abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

24 Mar 2002

Author:
Andrew Grainger & Thomas Royall Smith, Boston Globe

High court ruling nicks the protective coating of arbitration policies [USA]

...Arbitration clauses have become common in most business agreements, including employment contracts...In a recent case, EEOC v. Waffle House Inc., the US Supreme Court has declared that the EEOC [U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission] may go to court to seek all available remedies for alleged job discrimination regardless of the employer-employee agreement to resolve their disputes through binding arbitration.