Legal Question in Employment Law in California

Re: arbitration agreements

The general sentiment is that arbitration is usually more advantageous to the employer rather than the employee. The reason is that in arbitration there is one trier of fact who more than likely is a very experienced jurist, such as a judge. As such, theoretically, he or she can see the issues more objectively than say 12 people in a jury whose sensibilities may be more easily excited particularly in the 'David vs. Goliath' scenario of employee vs. employer. (I recognize that most employers are actually small businesses, but that can easily be lost on a jury).

As an employer another advantage to arbitration is that it is generally less expensive to arbitrate than to litigate. Bear in mind that most employees are represented on a contingency basis when asserting claims against their employers. That means, their representation costs nothing to them unless they recover something and then their fees are paid from the recovery. Not so for the employer. Generally, employers have to pay their defense attorneys on an hourly basis. Obviously, the quicker the resolution, the less the cost of defense.

If you would like to retian an attorney to review your employment agreement and particularly your arbitration provision for a modest few to cover just a few hours, let me know.

Best of Luck!