Publication Date
2009
Document Type
Article
Abstract
Over time, the Federal Courts have become increasingly supportive of and deferential to arbitration and mandatory arbitration clauses. Because arbitration under Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs) were governed by different but analogous statutes, however, there were always rules carved out for CBA-related arbitration, specifically with regard to claims of discrimination based on statutes external to the CBA. However, as the mandatory arbitration of statutory claims became accepted under non-CBA agreements, the reasoning of this rule was undermined. In 14 Penn Plaza v. Pyett, the Supreme Court abandoned this separation and adopted a rule that CBAs could mandate that statutory claims be arbitrated through the CBA’s arbitration process. This article discusses the history of this area of arbitration law, then discusses the Pyett case and the potential problems arising from its impact.
Publication Title
Syracuse Law Review
Volume
60
Issue
1
Recommended Citation
Mark Berger,
A Step Too Far: Pyett And the Compelled Arbitration of Statutory Claims Under Union-Controlled Labor Contract Procedures,
60
Syracuse Law Review
55
(2009).
Available at:
https://irlaw.umkc.edu/faculty_works/100