IS THERE A BETTER WAY - COMPULSORY ARBITRATION OF EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS AFTER GILMER

The United States Supreme Court's decision in Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corporation appears to have opened the door to the arbitration of employment discrimination claims both inside and outside of the securities industry. Subsequent to Gilmer, federal and state courts consistently have upheld agreements to arbitrate between employers and employers and have compelled the arbitration of employment discrimination claims under those agreements. Now that compulsory arbitration of employment discrimination claims may be available in the employment setting, it is important for parties to such agreements to examine carefully the relative advantages and disadvantages of the arbitration process and to determine their likelihood of success in a given case. This article will explore the scope of the Gilmer decision, as it has been interpreted by the courts, analyze the potential benefits and drawbacks of arbitration, and evaluate how employers and employees have fared in arbitrating employment discrimination claims since Gilmer.