On June 2, 2016, NYU held its 69th Annual Conference on Labor, which brought together top government officials and leading attorneys in the fields of labor and employment law. LR’s Daniel Engelstein presented his Reflections on the Mandatory Arbitration of Statutory Employment Claims, which analyzes the difference between the use of arbitration as part of a collective bargaining relationship and its use in statutory employment claims. Danny discusses the ways that implicit biases and cognitive habits impact the decision making process of arbitrators and how they negatively affect employees who are seeking justice through mandatory arbitration. While the idiosyncratic structure of collective bargaining minimizes the impact of these factors, the structure in place for mandatory arbitration fails to mitigate their negative impact. To effectively diminish those deficiencies, Danny proposes three solutions that will make mandatory arbitration a more neutral forum:
The full article is available at: Reflections on the Mandatory Arbitration of Statutory Employment Claims.