These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: EEOC policy statement aids workers seeking to avoid arbitration. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
    Journal: AIDS Policy Law; 1997 Sep 19; 12(17):1, 10-1. PubMed ID: 11364672.
    Abstract:
    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a policy statement condemning a prevalent practice among U.S. employers--new hires are asked to sign an agreement obligating them to submit Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) claims to binding arbitration. By signing the clause, an employee virtually forfeits his or her rights to bring an ADA claim to court. The EEOC compares these employment clauses to conditions of employment rather than voluntary agreements between worker and employer. Employers argue that the binding arbitration process is fast and equitable. Opponents argue that the process is unfair. The EEOC instructed its investigators to proceed with administrative charges regardless of whether or not the complainant signed a binding arbitration agreement. The EEOC policy statement argues against mandatory arbitration clauses, noting that the arbitration process limits the rights of employees and weighs heavily in favor of employers.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]