Mandatory arbitration clauses in employment agreements are the subject of a fair amount of controversy. While arbitration is a cost-effective method for the employer to resolve disputes, employees often have little choice as to whether to sign such agreements. Recent cases in California have found certain types of mandatory arbitration clauses in employment contracts to be unconscionable. This Note examines the larger problem of mandatory arbitration in employment agreements, and assesses various potential solutions to the problem. More specifically, it evaluates the unconscionability remedy that has been crafted by the California courts, and contrasts this remedy with the arbitration jurisprudence that has been developed by the United States Supreme Court. Finally, this Note argues that the California state remedy is inconsistent with federal jurisprudence.
A Cold Night: Unconscionability as a Defense to Mandatory Arbitration Clauses in Employment Agreements,
55 Hastings L.J. 987
Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal/vol55/iss4/5