Race and Neutrality in the ADR of Employment Discrimination Claims: Are They Divergent Interests?
Journal of American Arbitration
You have written extensively on the subject of employee rights under Title VII and alternative dispute resolution. Why do you think this is an important issue to discuss?
ANSWER: Title VII is the preeminent statute that most employees tend to look at when they are experiencing workplace problems, especially race and sex discrimination. I believe the increasing use of ADR to resolve employment discrimination claims began as a significant counter to the last great civil rights campaign in our country in early 1990. That campaign resulted in the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which established landmark changes and amendments to Title VII by creating a right to a jury trial and compensatory and punitive damage claims for employees alleging intentional discrimination. In the same year that these statutory claims received some teeth, the United States Supreme Court, in the Gilmer decision, allowed the enforcement of agreements to arbitrate such statutory claims, something that almost any employment law practitioner would have felt to be impossible before Gilmer.
Michael Z. Green,
Race and Neutrality in the ADR of Employment Discrimination Claims: Are They Divergent Interests?,
J. Am. Arb.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/facscholar/938