ARBITRATION AFTER CIRCUIT CITY

MARK S. DICHTER
IAN M. BALLARD, JR.

---

DOI: 10.2190/A10K-UWD3-KPXP-V93X

Abstract

Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act contains a provision that excludes from the statute's coverage "contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce" [1]. In March 2001, the United States Supreme Court interpreted those words in Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams [2]. This article discusses that case and a number of still unresolved issues that concern the arbitration of employment disputes. These matters include the scope of the agreement to arbitrate, the enforceability of handbook provisions, consideration, fairness of the process, sharing of arbitration fees, limitations on remedies and discovery, time limits, the enforceability of arbitration clauses in collective bargaining agreements, and the ability of the EEOC to bring lawsuits. The authors are attorneys who represent employers and this article is written from that perspective.

---

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.