disciplines

Civil Rights and Discrimination | Courts | Dispute Resolution and Arbitration | Law | Sexuality and the Law

Recommended Citation

Eric Koplowitz, "I Didn't Agree to Arbitrate That!"-How Courts Determine if Employees' Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Claims Fall Within the Scope of Broad Mandatory Arbitration Clauses, 13 Cardozo J. Conflict Resol. 565 (2012).
Available at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cjcr/vol13/iss2/9