The Court found the agreement was fair because it merely substituted arbitration as the forum for resolution of any employment-related dispute. If the agreement deprives the employee of any rights or remedies, the Court may not enforce it and the employee will be free to pursue litigation. If, however, the agreement simply substitutes arbitration as the forum, the agreement may be enforced. Mandatory arbitration is not a panacea. Employers should also weigh the relative benefits of arbitration and litigation before committing themselves to arbitration agreements.
Arbitration is faster and less expensive than litigation.
However, this advantage extends to both the employer and the employee. Employees who might otherwise be reluctant to commit time and money to protracted litigation will find arbitration is quicker and less costly. Because arbitration has no formal rules of evidence or pleading, the employee can probably present his or her claim effectively without incurring the cost of a lawyer. Consequently, arbitration s speed and low cost may actually encourage employees to demand arbitration. Employees may ask arbitrators to address any issue within the scope of the arbitration agreement.