|
Citing the Supreme Court's holding in E.E.O.C. v. Waffle House, Inc., 534 U.S. 279 (2002), a federal district court in Florida denied an employer's request to compel arbitration of claims brought by the E.E.O.C. pursuant to an employer-employee contract.
In E.E.O.C. v. Taco Bell of America, Inc., No. 8:06-ev-1792-T-30MAP (M.D. Fla. Jan. 23, 2007), employer Taco Bell asked the Court to compel the E.E.O.C. to arbitrate an employment dispute involving one of their employees who signed an agreement to arbitrate. The E.E.O.C. claimed it was not bound to arbitrate because it was not a party to the agreement. The Court agreed.
Noting that the question of whether an arbitration agreement between an employer and employee bars the E.E.O.C. from pursuing victim-specific relief has already been answered in the negative by the Supreme Court in Waffle House, the Court refused to grant Taco Bell's request to compel E.E.O.C. to participate in arbitration.
At the same time, the Court strictly limited the ability of the employee, who was bound by the arbitration clause in her employment agreement, to participate in the execution of the case. Specifically, the employee was limited to monitoring the proceedings, but could not actively participate in the prosecution of the case.
Subscribe to a free weekly update on ADR case law and
legislation
|